Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote:
Now, Jed, consider what you've just pointed out. The editors at
Scientific American got it seriously wrong. Do you expect the
editors at Wikipedia to do better?
No, I do not. Neither can be considered a reliable source of
objective, scientific information, at
Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote:
You do know that the dyed-in-the-wool skeptics think the article is
hopelessly biased toward cold fusion, right?
Sure, and creationists think the Wikipedia article on evolution is
hopelessly biased. However, they are wrong and their opinions count
for nothing. In
At 09:27 AM 5/27/2010, Jed Rothwell wrote:
Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote:
You do know that the dyed-in-the-wool skeptics think the article is
hopelessly biased toward cold fusion, right?
Sure, and creationists think the Wikipedia article on evolution is
hopelessly biased. However, they are
At 09:27 AM 5/27/2010, Jed Rothwell wrote:
Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote:
You do know that the dyed-in-the-wool skeptics think the article is
hopelessly biased toward cold fusion, right?
Sure, and creationists think the Wikipedia article on evolution is
hopelessly biased. However, they are
Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote:
No argument can be settled and no progress made unless you abide by
this rule: experiments are the only authority.
There is a problem with your view, Jed. You are proposing an
absolute standard for deciding issues but no mechanism for the
decision. You left out
At 04:28 PM 5/27/2010, Jed Rothwell wrote:
Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote:
No argument can be settled and no progress made unless you abide
by this rule: experiments are the only authority.
There is a problem with your view, Jed. You are proposing an
absolute standard for deciding issues but no
Jed sez:
It would not surprise me if Krivit as he went about performing
his investigations in preparation for NET#34 may have found himself
on more than one occasion privately entertaining speculation as to
whether certain CF scientists might have lied about the content of
their data.
He
The things Krivit accuses researchers of doing can only be lies, not
mistakes. They are too simple to be mistakes. And too blatant. For
example, he claimed the Italians were repeatedly misrepresenting
their numbers by a factor of 10, and that McKubre was publishing
hugely different numbers in
At 09:53 PM 5/25/2010, OrionWorks - Steven Vincent Johnson wrote:
I spent a couple of days reviewing the Guide to
the Cosmos interview with Steve Krivit. I was
interested in comparing what was actually said
versus what certain individuals within the Vort
Collective seem to be implying Krivit
Steven Vincent Johnson wrote:
does. Ask him! He is not shy about speculating or accusing people.
I did ask him.
Have you personally asked him that question?
I haven't asked him anything lately. He told me he has added my
e-mail address to his kill file, and unsubscribed to Vortex, so I
At 09:35 AM 5/26/2010, OrionWorks - Steven Vincent Johnson wrote:
Jed sez:
It would not surprise me if Krivit as he went about performing
his investigations in preparation for NET#34 may have found himself
on more than one occasion privately entertaining speculation as to
whether certain
At 09:49 AM 5/26/2010, Jed Rothwell wrote:
The things Krivit accuses researchers of doing can only be lies, not
mistakes. They are too simple to be mistakes. And too blatant. For
example, he claimed the Italians were repeatedly misrepresenting
their numbers by a factor of 10, and that McKubre
At 09:49 AM 5/26/2010, Jed Rothwell wrote:
The things Krivit accuses researchers of doing can only be lies, not
mistakes. They are too simple to be mistakes. And too blatant. For
example, he claimed the Italians were repeatedly misrepresenting
their numbers by a factor of 10, and that McKubre
Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote:
I tried to discuss the work with them and I had trouble finding
someone familiar with the project. I don't recall when Tom Passell
retired from EPRI. He is one of these Energizer Bunny people who
never stops working.
My analysis exactly. You'd have to ask the
At 10:31 AM 5/26/2010, Jed Rothwell wrote:
Steven Vincent Johnson wrote:
does. Ask him! He is not shy about speculating or accusing people.
I did ask him.
Have you personally asked him that question?
I haven't asked him anything lately. He told me he has added my
e-mail address to his
OrionWorks - Steven Vincent Johnson wrote:
Let me be clear about this. I never heard Krivit state that that CF
scientists and researchers lied about their data in this interview.
I don't know about this interview, but I have heard him say that. McKubre
and other researchers he accuses of lying
Thanks Steven, I think your level-headed analysis and comments are timely and
on-point.
The only thing I'd like to add to this topic is that any reporter, and
certainly Steve as an
investgative reporter, has more info that is off-the-record that he can't
report on directly, but
that is part
17 matches
Mail list logo
