I have bowed out of this discussion, but let me clarify this point: Horace Heffner <[email protected]> wrote:
> Oh come now. I have dealt with fraud by pointing that Yugo's claims of > stage magic is not falsifiable. > > > Uhhh .... how does that differ from just ignoring it? > It is a problem of logic, as I explained to Yugo. An assertion that cannot be tested or falsified cannot be debated. I cannot dispute it. Or agree with it, for that matter. It is meaningless. She claims there may be someone somewhere in the world who knows how to hide wires or chemical fuel in such a way that experts opening the cell would not be able to detect it. Until Yugo cites a specific stage magic technique that might accomplish this, there is no basis to determine whether it might be true or not. I do not believe such a stage trick can exist, even in principle. I have some knowledge of stage magic. As soon as the stage props are opened up and examined from the point of view of the magician -- that is, from the angle the audience cannot see -- the mechanism is obvious. It is always simple. See, for example: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sawing_a_woman_in_half#Methods_and_exposure No matter how you fake an eCat, the moment the reactor is opened up experts will see how it works. There is no way to hide wires. The cell is much too small to produce a chemical reaction of this magnitude, when you take into account the space needed for the equipment such as tanks and burners. Arguments that cannot be tested, falsified or refuted are verboten in science, but they are allowed in some other academic fields, such as literature critique or theology. - Jed
