Re: [Vo]:Cold fusion has been suppressed -- no evidence for a conspiracy

endet: 22:01 Dienstag, 11.September 2012 Betreff: Re: [Vo]:Cold fusion has been suppressed -- no evidence for a conspiracy Guenter Wildgruber wrote:   This is a completely different institute, and one probaly has to know the intricacies of the Max-Planck organization. > The same or differe

Re: [Vo]:Cold fusion has been suppressed -- no evidence for a conspiracy

Guenter Wildgruber wrote: > This is a completely different institute, and one probaly has to know the > intricacies of the Max-Planck organization. > The same or different, you would think that the Director's opinions might have weight when it comes to accepting or rejecting a important claim.

Re: [Vo]:Cold fusion has been suppressed -- no evidence for a conspiracy

Von: Jed Rothwell An: vortex-l@eskimo.com Gesendet: 20:23 Dienstag, 11.September 2012 Betreff: Re: [Vo]:Cold fusion has been suppressed -- no evidence for a conspiracy Guenter Wildgruber wrote:   >> not over here (Germany).  As far as i know, t

Re: [Vo]:Cold fusion has been suppressed -- no evidence for a conspiracy

Guenter Wildgruber wrote: > >> not over here (Germany). As far as i know, the MPP, which is the > biggest May-Planck-Institute, tried to replicate F/P and failed. so the > issue was settled. > I do not know about this test, but it would be ridiculous to reject cold fusion based on one test in

Re: [Vo]:Cold fusion has been suppressed -- no evidence for a conspiracy

Von: Jed Rothwell An: vortex-l@eskimo.com Gesendet: 16:12 Dienstag, 11.September 2012 Betreff: Re: [Vo]:Cold fusion has been suppressed -- no evidence for a conspiracy Jouni Valkonen wrote: Yes you did say. You said that hot fusion researchers are

Re: [Vo]:Cold fusion has been suppressed -- no evidence for a conspiracy

On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 9:12 AM, Jed Rothwell wrote: > Jouni Valkonen wrote: > > Yes you did say. You said that hot fusion researchers are trying to >> 'suppress' it and indeed hot fusion research is operating with extremely >> big money. >> > ... > I suppose plasma fusion funding is "big money.

Re: [Vo]:Cold fusion has been suppressed -- no evidence for a conspiracy

Jouni Valkonen wrote: Yes you did say. You said that hot fusion researchers are trying to > 'suppress' it and indeed hot fusion research is operating with extremely > big money. > As noted that was Abd, not me. However, it is true that the plasma fusion scientists played a leading role in suppre

Re: [Vo]:Cold fusion has been suppressed -- no evidence for a conspiracy

> There is no 'big money suppression'. > > > Did I say anything about big money? > > Yes you did say. > Actually perhaps it was Abd who said: »But the physics community, dependent upon large subsidies for hot fusion research, did not operate, here, by the normal standards of science. They, instead

Re: [Vo]:Cold fusion has been suppressed -- no evidence for a conspiracy

On Sep 11, 2012, at 4:56 AM, Jed Rothwell wrote: > Jouni Valkonen wrote: > There is no 'big money suppression'. > > Did I say anything about big money? Yes you did say. You said that hot fusion researchers are trying to 'suppress' it and indeed hot fusion research is operating with extremely b

Re: [Vo]:Cold fusion has been suppressed -- no evidence for a conspiracy

Jouni Valkonen wrote: Jed, many people and thousands of scientist have looked the data and they > are concluded that scientific data is nowhere near sufficient. Thousands of scientists download papers from my website every week. I hear from them often. Not one of them has told me that. There

Re: [Vo]:Cold fusion has been suppressed -- no evidence for a conspiracy

Jed, many people and thousands of scientist have looked the data and they are concluded that scientific data is nowhere near sufficient. It is in best case speculative, suggestive and inconclusive. There is no 'big money suppression'. That kind of idea is silly and non-informative and it is an

Re: [Vo]:Cold fusion has been suppressed -- no evidence for a conspiracy

Jed sez: ... > I think that I know why Jouni Valkonen accused me of being a conspiracy > theorist. He did that to make me look silly or gullible. People often accuse > me of being a "conspiracy theorist" because in the minds of most people, a > conspiracy theorist is a paranoid person who wears a

Re: [Vo]:Cold fusion has been suppressed -- no evidence for a conspiracy

I wrote: > Miles was a Fellow of the Institute at China Lake. A "Fellow" means > someone who can study any subject he wants, like a tenured professor. > Speaking of tenured professors, see: http://art-by-comics.imagekind.com/store/imagedetail.aspx/1e1ac97a-833f-4a40-819c-9c05dc89a2aa/Professor_

Re: [Vo]:Cold fusion has been suppressed -- no evidence for a conspiracy

James Bowery wrote: Unfortunately, Jed, the accusers of "conspiracy theorizing" may have a > legal leg to stand on given this "plain language" instruction to the > jurors in California civil cases regarding > conspiracy

Re: [Vo]:Cold fusion has been suppressed -- no evidence for a conspiracy

Unfortunately, Jed, the accusers of "conspiracy theorizing" may have a legal leg to stand on given this "plain language" instruction to the jurors in California civil cases regarding conspiracy

[Vo]:Cold fusion has been suppressed -- no evidence for a conspiracy

Jouni Valkonen wrote: > Besides that your idea about the funding cuts is silly conspiracy theory > and if you are throwing such lazy arguments, it will not help the field. > It irks me when people write this! Why does this nonsense about a "conspiracy" so often come up? Who said anything about