Mary Yugo <[email protected]> wrote: Well, you see, the problem is that there are many possible errors in their > determinations and they did not do what was need to rule them out. >
No, there are not. This is your imagination. If they had said "there is no heat" you would insist this was a bullet-proof test. After Fleischmann and Pons released their videos of a boil off, many skeptics went on for years claiming the tests were questionable. That was incorrect. Those were first-principle, visual proof that the effect produces massive anomalous heat. There is no way it could be wrong. It is true that the tests witnessed by E&K were somewhat sloppy. They could have used better instrumentation. However, E&K are good scientists and they understand that no experiment is perfect and that these instruments are good enough to establish an irrefutable claim. As I said, if they had reached a negative conclusion I am sure you would be shouting that the instruments were good enough and anyone who disagrees is nitpicking and cannot see the forest for the trees. Whether this was out of politeness, a desire to have Rossi call them > again, or a lack of diligence and determination, I don't know. > I am sure it is for the reasons they stated: the test is irrefutable. You may disagree with that, but please do not assume that E&K are lying, or they secretly agree with you, or they lack determination, or they are timid and afraid to ask Rossi to do something. The chairman of a skeptics society is not usually timid. You should just accept that they mean what they say, and their views are not your views. It doesn't matter how qualified they are. They tested the E-cat > incorrectly-- each and every public time. > So you say, but every expert I have heard from disagrees. You have the right to your opinion of course, but -- as I said -- please do not tell us that E&K and the others secretly agree with you, and they are only pretending to believe what they say. You should get used to the fact that thousands of extremely qualified people not only believe in cold fusion -- even though you do not. Hundreds are convinced by Rossi. Look here: I am willing to take Robert Park's words at face value. I think he, the editors at Sci. Am. and other strong opponents sincerely believe that all cold fusion researchers are lunatics, frauds and criminals, and the effect was never replicated. Why should anyone doubt they sincerely mean what they say? I am also sure that you, Cude and others sincerely believe that all cold fusion results are wrong. It seems to me that if I am willing to accept your views at face value, you should be willing to accept that E&K, Levi and the others sincerely believe their tests are definitive. Go ahead and say they are wrong, but do not say they secretly know they are wrong. There is a huge difference. Here again you insist they have secret doubts: And for some inexplicable reason, he never repeated it with attention to > the missing details. I bet he regrets it. Or maybe he asked and Rossi > told him to go fly a kite. > Wrong on all counts. You should stop speculating about other people's state of mind. You remind me a little of naive travelers who are appalled to discover that people in foreign countries really do speak other languages. They don't all speak English, like in the movies. It is not an act. They really are different from you. - Jed
