On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 9:02 AM, Joshua Cude <joshua.c...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 7:59 AM, James Bowery <jabow...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> >> The pseudoskeptics are basically saying that all we have to do is look at >> the circumstantial evidence to know that even cursory investigation of the >> direct evidence of the Rossi phenomenon (which implies suspending >> skepticism about Rossi's claims the way one does in a logical proof >> involving an assumed condition) is ill-advised (to say the least, by >> Jove!). This would approximate a reasonable opinion ONLY if P&F were not >> valid. If P&F are valid, and we have the possibility of invalidating >> Rossi's claims merely on direct evidence, what is ill-advised is to ignore >> what direct evidence we have available if there is any plausible >> expectation that by doing so we can invalidate Rossi's claims. >> >> > Whew. My sympathies for your clients, if that's an example of your > communication to them. > Yeah I should take more than 30 seconds to bang out a report to them. OOPS! I Do! Sorry if I don't accord you the same courtesy. > But if I get the gist of it, I agree that if P&F is accepted, then Rossi > should be considered more seriously. But, Rossi would know that P&F is > accepted by a lot of people (many who are desperate to "spread the word", > as if it is religious), and that the unwashed are rather susceptible to its > claims. That would make cold fusion a rather fertile area for attracting > investment for extraordinary claims, even if one's demos do no more than > hint at them. So, whether or not one accepts P&F, without good evidence, > skepticism of Rossi is well-advised, especially in view of his history. > Boy that sounds familiar! >From "Excess Heat" by Beaudette chapter Baltimor, section The Assault: Koonin offered this denouement to the gathered professional audience. "We are suffering from the incompetence and perhaps delusions of Drs. Pons and Fleischmann," a comment he knew was likely to destroy their professional stature. The audience sat quietly for a moment, possibly waiting to see if the sky would fall, and then it burst into enthusiastic and sustained applause. The assembly of physicists had found their deliverance...That considerable response of the roomful of physicists ought not be attributed entirely to the persuasive powers of Koonin and Lewis. As scientists the two did not carry great authority within their respective professions. They were only a couple of especially competent professors. Their polemics on that evening in May (1, 1989) simply triggered the pent-up emotions of the audience.
