Mark, you quoted Siegel as saying that CF violated physics because it
did not act like hot fusion. Carat simply pointed out that CF was not
like hot fusion and this comparison was not valid. She simply made a
statement of belief, not a proof. Siegel also made a statement of
belief, not a proof or fact. If you want facts, I would be glad to
supply them, but don't complain about Ruby when she simply points out
that CF is not like hot fusion. Such a statement is no more hand
waving than was the statement by Siegel. Actually, your description of
Carat as hand waving simply revealed that you agree with Siegel.
Ed Storms
On May 31, 2013, at 2:59 PM, Mark Gibbs wrote:
On Fri, May 31, 2013 at 1:12 PM, Jed Rothwell
<jedrothw...@gmail.com> wrote:
Cude has waved his hands and said there might be a method of
deception that he has not thought of yet. As I have often pointed
out, such assertions cannot be tested or falsified. There might be
an error in Ohm's law we have not yet discovered, but until you
specify what that error actually is, you have no basis for arguing
that law may be wrong.
Ah, so it's OK to argue that Cude is, in effect, hand-waving away
Ohm's law and that's indefensible because that law is accepted but
it's not OK to argue that Carat's dismissal of conventional physics
as being wrong about LENR is also hand waving?
[m]
