Yes, it does... I can remember a college lecture in some science-related class (think it might have been ethology), where the point of one of the prof's lectures what to avoid using 'cute' or 'descriptive' labels for things in your research papers... I guess I just find it very sad that the acceptance of a completely new phenomenon of science ends up being delayed (partially) because of the label that got attached to it 20 years ago... its even more frustrating when that new science could be our way out of the age of oil! I wonder how future (100 yrs from now) science texts will look at this time, and whether references to this time will be 'it was just science operating as it should', or, 'science gone awry'!
-Mark _____ From: Steven Krivit [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Tuesday, January 05, 2010 1:58 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [Vo]: Yet another Wikipedia use of CF in a bad light... At 08:41 AM 1/5/2010, you wrote: Wikipedia's use of CF as an example for 'science by concensus' and 'burden of proof'... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burden_of_proof About 4/5s the way down the page. "Examples in science As a general rule, the less coherent and less embedded within conventional knowledge a claim appears, the heavier the burden of proof lies on the person asserting the claim. ***The scientific consensus on cold fusion is a good example.*** The majority of physicists believe cold fusion is not possible, since it would force the alteration or abandonment of a great many other tested and generally accepted theories about nuclear physics." -Mark Mark, It would be helpful if more people distinguished between the *theory* of "cold fusion" from the observations of low-energy nuclear reaction experimental evidence. The theory of cold fusion - like-charged atomic nuclei joining together at room-temperature - may never get accepted. It would be unfortunate if the non-acceptance of the theory of cold fusion impedes the acceptance of LENR. Does this make sense? -Steve No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 9.0.725 / Virus Database: 270.14.126/2601 - Release Date: 01/04/10 23:35:00
