Mark Iverson wrote:
Jed, then you've got some extremely liberal definition of 'insider'!
I was using the skeptics' definition. As I said, one of them called
Duncan a "charlatan" because he concluded that Energetics Technology
is correctly measuring 0.8 W in, ~20 W out. Any sane expert in
calorimetry would reach this conclusion, but the skeptics say anyone
who does becomes an "insider" and loses all credibility.
My definition of an insider is one who has at least done some
experimental/theoretical research on the subject; LENR in this case.
Duncan has now become an insider, by that definition.
The people who consulted in this review are listed on p. 6. Some of
them are not known to have contributed to cold fusion but they are
knowledgeable about the field and that makes them "insiders" as some
people define it. This devolves into a "no true Scotsman" logical fallacy.
Agreed, some may now refer to Dr. Duncan as somewhat of an insider,
but his single assessment had MORE of a positive impact than
anything that I can think of... it drastically reduced the "negative
aura" surrounding LENR...
I would not say "drastically." There is still a lot of resistance and
no good press in the mass media. It has had a welcome effect, and it
has opened doors. That was mainly because it was broadcast on CBS.
Gerischer was as qualified and prestigious as Duncan, and his review
is even more positive than Duncan's, but it had no impact because no
one has ever heard of it, apart from people who download his paper.
Which is here, by the way:
http://www.lenr-canr.org/acrobat/GerischerHiscoldfusi.pdf
- Jed
