LENR deniers.
-----Original Message----- From: James Bowery <jabow...@gmail.com> To: vortex-l <vortex-l@eskimo.com> Sent: Thu, Mar 6, 2014 9:27 am Subject: Re: [Vo]:Asked & Answered "True believer" because they refuse to accept experimental falsification of their theories. On Thu, Mar 6, 2014 at 2:42 AM, Kevin O'Malley <kevmol...@gmail.com> wrote: I need a better term than skeptopath. . How about Aggressively Skeptical ‘Humans’ Obfuscating Lenr Endeavors (ASHOLEs)? On Thu, Nov 28, 2013 at 7:35 PM, Kevin O'Malley <kevmol...@gmail.com> wrote: How to know you're dealing with a skeptopath: they won't read the simplest evidence put in front of them. http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/3095784/posts?page=32#32 To: tacticalogic "I'd be interested in a practical source of energy, and you keep hawking this like it is. Where's the beef?" Nah, you're just regurgitating the standard crawfishing that all skeptopaths do when they can no longer claim that there is "no scientific evidence" for cold fusion. First the refrain was "cold fusion experiments cannot be repeated". Then, when the researchers "did" improve the repeatability, the refrain became "cold fusion experiments cannot be repeated fifty percent of the time. Then, when repeatability increased past 50%, the refrain became "cold fusion experiments cannot be repeated 100% of the time". Now, as some researchers repeatabiltity numbers approach 100%, the refrain has become "the amount of power is miniscule, even if it "can" be repeated". So, the answer to your question is "the beef is still growing". And an HONEST respondent would admit that. But in the not too distant future, I look forward to when LENR "does" produce usable amounts of power. I wonder what you skeptopaths will say then. 32posted on Wed 27 Nov 2013 05:28:54 AM PSTby Wonder Warthog [Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies | Report Abuse] To: Wonder Warthog Nah, you're just regurgitating the standard crawfishing that all skeptopaths do when they can no longer claim that there is "no scientific evidence" for cold fusion. Lemme guess. You can't show me the evidence to back that up, I'm supposed to go find it. 33posted on Wed 27 Nov 2013 05:34:11 AM PSTby tacticalogic [Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies | Report Abuse] To: tacticalogic "Lemme guess. You can't show me the evidence to back that up, I'm supposed to go find it." Not quite. I'll give you two starting places. The first is George Beaudette's book "Excess Heat". You can access this either by buying a copy (Amazon)($), or via interlibrary loan (free or $ depending on the policies of your local library. The second is Edmund Storm's collection of summaries of LENR research, which can easily be found with Google search terms ("Edmund Storms" cold fusion pdf). Most of the pdf's can be found at LENR-CANR.org. All are available free. Now, why don't I give you direct links?? Because I have found that there is no better litmus test about the honesty or lack of same of the various skeptics that show up on these LENR threads. The skeptopaths will NOT follow up. NOTHING will induce them to actually examine the evidence. The honest skeptics do. 34posted on Wed 27 Nov 2013 08:46:23 AM PSTby Wonder Warthog [Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies | Report Abuse] To: Wonder Warthog I’ve looked at LENR-CANR.org. It’s interesting research, but I can’t find any research that’s actually producing measurable amounts of power to justify the hyperbole surrouding the phenomenon. 35posted on Wed 27 Nov 2013 10:24:46 AM PSTby tacticalogic [Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies | Report Abuse] To: tacticalogic "I’ve looked at LENR-CANR.org. It’s interesting research, but I can’t find any research that’s actually producing measurable amounts of power to justify the hyperbole surrouding the phenomenon." LOL. Yeah, right. You're read all the thousands of papers at LENR-CANR.org. SSUUUURREEE you have. If you proceed from either of the start points I gave you, you will find the data quite easily, as the references to specific papers are well documented in both of them. But you won't, will you. 36posted on Wed 27 Nov 2013 01:36:37 PM PSTby Wonder Warthog [Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies | Report Abuse] To: Wonder Warthog No, I won’t go through those thousands of pages looking for the documentation of a practical demonstration of the technology. That’s based on an assumption that if any such documented demonstration had taken place it wouldn’t be buried somewhere down in those thousands of pages, where it could only be found by sifting through those thousands of pages. 37posted on Wed 27 Nov 2013 01:47:35 PM PSTby tacticalogic [Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies | Report Abuse] To: Kevmo Nuclear energy is based on the use of fissile materials, and is not a solution, because the stock of these materials is limited. Not with breeder reactors. 38posted on Wed 27 Nov 2013 06:57:26 PM PSTby aruanan [Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies | Report Abuse] To: tacticalogic "No, I won’t go through those thousands of pages looking for the documentation of a practical demonstration of the technology. That’s based on an assumption that if any such documented demonstration had taken place it wouldn’t be buried somewhere down in those thousands of pages, where it could only be found by sifting through those thousands of pages." LOL...you're precisely proving my point. Pure Skeptopath. Clue.....if you start with the Storm's freely available PDF writeups (any of them), the information is nicely broken down according to what sort of proof is available, including direct references to (at least the important) papers on the subject. This includes heat, tritium production, transmutation, correlation of heat to He4 production, and other. This means exactly that you don't "have" to "go through thousands of pages of documentation looking.......", as the references are already sorted out and documented. Storms has already done that. Beaudette's book likewise, though a bit dated nowadays. And of course, most of the full papers are available at LENR-CANR.org. Route of easiest discovery....Beaudette first, then Storms for newer information, then LENR-CANR for full papers. But you won't look at any of those, of course, because your real interest is not in discovering how the world works, but bashing LENR. 39posted on Thu 28 Nov 2013 04:50:15 AM PSTby Wonder Warthog [Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies | Report Abuse] To: Wonder Warthog LOL...you're precisely proving my point. Pure Skeptopath. Clue...you throw "Skeptopath" around the way gays do with "homophobe". 40posted on Thu 28 Nov 2013 04:56:27 AM PSTby tacticalogic [Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies | Report Abuse] To: tacticalogic "Clue...you throw "Skeptopath" around the way gays do with "homophobe"." Only to those who prove themselves to be such by their own behavior on these threads. But thanks for proving my points so fully and wholeheartedly. As usual, total refusal to actually look at the published information, and any comment to shunt attention to that behavior away the one refusing. An exact fit to the phrase "pathological skepticism". 41posted on Thu 28 Nov 2013 09:52:21 AM PSTby Wonder Warthog [Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies | Report Abuse] To: Wonder Warthog Only to those who prove themselves to be such by their own behavior on these threads. That's what the homos say, too. 42posted on Thu 28 Nov 2013 09:54:33 AM PSTby tacticalogic [Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies | Report Abuse] To: tacticalogic "That's what the homos say, too." LOL. More proof. You'll say or do anything to avoid confronting the issue of the existing data. Here is the difference between you skeptopaths and real skeptics. A real science skeptic, given the references I have provided would not rest until he/she had read them. A skeptopath will say or do anything to avoid reading them and change the subject to avoid acknowledging their existence, much less actually read and study them. Methinks the shoe fits you quite well. Enjoy your turkey, turkey. 43posted on Thu 28 Nov 2013 03:49:43 PM PSTby Wonder Warthog [Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies | Report Abuse] On Mon, Aug 12, 2013 at 9:23 PM, Kevin O'Malley <kevmol...@gmail.com> wrote: I'm growing weary of the same objections, over and over and over again on various internet sites. So I'm going to post each q&a here & just send links.
