I continue to be amazed how *convinced* people
can be by incomplete and inconclusive evidence.
That takes place in all directions and all sides.
I looked at the thread cited. As cited, it's
definitely not a proof of anything, there would
need to be some precedent conditions. However,
those who are familiar with the whole sequence,
or certain critical parts of it, might well know
enough. But that complete evidence hasn't been
presented. The result is that people may believe
what they choose to believe. My advice is to
believe nothing, as to absolute belief. Make
routine judgments as to where to place your
money, your feet, or your reputation, and it's
not necessary to have complete evidence to do
that. But don't present your conclusions as if
they were proof of anything but your own opinion.
Physicists who rejected LENR in 1989-1990 because
it seemed impossible to them may have been making
a decision that was reasonable given what they
knew, and the error was in over-exclusion of
evidence contrary to their beliefs, and
incomplete study of the foundations of their
beliefs. Nevertheless, in those early days, there
were lots of reasons to remain *very* skeptical.
"Very skeptical" is not the same as certainty as
to bogosity. That certainty never existed with
cold fusion, as to what would reasonably be
considered "scientific consensus," i.e., the
judgment of those who became reasonably informed.
Read the 1989 and 2004 U.S. DoE reports and see
if it's reasonable to conclude that there was
*certainty of bogosity.* There wasn't, not even
in 1989, and by 2004, experts, including some
major fraction (as much as one-third) who, from
their comments, weren't going to accept cold
fusion if it bit them in the nose, were about
evenly divided on the issue of some significant
anomaly being involved. The conclusion that
further research was needed and actually
recommended was unanimous in 2004, and that
wasn't -- as I've seen some skeptics claim --
mere "boilerplate." In 1989, yes, it was a
politically forced conclusion, the Nobel
Prize-winning co-chair threatened to resign if
that moderate language wasn't included. Smart man.
What's the problem with the conclusion that
"Greg" and "Aussie Guy" are the same? The problem
is that if some person, with a created pseudonym,
claims to be "So-and-So," on the Internet, we
don't know it is actually that person.
Presumably, from the history, and assuming that
those writing here aren't lying, there is a real "Greg."
Yet I have seen, in Usenet posts, for example,
straw puppets, users claiming to be such and such
a person, with such and such views, when the user
was actually the opposite, an enemy, and was
attempting to expose and humiliate.
I obviously don't know that this is the case
here, and my sense is that "Keef" is right; if
Keef is right, the comments about obsession are
way out of place. When we have rare and unusual
knowledge, that could be important for the
protection of users, we have a special obligation
to reveal this information. Judging someone who
does this as "obsessed" is downright rude.
Possessing special knowledge is not "obsession."
There are other traits that would have to be
examined, and for what purpose? Do we suggest
that users who are "obsessed" should be booted
from the list? Or that what they tell us should
be discounted as the ravings of a lunatic?
If there are people actually considering
investing with "Aussie Guy," these allegations
should be known, so that people can make up their
own minds. Everyone should be aware of how
unreliable information found here and elsewhere on the internet can be.
At 03:21 PM 1/20/2012, Jones Beene wrote:
If anyone is still in doubt that Greg and Aussi
Guy are one and the same, here is a thread from
another forum - that turned up today - where
other posters are calling Greg the worlds
greatest supplier of bullshit, to his face - and
he doesnt blink an eye - PLUS he identifies himself as AussiGuy. Case closed.
5th message down
<http://peakoil.com/forums/the-cold-fusion-thread-pt-4-merged-t63982-165.html>http://peakoil.com/forums/the-cold-fusion-thread-pt-4-merged-t63982-165.html
Go for it Keef did you miss this forum?
yeah, yeah - we realize that your obsession
with this mission to bring justice to Oz is
almost clinical but hey, getting scammed and
then getting insulted by the scammer and then
stalked and threatened that will sometimes cause overreaction.
Dont forget to take the meds, however.
