At 03:03 PM 9/14/2005, you wrote:
> > From: Steven Vincent Johnson:
> From: Mitchell Swartz
> > This is a lengthy list of collected evidence to support what
> > I presume is your contention that Mr. Storms often doesn't
> > know what he's talking about. How much more of your finite
> > resources do you plan to spend on the furtherance of this goal?
> > End the end, what will you have accomplished?
> "Talk is based upon the assumption that you can get somewhere
> if you keep putting one word after another." - Iblis Ginjo
Onc can interpret the context Gino's comments in several ways. Two
interpretations are:
(1) Me putting "one word after another" is nothing more than meaningless
prattle.
(2) By putting "one word after another" your goal will be to suggest that
Mr. Storms often doesn't know what he is talking about.
I'm sure there are additional interpretations.
I'm aware of the fact that you are well known in many circles (certainly
more known than I), and that you have performed CF experiments. There is a
photo of you in the lenr-canr.org web site that shows you explaining
experimental results to an attendee of the ICCF-10 Conference.
See: http://lenr-canr.org/Collections/ICCF10.htm
I sincerely hope the fruits of your CF analysis will eventually bare fruit
if they haven't already, for all of our sake.
It seems to me that you might increase your chances of realizing the
fruits of your labor if more time was spent explaining and clarifying the
conclusions of your experiments as compared to focusing on a personal
assumption that Mr. Storms doesn't always know what he is talking about.
Granted, it's only my personal opinion but I don't think it reflects well
on you.
Regards,
Steven Vincent Johnson
www.OrionWorks.com
Steven:
Please do not belittle yourself, nor Dr. Storms.
There is a third, more logical, interpretation.
We have spent years reporting our results of quality control, materials
fabrication,
engineering and nuclear theory, device development, and progressive cold
fusion results,
resulting in more than 40 papers.
In that prism, accuracy is very important to me (although it often is NOT
found on the 'net).
In this case, the point was that D2O is NOT poisonous (as would be cyanide
or carbon monoxide).
The correction to this myth is exactly what was posted -- and was clearly
demonstrated by reference.
You have purported to know what I think, but do not. Instead, such
projections inform about you.
Thank you for your other comments. Our cold fusion efforts (much more
than analysis) have
wrought much 'fruit' with some of the highest long-term results to date to
my knowledge,
and have resulted in the development of technology and Q/A systems which
are immediately applicable
to others in the field.
As such, if you want scientific explanations and conclusions of our
experiments you might try the papers,
and in the meantime, the JET Thermal Products website also has a lot of
information from previous years.
Hope that clarifies. Best wishes.
Dr. Mitchell Swartz
"Opportunities are a tricky crop, with tiny flowers that are difficult to
see and even more difficult to harvest" - anon (after Herbert)
========================================================
Cold Fusion Times http://world.std.com/~mica/cft.html
The journal of the scientific aspects of loading isotopic fuels into
materials ISSN# 1072-2874
JET Thermal Products http://world.std.com/~mica/jet.html
Working for Safe and More Efficient Heat Products to Serve You
