Like Mary Yugo, I've always wanted to see strong irrefutable evidence for a CF anomaly -- heat, transmutation, radiations -- so it's good that many are motivated worldwide for over two decades to be on the alert for anomalies and to try novel setups -- even if it is decades before a reproducible anomaly is shared, science will benefit from seeing the various ways in which subtle errors and human factors can create durable, albeit isolated, communities of cooperation, such as is the case with BlackLight Power, UFOs, -- medicine has seen Freudian psychoanalysis, prefrontal lobotomy, caesarean section deliveries, acapuncture as durable mainstream fads -- myself an experiencer for decades in psychic and spiritual realms, which have many fan networks -- perhaps with exponential speed, science will be based on shared expanded states of awareness, while many forms of psychokinesis will be normal -- so then the various one-of-a-kind anomalies repeatedly reported in CF will be appreciated from a very expanded viewpoint...
within mutual service, Rich Murray On Fri, Nov 11, 2011 at 10:42 AM, Mary Yugo <[email protected]> wrote: > > Well, if I had been so confident that cold fusion or LENR or what ever you >> want to call it is impossible, I would feel quite foolish at the moment. >> He spent many years of his career making fun of the serious researchers >> operating within the field. >> > > I'm not sure who will end up looking foolish here. At this point, Rossi > is far from proving that his device is real. Even if it is, skepticism is, > at this point in time, the correct perspective. > > >> I suspect that the damage to the world and people caused by his attitude >> and interference is incalculable. Do you not think that the field was >> damaged by he and a number of other prominent scientists? We would all be >> better off had they kept out of the loop entirely. >> > > I don't know how much damage Park and other skeptics did to cold fusion > research. I personally highly favor funding for cold fusion research in > proportion to the promise of a particular concept or implementation. I > think most of the damage has been done by claimants who couldn't prove > their theories and whose devices did not work convincingly enough. >
