the Baysian
analysis by Johnson and Melich, for example.
There is not the slightest chance we will sway people such as Cude, Mary
Yugo or Robert Park.
- Jed
do believe that
Rossi and every other cold fusion researcher is either a liar, a
criminal or a lunatic, as Robert Park says. I do not suppose they
secretly believe the results are real and they are posting
disinformation on behalf of the oil industry. I do not believe in
conspiracies.
- Jed
that Robert Park sincerely
believes we are lunatics and criminals.
If you do not like to read this sort of thing just block his messages. What
is the big deal?
- Jed
On Sun, 2 Jun 2013 16:14:35 -0400
Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote:
Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote:
A lie detector test should be a requirement of employment for their
institution which asks the critical question: “Do you or have you ever
opposed the idea of LENR to have
the same lines, the Washington Post, the New York Times, Time
magazine and others have often published attacks by Robert Park and other
opponents accusing researchers of being frauds, criminals and lunatics. To
my knowledge they have never allowed any researcher to publish an objection
or a rebuttal
fulfilling population desire).
2013/6/2 Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com
Alain Sepeda alain.sep...@gmail.com wrote:
I would like to ask to people who follow the LENr domain whetehr or not
there is an official policy in Scientific Journal to reject LENR/Cold
Fusion papers ?
Yes. Most
the present test does not prove. Mary Yugo would insist it is fake. Robert
Park would ignore it. Why bother? Just use a different watt meter next time
and all remaining questions vanish as surely as they would with a
self-sustaining reactor.
that is what I am working toward.
standalone and a cup
John Berry berry.joh...@gmail.com wrote:
When will they finally realize that Rossi may have something?
They always knew he might . . .
I doubt that. I cannot read minds, but I get a sense that Shanahan, Nate
Lewis or Robert Park are certain they are right. It has never crossed their
minds
of the Royal Society. The
leading opponents, such as Robert Park, are not experts in relevant fields
such as nuclear energy, electrochemistry or calorimetry.
- Jed
and the New York Times science editors. Most opponents are trying to stop
it because they think it is fraud and lunacy, as Robert Park says. Others
think it unscientific nonsense, similar to creationism. A few scientists in
the plasma fusion program want to stop it because they fear it will cut
their budget
On Fri, May 10, 2013 at 2:29 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote:
The answer is that people often make drastic mistakes. Even intelligent
people do.
Even cold fusion researchers do.
It was not obvious because these people were blinded by emotion. So are
the people opposed
On Mon, Jun 3, 2013 at 4:07 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote:
I do not understand what you have in mind here. Nature allows us to do
some things and not others. We have to work with what nature allows, not
what we would wish for in an ideal universe.[...]
Obviously with more
mayor. It was not obvious because these
people were blinded by emotion. So are the people opposed to cold fusion,
such as Robert Park and Cude. Facts, logic, analysis, common sense,
education, the lessons of experience . . . all are sacrificed when emotions
and the primate instinct for power politics
such as Robert Park, and the mischievous
nitwits at Wikipedia and the Scientific American, who have published lies
about it, poisoning public opinion. People who have no interested in it,
and who have expressed no opinion, have caused no harm.
- Jed
misreads.
Let me answer your question: How many times do we need to go through this
. . . ? No number of times will suffice. People such as Cude or Robert
Park will NEVER acknowledge any point you make, no matter how self evident,
no matter how trivial. They will not give an inch. I have been dealing
.
More to the point, how can you expect researchers to make progress when
their funding is cut and they are fired? This happened to Mizuno, Miles and
Boss and most others. There is tremendous opposition to this research
because of academic politics. Robert Park and other go around destroying
people's
Robert Park is 82
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_L._Park
In my cabinet I have a bottle to celebrate his no longer finding a use for
oxygen.
Also..I will debunk his death...as will others.
Ron Kita
On Wed, Jun 5, 2013 at 10:06 PM, William Beaty bi...@eskimo.com wrote:
On Wed, 5 Jun 2013
not
serve the goals of LENR well.
On Tue, May 14, 2013 at 6:50 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote:
Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote:
The same is true when an experiment shows that gold nanoparticles can
reduce the half-life of U232 alpha emissions from 69 years to 6
microseconds
. The creme
de la creme of Wall Street tycoons and bankers triggered the 2008 crash.
Gen. Colin Powell believed the Iraqi WMD intelligence.)
4. There are small number of hard-core opponents such as Robert Park,
Huizenga, Close, Morrison and the editors of the Scientific American. These
people jumped
On Thu, Jun 27, 2013 at 10:46 AM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.comwrote:
John Berry berry.joh...@gmail.com wrote:
When will they finally realize that Rossi may have something?
They always knew he might . . .
I doubt that. I cannot read minds, but I get a sense that Shanahan, Nate
will not accept the
thermocouple reading because they did not present the entire data set. They
said only that it tracked the IR camera to within 2 deg C. I am sure that
if they did present the entire data set, he would find some other reason to
reject the results.
Finally, Shanahan, Yugo, Robert Park
to threaten them all. But the fossil fuel
industry and the DoE both think that cold fusion does not exist. They have
no knowledge of it. The are not going to try and stop something that they
consider a lunatic fringe perpetual motion machine movement. (We can thank
Robert Park and John Huizenga
and usually wrong.”
Original Message
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Why are pseudoskeptics so relentless in their mission
to debunk?
From: Ron Kita chiralex.k...@gmail.com
Date: Thu, June 06, 2013 2:09 pm
To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com
Robert Park is 82http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_L
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Why are pseudoskeptics so relentless in their mission
to debunk?
From: Ron Kita chiralex.k...@gmail.com
Date: Thu, June 06, 2013 2:09 pm
To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com
Robert Park is 82
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_L._Park
In my cabinet I have a bottle
chiralex.k...@gmail.com Date: Thu, June 06, 2013 2:09 pm To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Robert Park is 82http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_L._ParkIn my cabinet I have a bottle to celebrate his no longer finding a use for oxygen. Also..I will debunk his death...as will others.Ron KitaOn Wed, Jun 5, 2013 a
25 matches
Mail list logo
