At 04:06 PM 5/8/2010, Jones Beene wrote:
-Original Message-
From: Abd ul-Rahman Lomax
> This is what I expect to see: I'll be lucky if I register on the film
one neutron track per several minutes, maybe ten minutes, averageThe key
to the film is getting the film very close to the sou
-Original Message-
From: Abd ul-Rahman Lomax
> This is what I expect to see: I'll be lucky if I register on the film
one neutron track per several minutes, maybe ten minutes, averageThe key
to the film is getting the film very close to the source, so
neutron levels on the level of o
At 03:53 AM 5/8/2010, GeorgeBaldwin\(Gmail\) wrote:
"We Americans are casual about such
things.Hey, it sounds the same to us."
Hey, I think I get it now, you mean like "fusion" and "fission"? :-)
You mean that new-kew-lar stuff?
At 07:06 PM 5/7/2010, Jones Beene wrote:
-Original Message-
From: Abd ul-Rahman Lomax
> But his [Scott Little] standing offer is to use his fancy calorimeter,
and I'm not searching for heat. Just neutrons. Neutrons are direct
evidence of nuclear reactions ...
That is a good strategy, an
"We Americans are casual about such
things.Hey, it sounds the same to us."
Hey, I think I get it now, you mean like "fusion" and "fission"? :-)
GB
- Original Message -
From: "Jed Rothwell"
To:
Sent: Friday, May 07, 2010 11:44
On 05/07/2010 05:44 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote:
> Michel Jullian wrote:
>
>> . . .an idée fixe (French,
>> > meaning "a complete meal of several courses, sometimes with choices
>> > permitted, offered by a restaurant at a fixed price").
>>
>> Only in US French then!
>
> Yes, that probably is a U.S.
-Original Message-
From: Abd ul-Rahman Lomax
> But his [Scott Little] standing offer is to use his fancy calorimeter,
and I'm not searching for heat. Just neutrons. Neutrons are direct
evidence of nuclear reactions ...
That is a good strategy, and Scott is also an expert in radioactiv
At 04:23 PM 5/7/2010, Jones Beene wrote:
I am pretty sure that "discredit" is "apropos of
nothing, really" ... Scott would probably love to
see real proof of a robust energy anomaly as much
as any of us. However, he does not suffer from
the "expectation effect" nor "inventor's disease"
and he doe
Michel Jullian wrote:
. . .an idée fixe (French,
> meaning "a complete meal of several courses, sometimes with choices
> permitted, offered by a restaurant at a fixed price").
Only in US French then!
Yes, that probably is a U.S. construct, but
actually I borrowed the definition for prix fixe
2010/5/7 Jed Rothwell :
> I wrote:
>
>>> Wait a minute. Why should I care about two people, who are both
>>> wrong . . .
>>
>> Who said I care? . . .
>
> Seriously, let us grant that Krivit is right in this instance. Shanahan is
> smart but he went off the rails a long time ago, with an idée fixe
At 01:47 PM 5/7/2010, Terry Blanton wrote:
Wait a minute. Why should I care about two people, who are both
wrong, arguing with each other? :-)
Because even a stopped clock is right twice a day
Seriously, Shanahan, it must be realized, is the best the skeptics
have at this point. He's ra
-Original Message-
From: Jed Rothwell
I'm not sure about "discredit" but I think we can
all agree that despite his last name, Scott
Little does cast a large shadow. Plus, he takes
up a large fraction of the space in an elevator.
Chris Tinsley remarked that it is standing joke
in Engl
Terry Blanton wrote:
Well, I did find this rather amusing:
Krivit: "The credibility of Shanahan's criticisms is further weakened
by his citation of and
reliance on four references from a single source of allegedly
scientific research
that are neither peer-reviewed nor published.
For 21 years,
On Fri, May 7, 2010 at 2:02 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote:
> Terry Blanton wrote:
>
>> Wait a minute. Why should I care about two people, who are both
>> wrong, arguing with each other? :-)
>
> Who said I care? I report, you decide.
>
> - Jed
Well, I did find this rather amusing:
Krivit: "The credib
At 09:56 AM 5/7/2010, Jed Rothwell wrote:
See:
http://sti.srs.gov/fulltext/SRNS-STI-2009-00825.pdf
Wow! Our friend Shanahan finally got published again. This is good
news, actually, quite good. Shanahan is nuts, but he's the best the
skeptics have at this point. I've been suspecting that pee
At 09:56 AM 5/7/2010, Jed Rothwell wrote:
See:
http://sti.srs.gov/fulltext/SRNS-STI-2009-00825.pdf
Wow! Our friend Shanahan finally got published again. This is good
news, actually, quite good. Shanahan is nuts, but he's the best the
skeptics have at this point. I've been suspecting that pee
I wrote:
Wait a minute. Why should I care about two people, who are both
wrong . . .
Who said I care? . . .
Seriously, let us grant that Krivit is right in
this instance. Shanahan is smart but he went off
the rails a long time ago, with an idée fixe
(French, meaning "a complete meal of s
Terry Blanton wrote:
Wait a minute. Why should I care about two people, who are both
wrong, arguing with each other? :-)
Who said I care? I report, you decide.
- Jed
Wait a minute. Why should I care about two people, who are both
wrong, arguing with each other? :-)
T
On Fri, May 7, 2010 at 9:56 AM, Jed Rothwell wrote:
> See:
>
> http://sti.srs.gov/fulltext/SRNS-STI-2009-00825.pdf
>
> http://newenergytimes.com/v2/news/2010/35/3566shanahan-jem-response.pdf
>
19 matches
Mail list logo
