On Sep 17, 2007, at 6:27 AM, Jed Rothwell wrote:
Stiffler Scientific wrote:
Mistakes are human nature and will always exist, yet overt
stupidity should
not be allowed. In my opinion I actually feel YouTube should look
into
censoring as they do Porn, those that abuse H2+O2 in the way they
are.
Perhaps it should be censored because it is dangerous, but not
because it is stupid. Pardon me for putting it this way, but
censoring stupidity is a stupid idea. There are two problems with
this: it violates academic freedom, and no one can be certain what
is stupid and what isn't. There are borderline cases of pornography
-- pictures that some people would call porn but others would not,
but the ambiguity is greater when judging stupid or smart.
Speaking of censorship, here is a blogger who wants the Congress to
crack down hard on the Navy for allowing cold fusion research:
http://www.flightglobal.com/blogs/the-dewline/2007/09/business-week-
investigates-ear.html
Now that a little research is allowed, you can expect many such
people to emerge from under their rocks. When cold fusion research
was merely a hypothetical scourge -- not something actually
practiced -- these people attacked it only in principle, and did
not that specific people be censored (Pam Boss in this case).
- Jed
To:
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
First time I've heard the argument that denying congressional
earmarks is inconsistent with supporting academic freedom. Seems a
little shrill, no?
I think even supporters of Cold Fusion would agree that the field
remains classified as a pseudo-science, as Popper defined it.
Posted by Stephen Trimble
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
I responded: "As a supporter of cold fusion research, I can say
unequivocally that cold fusion research is no longer pseudoscience in
the context of Popper's definition, because experimental protocols
have reached the state of being readily falsifiable. Results have
reached a success rate such that only a small number of comparatively
inexpensive experiments are necessary to demonstrate nuclear events
from chemical means. This achievement is due in large part to work
done by US Navy and national laboratory personnel, much of it at
their own expense and on their own time. This is no less falsifiable
than the electron slit interference experiment performed a few
electrons at a time. This is a valid line of research with enormous
potential for beneficial impact to society."
Horace Heffner
http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/
