I know the rules here, but you have made some pretty serious allegations here. The statements below are not a direct attack, but an observation of the facts so far. I hope the moderators allow some leeway here.

I am sorry, but your work has all the hallmarks of crank science.

a) work self-published on a website
b) claims that well established theories are incorrect
c) claims that the theory supposedly covers many diverse topics
http://www.cathodixx.com/pdfs/topics.pdf
d) claims that the establishment is trying to keep your theories from becoming public.
e) comparing yourself to Copernicus is a classic marker of a crank.

The part that really makes this look like nonsense is your claim that you can predict structures with any critical temperature

"This patent covers the design, optimization and manufacture of superconducting artifacts. The patent covers all materials that superconduct above 200?K. The design criteria allow the designer to select any critical temperature. The design logic allows one to determine if a specific chosen material can be optimized to be superconducting at the chosen critical temperature."

I'm sorry, if you could produce a superconductor with a Tc above 200K, you would have the data to back up some claims.

People do need to challenge the "status quo". People need to challenge well established theories. However, extraordinary claims need extraordinary evidence.