No, Mary, the endless repetition from the same person of the same old thing
is what annoys me. In one of your posts, where you interspersed your
comments with the other person's, I counted 4 or 5 instances where you
repeated the same basic point, but 5 different ways. Yeah, we get it, ok?
RE: "The real waste of bandwidth is the endless repetitious guessing about
what Rossi really did and really showed."
I wouldn't call it 'guessing'. The majority of the discussions of the data
that IS available, is backed up by spreadsheets, FEM modeling, and other
sincere quantitative efforts to establish a better estimate as to how likely
Rossi's claims are. How many calculations have you done in all of your
numerous posts?
I strongly suggest you read the founding principles of this discussion group
here:
Vortex-L email discussion group, unconventional physics
amasci.com/weird/wvort.html
Did you happen to notice the title (from my web search for vortex-l) has the
phrase, 'unconventional physics' in it?????????
Did you happen to notice that the second folder's name in that URL is
'/weird/' ?????????????
Those two clues alone should make it clear that this is a discussion group
that prides itself on discussing the technical aspects of unusual claims.
for the most part, we try not to focus on the personalities behind the
unconventional claims, nor speculate on personal motives, unless CLEAR
FACTUAL evidence exists to question the person's character. We enjoy taking
what data we DO HAVE, and discussing it, and EACH OF US, ON OUR OWN, WILL
DECIDE HOW MUCH CREDIBILITY WE ASSIGN TO THE DATA/CLAIMS. You seem to think
that just because I one day bring up an issue which is supportive of one of
the Rossi demos, means that I believe everything he says or has shown. No.
In fact, I think I was the one who started the whole question of the close
proximity of the secondary thermocouple to the steam inlet. A true seeker
of truth is able to bring forth facts which both support or detract from
what he/she thinks is going on in any situation. I think most Vorts are
very capable of that kind of objective thinking. unfortunately, some are
not.
Due to your limited experience with this forum, and contrary to what you
have suggested, in many instances this forum HAS HELPED to bring to light
the problems or errors made by people making extraordinary claims; it is
anything but a mutual admiration, or 'true believers' society. Most of the
regulars have an extensive amount of time invested in technology careers,
and then have spent a lot of their spare time researching and even
experimenting with unconventional things. The fact that many Vorts feel
there is enough evidence to warrant govt funding of LENR research is NOT
because they 'believe' it; it's because they have read the papers and
discussed the possibilities, talked to the scientists, attended conferences,
and MADE UP THEIR OWN MIND that there is a reasonable chance that SOMETHING
unusual is happening which needs further, dedicated effort. Others prefer
to let the journal editors, or the majority', do their thinking for them.
How many LENR papers have you read?
How many conferences have you attended?
How many scientists have you emailed?
Now, if you want to label those of us with that opinion as 'true believers',
be my guest, but we have done more to educate ourselves about the material
than you or Cude combined.
I'm in the process of responding to other points of your post; I'll post
that shortly.
For some reason you think that it's a major catastrophe if some newbie on
this forum happens to see a supportive post, and goes away with a,
god-forbid, positive impression of LENR/Rossi/DGT! Its bordering on a
pathological sense that it's your duty to make sure that doesn't happen.
that's fine too, and it is your right to try to save people from their own
ignorance or stupidity, if that's the way you enjoy spending your free time,
but I for one would graciously request that you do it on some other forum!
If you come across some NEW material on Rossi/DGT or other unconventional
physics that you think is interesting, then by all means post it! Then that
NEW information can be added to the Collective along with its analysis.
-Mark
From: Mary Yugo [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Thursday, December 08, 2011 11:04 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Will tests surface mounted thermocouples on pipe
On Thu, Dec 8, 2011 at 10:07 AM, Mark Iverson-ZeroPoint
<[email protected]> wrote:
Mary yet again proves that there are now 101 ways to say the same thing.
we all agree the tests could have been done much better with little effort.
I think that's enough repetition that most readers know your opinion on the
issue.
Stop wasting bandwidth and our time unless it's a point you HAVEN'T made
before.
Rossi's failure to provide adequate data when it is easy to do so really
annoys you, does it? I can understand why you dislike being reminded about
it.
The real waste of bandwidth is the endless repetitious guessing about what
Rossi really did and really showed. You are very unlikely to determine it
by rehashing the inadequate data from a bad experimental design and from the
insufficient and unreliable information Rossi and the observers provided.
It's simply GIGO.
And Mark, you don't seem to object about bandwidth when people endlessly
project what they will do with an E-cat when they get it. Or when they
theorize at length *how* it works when nobody can be sure *that* it works.
In fact, most people who do this have never seen an E-cat, have no reliable
means to project what if anything it will do, and from what we have seen so
far, may never have one to do anything with.
After all, who has one to play with at the moment except a single anonymous
and very possibly mythical "customer"? And we're to believe he is getting
1300 E-cat modules? After the inadequate demonstration of leaky plumbing
running at half power connected to a generator that Rossi put on October 28?
The customer is to do what with it exactly? The practical application is?
That sale story is credible?
Jed's well intentioned experiments won't help either unless he gets himself
a heat exchanger or properly simulates it with a nice heavy steam-heated
copper block on which to move his thermocouples around. That's what Rossi
used.
