Danyk666 and his microwave oven (Czech language)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R_DKblzdbJI
Yeesh! Like pouring a bucket of live spiders down your pants.
And if you thought THAT was bad...
danyk and his unshielded x-ray source
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZzMXKxadnVw
danyk
Examiner.com recently posted an article that obviously is not Al Gore
friendly, titled “Just how stupid is Al Gore, anyway?”
See:
http://www.examiner.com/x-31244-Louisville-Public-Policy-Examiner~y2009m12d3-Just-how-stupid-is-Al-Gore-anyway
http://tinyurl.com/yddzj6m
What piqued my curiosity
At 02:10 PM 12/2/2009, Jed Rothwell wrote:
Many mass media articles and blogs have claimed that the
climate-gate scandal resembles cold fusion. Unfortunately, all the
ones I have checked have the resemblance backwards. They think cold
fusion was wrong and never replicated, and that the cold
This is pretty cool:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mi7Srd-LSeE
-Mark
-Original Message-
From: William Beaty [mailto:bi...@eskimo.com]
Sent: Thursday, December 03, 2009 5:14 AM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: [Vo]:terrifying online videos
Danyk666 and his microwave oven (Czech
At 04:25 PM 12/2/2009, Jed Rothwell wrote:
Here is a good example of an article about climate-gate that
includes mythology about cold fusion, from some guy named Poe who is
allergic to doing his homework:
At 02:45 PM 12/2/2009, Jed Rothwell wrote:
Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote:
Simon is interested in the process of closure. And what he comes
to with Undead Science is that there can be an apparent closure
where an apparent scientific consensus arises, but there is life
after death, hence, undead
- Original Message -
From: OrionWorks - Steven V Johnson svj.orionwo...@gmail.com
To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Thursday, December 03, 2009 11:07 AM
Subject: [Vo]:Just how stupid is Al Gore, anyway?
First of all, Gore was way off base in his description of
the temperature of
On 12/03/2009 10:53 AM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote:
One of the most cogent of criticisms of CF research is probably the
claim of publication bias. CF was such an attractive field, in terms
of potential significance, that many workers attempted to find
something. Much of the work was never
Thanks, Bill!
On 12/03/2009 08:14 AM, William Beaty wrote:
Danyk666 and his microwave oven (Czech language)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R_DKblzdbJI
Yeesh! Like pouring a bucket of live spiders down your pants.
Well he SAYS it's at reduced power (in one of the comments).
In reply to OrionWorks - Steven V Johnson's message of Thu, 3 Dec 2009 10:07:45
-0600:
Hi,
[snip]
Regarding the second comment, what are reliable figures on tapping
into geothermal energy on an economical scale? Why I bring it up is
that we are now technologically capable of drilling miles deep
Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote:
What does Britz think, by the way, about excess heat? Has he
betrayed his current position?
The last I heard from him was when I wrote the Tally of Cold Fusion Papers:
The Jacob's ladder is spectacular, of course, and so are Tesla coils
in general, but, with reasonable precautions, like don't touch!, are
pretty safe. However, an unshielded x-ray with enough output to
nicely light up a flourescent screen?
For perspective, though, as a kid I looked through a
Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote:
There *was* an apparent scientific consensus. That isn't to be
denied. But was there a *real* scientific consensus. It's obvious
that there was not. That would be a consensus rigorously based on
scientific principles, and such a consensus would be far more widely
On 12/03/2009 04:57 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote:
Theories are a dime a dozen in this business. As far as I know none of
them makes useful predictions -- or even testable predictions! So they
are useless. Heck, they aren't even theories, just speculation. A
theory is not viable unless it can be
Stephen A. Lawrence wrote:
Theories are a dime a dozen in this business. As far as I know none
of them makes useful predictions -- or even testable predictions! . . .
If I recall correctly, Hagelstein's theory based on phonon coupling
to the lattice made testable predictions. However, that
At 05:42 PM 12/2/2009, Jed Rothwell wrote:
I meant to say:
Simon is interested in the process of closure. And what he comes
to with Undead Science is that there can be an apparent closure
where an apparent scientific consensus arises, but there is life
after death, hence, undead science.
16 matches
Mail list logo
