What Defkalion attempted to do was to instill faith in the LENR community. It is the same principle where the body of the Church recognizes actions that cannot be explained by natural laws, to inspire faith in the membership. When the blind see again, when the cripple walk, when the dead rise and walk again among us, the faithful believe no matter what is said against the faith. If there is no faith in your heart, there can be no belief. If there is no belief, there can be no Church. Our Church is weak and beset from all quarters. We do not need dissention in the membership.
You are acting like a loathsome heretic in the face of a divine miracle, like a non-believer, like a devil worshiper, like Mary Yugo who wants to destroy the faith at every turn. Faith is beyond logic and reason, beyond proof and testing. It is the greatest achievement of the human heart; it is what makes the assent of man march inexorably forward.. Do you require more evidence to bolster your faith like doubting Thomas, a skeptic in the faith who refused to believe without direct personal experience, to plunge his suspicious fingers deep into the gaping wounds piercing the lifeless hands still flowing forth in the sacred blood as proof of the miracle that you so long hoped was possible? You are demonstrating a total lack of faith, a faith in a process that will not be understood until you have long passed from this veil of tears. Faith has its rules too. there is no middle ground, in this matter. either you have the faith or you don’t; and you don’t and you probably never will. On Fri, Aug 2, 2013 at 3:57 PM, Jed Rothwell <[email protected]> wrote: > ChemE Stewart <[email protected]> wrote: > > "Everyone knows the rules" >> >> Jed, do you have a copy of the rule book I could borrow, or at least let >> me know what page to look on?... >> > > The rule is right here, plain as day: > > Nullius in verba > > http://royalsociety.org/about-us/history/ > > Chapter 1, paragraph 1, first sentence: Take nobody's word for it. > > As Francis Bacon put it in 1620: > > "For we admit nothing but as an eyewitness, or at least upon approved and > rigorously examined testimony; so that nothing is magnified into the > miraculous, but our reports are pure and unadulterated by fables and > absurdity. . . . In every new and rather delicate experiment, although to > us it may appear sure and satisfactory, we yet publish the method we > employed, that, by the discovery of every attendant circumstance, men may > perceive the possibly latent and inherent errors, and be roused to proofs > of a more certain and exact nature, if such there be. Lastly, we > intersperse the whole with advice, doubts, and cautions, casting out and > restraining, as it were, all phantoms by a sacred ceremony and exorcism. . > . ." > > That is the experimental method. There are no substitutes and no > shortcuts. A demonstration -- worthy as it may be -- is not a test, not an > experiment, and not a scientific paper. > > That has been the rule since the 17th century. It is the basis of the > scientific revolution. It is also the motto of the state of Missouri and > source of the Jeffersonian spirit at the University of Missouri. It's on > the license plates: "show me." > > - Jed > >
