Generally I would agree with you. Even though I think a good idea should be pursued in peer reviewed journals, even if it isn't accepted at first.
However, you are incorrect about Heisenberg. With his student and assistant, Hans Euler, he published his "Über den anschaulichen Inhalt der quantentheoretischen Kinematik und Mechanik", in the journal, ZEITSCHRIFT FUR PHYSIK 43: 172-198 in 1927.
Which was not "peer reviewed". They would take any paper that was submitted:
...And if Annalen der Physik rejected a paper, for whatever reason, any professional German physicist had an alternative: Zeitschrift für Physik. This journal would publish any paper submitted by any member of the German Physical Society. This journal published quite a few worthless papers. But it also published quite a few great papers, among them Heisenberg’s first paper on the Uncertainty Principle, a central idea in quantum mechanics. There was no way in which referees or editors could stop an idea from appearing in the professional journals. In illustration of this, the great Danish physicist Niels Bohr said, according to Abraham Pais (The Genius of Science, p. 307), that if a physicist has an idea that seems crazy and he hesitates to publish so that someone else publishes the idea first and gets the credit, he has no one to blame but himself. In other words, it never occurred to Bohr that referees or editors could stop the publication of a new idea...
Frank Tipler, Refereed Journals: Do They Insure Quality or Enforce Orthodoxy? 2003 p.3
Cordially,