I was speaking specifically about the article, its logic is poisonous, typical post-logical thinking and mixing points of view. Influential skeptics, on other hand are poisoning the funding sources of New Energy. But if you wish, I can retract 'poisonous' I am just writing an essay about Rossi. Not black or white dualistic thinking.
On Tue, Dec 6, 2011 at 5:44 PM, Mary Yugo <maryyu...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > On Tue, Dec 6, 2011 at 6:15 AM, Peter Gluck <peter.gl...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> A few good demos could make the skeptics to swallow their poisonous words >> and to shut up. I hope eventually these demos will happen. Now I hope they >> will happen at Defkalion. >> Peter >> > > One can be, at the same time, agnostic about cold fusion/LENR and very > skeptical about Rossi. It's hardly "poisonous". It's simply good > observation. Characterizing that as "poisonous" makes no sense. > > -- Dr. Peter Gluck Cluj, Romania http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com
