On Mon, Feb 21, 2011 at 8:49 AM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax <a...@lomaxdesign.com>wrote:
> Subject was Re: [Vo]:Revised version Celani reports on gamma emission from > Rossi device > > At 04:12 AM 2/21/2011, Joshua Cude wrote: > > Not true. I have described what it would take to convince me (and so has >> Jed Rothwell), and if cold fusion could deliver a tiny fraction of what has >> been promised for 22 years, my criteria would be easily met. >> > > This discussion has been about the Rossi work, which is based on a secret > process, and which is inadequately confirmed, there has merely been a > somewhat convincing demonstration that *something* is going on in that > thing. This is nothing like the accumulated evidence for cold fusion, based > on open and documented and reproducible experimental techniques, widely > confirmed. > > I'm not interested in Rossi's work for the moment. Obviously, if *Rossi's > promises* are fulfilled, all bets are off. Rossi, by the way, is also > working on "unknown nuclear reaction," he'd merely be succeeding, if he > does, in demonstrating a far more vigorous reaction than any prior reports. > > So I'm going to ask, as to cold fusion in general, "what has been promised" > and what do promises have to do with science? > A new energy source has been promised. > > And... "convinced of what"? > Convinced that nuclear reactions in cold fusion experiments have produced measurable heat.