At 11:14 AM 12/2/4, Jed Rothwell wrote: >I think we should make a list of some of the major blunders, and uploaded >into LENR-CANR.org as part of our News report. Two mistakes struck me the >moment I glanced at the report. They are:
This may be an interesting intellectual exercise, but what will it achieve? Another 15 years of bickering? The glass is half empty, but also half full. The main problem is getting qualified research proposals on the table. If qualified proposals are rejected it then seems reasonable to mount a hostile response. The problem at this time is getting qualified PhD's to make the proposals and do the work. The stigma is obviously still there. Another line of attack may be to propose establishment of a politically independent foundation to explore controversial energy related physics and innovations. Energy related physics would include both energy generation and conservation issues. Based on recent developments in global warming, such a foundation might be permanently fundable by private endowment enhanced by matching government grants and DOE and other agency cooperative efforts. Regards, Horace Heffner
