RE: CF on NPR
John Steck wrote: You really expect a fair shake on NPR? Yes, I do -- for a good reason. The short segment they broadcast with Ira Flatow was quite fair and accurate. Flatow has often communicated with us that he knows what the story is. He was a little timid, but accurate. I am hoping the other reporters on NPR contact him and discuss the matter. Since he is their science reporter it is likely they will. IMO the Scientific American position is far more damaging to winning the hearts and minds of the mainstream scientific community. I agree. Also, with regard to your volley to Wikipedia... maybe read the Wired article you linked in your post. It explains how the system works and how the subject champions really control the info presented there. I did read it, and that is why I sent the message. I am hoping they will make me the subject champion of cold fusion. If the people in charge are reasonably fair they will let me fix the article and then lock it. If they do not give me that assurance I will not bother to change it. I have no time to play games with skeptics. - Jed
RE: CF on NPR
I wrote: I did read it, and that is why I sent the message. I am hoping they will make me the subject champion of cold fusion. If the people in charge are reasonably fair they will let me fix the article and then lock it. Mind you, I am not expecting a response. The people in charge probably do not see things my way. But I propose to do a few weeks of tedious work, and assemble 50 to 100 footnotes, and I'll be darned if I do that only to have some skeptic come in and erase the whole thing. The people in charge there do not seem to be hung up on formal qualifications, but if they challenge me I will tell them I have read hundreds of papers about cold fusion and the skeptics who wrote the present article apparently have read none. If the Encyclopedia were written for professionals, the best thing to do would be to replace the entire article with Storms' Student's Guide. However, I think the Guide is a little too technical for the general public, and we have to preserve the existing article with the comments by the skeptics, so I think this calls for a shorter article based on the Guide targeted to the general public. - Jed
RE: CF on NPR
Grimer wrote: There must be some neurotic tree-hugging Vortexian who could be relied on to play his part convincingly. Wheel him on to explain the horrors which will ensue if the terrorists get there before the US is ready with adequate counter measures. If I do say so myself, I think I did a pretty good job of that in chapters 11 and 12 of the book. Seriously, even a small difference in military capabilities can translate into an enormous advantage. If the biplane fighter airplanes of the early 1930s have been available in 1916, I think WWI would have been over by the end of the year. In 1940 if the British had had two or three surface-to-air missile batteries with circa 1955 Nike technology, the Battle of Britain would have been over before it started, with zero casualties on the British side. People as neurotic as him have an almost mesmeric ability to inspire fear. I remember he once came round to my house and seeing my new fridge with an internal light (an innovation at the time), he said, Are you sure that it turns off when you shut the door. Even though I knew perfectly well that it did. and the switch plunger was in plain view, I'm ashamed to say that when he'd gone I opened the fridge door just a crack to make certain. That's hysterical! But why would anyone *fear* that the light remains on? - Jed
RE: CF on NPR
Jed wrote: Yes, I do -- for a good reason. The short segment they broadcast with Ira Flatow was quite fair and accurate. Flatow has often communicated with us that he knows what the story is. He was a little timid, but accurate. I am hoping the other reporters on NPR contact him and discuss the matter. Since he is their science reporter it is likely they will. Jed - If mainstream news media did their job, there would be no need for Infinite Energy or New Energy Times. If mainstream science publishing did their job, there would be no need for LENR-CANR.org. But these entities cater to the dominant, safe public view. They lack either/both the courage or the foresight to explore the unknown. Another viewpoint: Henry Bauer touches on the very heart of why mainstream science journalism has been largely unwilling/unable to bridge the communication gap between the cold fusion community and the broader science community. A constant dilemma for reporters, Bauer says, is that they need access to sources, and if they publish material that casts doubt on the official view, they risk losing access to official sources. Source: Journal of Scientific Exploration, Science in the 21st Century: Knowledge Monopolies and Research Cartels, by Henry H. Bauer (Vol. 18 #4 pp. 643--660, Winter 2004) http://newenergytimes.com/Library/2004BauerH-21stCenturyScience.pdf Courtesy of http://www.scientificexploration.org/index.html s
RE: CF on NPR
At 11:00 am 04-03-05 -0500, you wrote: Grimer wrote: There must be some neurotic tree-hugging Vortexian who could be relied on to play his part convincingly. Wheel him on to explain the horrors which will ensue if the terrorists get there before the US is ready with adequate counter measures. If I do say so myself, I think I did a pretty good job of that in chapters 11 and 12 of the book. Seriously, even a small difference in military capabilities can translate into an enormous advantage. If the biplane fighter airplanes of the early 1930s have been available in 1916, I think WWI would have been over by the end of the year. In 1940 if the British had had two or three surface-to-air missile batteries with circa 1955 Nike technology, the Battle of Britain would have been over before it started, with zero casualties on the British side. People as neurotic as him have an almost mesmeric ability to inspire fear. I remember he once came round to my house and seeing my new fridge with an internal light (an innovation at the time), he said, Are you sure that it turns off when you shut the door. Even though I knew perfectly well that it did. and the switch plunger was in plain view, I'm ashamed to say that when he'd gone I opened the fridge door just a crack to make certain. That's hysterical! But why would anyone *fear* that the light remains on? - Jed I think he thought it would heat the fridge up, Jed. Medical people aren't very good with numbers (pace Mills). Calculus gives them nightmares, at least it did my brother which is why he switched to biology in the 6th form. Frank
RE: CF on NPR
Grimer wrote: I think he thought it would heat the fridge up, Jed. Medical people aren't very good with numbers (pace Mills). . . . Hmm . . . Well, it would heat it up, naturally. But the fact that the fridge was cold when you opened the door showed that the compressor was keeping up, and removing more heat than the bulb generated. The only problem, then, was the cost of running the 20 W bulb and removing the heat. That would be ~100 W continuous, 2.4 KWH per day, about $0.20 per day worst case. If it was a novelty, I guess I would have checked to be sure the switch was working, too. No point in throwing away money. - Jed
RE: CF on NPR
Steven Krivit wrote: Henry Bauer touches on the very heart of why mainstream science journalism has been largely unwilling/unable to bridge the communication gap between the cold fusion community and the broader science community. A constant dilemma for reporters, Bauer says, is that they need access to sources, and if they publish material that casts doubt on the official view, they risk losing access to official sources. That is true. And yet Flatow's report was accurate and positive, albeit timid. Some people in the media get away with reporting facts about cold fusion, and they are not punished by losing access. I suspect the others would also escape unscathed, but perhaps they are cowards and do not want to risk it. Most, I think, simply buy the establishment's line without question. I have contacted many people in the media and elsewhere. Only a few have responded, and most of those have parroted the Scientific American or some other official source. Often they cite phantom sources. They claim the DoE ERAB report said this or that, when it said nothing of the kind. In other words, laziness causes more harm than fear. - Jed
RE: CF on NPR
That is true. And yet Flatow's report was accurate and positive, albeit timid. Some people in the media get away with reporting facts about cold fusion, and they are not punished by losing access. I suspect the others would also escape unscathed, but perhaps they are cowards and do not want to risk it. Most, I think, simply buy the establishment's line without question. I have contacted many people in the media and elsewhere. Only a few have responded, and most of those have parroted the Scientific American or some other official source. Often they cite phantom sources. They claim the DoE ERAB report said this or that, when it said nothing of the kind. In other words, laziness causes more harm than fear. - Jed Jed, I forgot to mention. Yes, I agree with you about Flatow. I have listened to his question and dialogue in cf reports he has done and it is crystal clear to me that he knows much more than he tells. But he knows how to keep his producers happy, and keep his job, too. And that is his choice. s
Re: CF on NPR
The Flatow segment was linked to a really idiotic segment on sonofusion, which is full of insults toward CF: http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=4520833 - Jed
