Erik Reuter wrote:
>
> On Sat, Feb 01, 2003 at 06:32:17PM -0600, Julia Thompson wrote:
> > Someone on one of my other lists posted this link:
> >
> > http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2003/01/28/1043534050248.html
> >
> > My BS detector started going off at the sentence "I am not a crank." :)
>
> You got that far? :-)
Actually, I guess that was the point that *nailed* it. :)
> > Anyone better at ferreting out the BS in the details want to take a
> > crack at pointing out to me just where the fatal flaws are? (I'd be
> > very interested in hearing from Dan, Erik and Gautam on the whole
> > thing. Any other response is quite welcome, as well.)
>
> I didn't see any facts. A bunch of wild speculations and typical crank
> gibberish. He talks about "electrogravitics" like it is some well known
> science or technology. Outside of Star Trek, it isn't. Not much more to
> say, unless there was something specific that sounded plausible to you
> that you want to discuss.
Mostly I wanted something *specific* to use in a response to the person who
first brought the URL to my attention. Something a little more than a vague
dismissal on the grounds of the author having no grasp of thermodynamics
(which was the shoot-down on another whacked page that someone else
suggested folks look at on that list) or something similar.
Partway through, something just started screaming "Dean Drive alert! Dean
Drive alert!" in my head. Of course, it never said "Dean Drive", so I can't
just find an explanation of why *it* doesn't work and post *that* URL.
Julia
_______________________________________________
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
