Mitchell Swartz wrote:
I'm continuing this exchange only for the benefit of interested observers. Apparently, no statement contradicting or explaining Dr. Swartz's assertions has any effect on his persistent repetition. He continues to call Jed and I liars and continues to insist that he is correct in a public form that should be devoted to debate of science.
At 11:44 AM 1/27/2005, Edmund Storms wrote:
Dr. Swartz, if you have a problem with what Jed or I have done with your papers, take it up with us personally. Do not waste the time of everyone on Vortex. They can not solve your problem. ....
Ed:
First, Rothwell brought this up. He wasted everyone's time his false statement
and useless allegation.
Neither Jed nor I have any reason to keep his papers off the site, other than his lack of cooperation. We publish all papers that can be understood and are of value to the field. As anyone can see, our standards are rather low, but not absent. Swartz's papers fall well within this standard. However, some papers do not, hence Swartz's charge of censorship. This accusation would be laughable except Swartz is an influential contributor to the CF field and many readers will only note the repeated assertion without examining the evidence. As has been said before, "A lie told many times becomes the truth."
Of course, neither Swartz nor I, nor Jed, can prove our individual viewpoints. Consequently, readers, if it is important at all, will have to come to their own conclusions based on the past history of each of us. Therefore, this is the last comment I will make on the subject.
Ed Storms
The problem of the misnamed (and censored) LENR-CANR site is your own. You apparently continue it for reasons known only to you (and perhpas those who attended LENR-2 in Texas).
"God knows, Jed has tried and failed."
Interested viewpoint that you have, Edmund.
