On Mon, Dec 19, 2011 at 7:10 AM, Aussie Guy E-Cat <[email protected]>wrote:
> Cude what does this have to do with F&P having been replicated in many > labs all over the world? They haven't been. McKubre himself has said that no one has achieved quantitative reproducibility. And interlay reproducibility always requires the interchange of personnel. Doesn't say much for the robustness of the effect. What cf researchers call replication is not what is considered replication in the rest of science. Which is why the expert panels in 1989 and 2004 judged the evidence to be inconclusive. > > Would you please disclose if your income / pay check depends on you not > believing the FPE is real and / or working to trash anyone who does? No, like just about everyone else on the planet (probably everyone), I would benefit immensely if cold fusion were real. Like the the industrial revolution, everyone's standard of living would improve. What's not to like about that? That's why these arguments about political opposition and conspiracies are just rationalizations for people who are heavily invested, emotionally and otherwise, in the cold fusion delusion. > I ask because all you apparently contribute to this list is trashing the > FPE. > > > On 12/19/2011 11:23 PM, Joshua Cude wrote: > > >> >> On Sun, Dec 18, 2011 at 8:38 PM, Jed Rothwell <[email protected]<mailto: >> [email protected]>**> wrote: >> >> He sure knew what he was getting into. Fleischmann wrote a >> lighthearted account of this, quoted in Beaudette's book. It >> starts off with Arrhenius in 1883. He was one of the most >> important electrochemists in history, like Faraday. He made a >> revolutionary discovery. As any student of history would predict, >> this led the academic authorities to kick him out of the >> university. He was vilified and ridiculed for years and years. >> Finally, long after, he won a Nobel prize. >> >> >> You mean like Einstein got kicked out of university? No, because his >> revolutionary ideas got him kicked *into* university. >> >> >> You mean like Planck's ideas got him kicked out of university? No, >> because they named one after him. >> >> >> etc. >> >> >> You can't just make shit up to please your audience. >> >> >> I'd like to know of a professor who got kicked out of university for a >> revolutionary idea. At least one that turned out to be right, and didn't >> have religious objectors. >> >> >> Because, contrary to your claim, Arrhenius does not provide an example. I >> admit, my source does not go beyond wikipedia, but according to it, his >> controversial ideas were presented in his doctoral thesis, so he didn't >> have a position to be kicked out of. And while there were local skeptics, >> his degree was granted, if only as 3rd class. Nevertheless, when the >> dissertation was sent to other European scholars, they came to Sweden >> trying to recruit him. Doesn't really sound much like cold fusion, does it? >> >> >> The Swedish Academy then awarded him a grant to study with the likes of >> Boltzmann and van 't Hoff. That doesn't sound like years and years of >> vilification does it? A few years after his graduation, he was *given* an >> appointment at the Stockholm university, and was a full professor/chair >> (rector) about a decade after his PhD. That doesn't sound much like >> ridicule, does it? >> >> >> It did take almost 20 years to recognize his work with a Nobel prize, but >> maybe the fact that the prize was not initiated until about 17 years after >> had something to do with that. He got the 3rd one in chemistry. He was on >> the Nobel committee from the beginning until his death, and it seems he was >> not a particularly nice guy himself, arranging awards for his friends, and >> attempting to deny them to his enemies. He also got involved in racial >> biology (eugenics) later in his life. >> >> That happens so often I am astounded anyone believes the myth that >> scientists welcome new ideas. >> >> >> Well, you would not be astounded if you actually paid attention to >> history, instead of twisting it to rationalize your fervent belief in cold >> fusion. Right about the same time as the CF announcement, high temperature >> superconductivity was discovered, and the Nobel prize was awarded -- now >> get this -- one year later. The discovery had no theory to support it, was >> unexpected, and yet the discoverers were not dismissed from their >> positions. Amazing, isn't it. Of course, most Nobel prizes (including >> Einstein's) take much longer, because it usually takes time for the >> importance to become manifest, but new discoveries are always celebrated in >> science, by scientists. >> >> >> As I've said before, the most revolutionary ideas in science in >> centuries, relativity and QM, were accepted almost as quickly as they could >> be developed. Because they fit the evidence so perfectly. >> >> >> Just about every evaluation of merit in science, from granting of >> degrees, to awarding academic or industrial positions, to granting awards, >> to giving funding, to accepting manuscripts for publication, to any degree >> of fame and glory, has as its first criterion: >> >> >> *** novelty ***. >> >> >> >> What scientists fear is not new ideas (they crave them), but wrong ideas. >> Scientists are skeptical; they have to be. Skepticism is a critical filter >> in guiding research. Without it, they would simply flounder around, like, >> well, like cold fusion researchers. >> >> >> Of course, that sometimes leads to rejecting good ideas, and finding the >> right balance is the most important quality a scientist can strive for. >> Linus Pauling was clever enough to win 2 Nobel prizes, and yet he ridiculed >> quasi-crystals. At the other end is perhaps Josephson, who got a Nobel >> prize for work done as a graduate student, when skeptical guidance was >> still provided by others. On his own, his lack of skepticism has led him to >> dabble in the paranormal, and to a life's work wholly unworthy of his >> brilliant beginning. >> >> >> >> >> After the press conference, Dr. Caldwell came up to us and said, >> "Well, when my grandfather proposed electrolytic disassociation, >> he was dismissed from the University. At least that won’t happen >> to you." I said to her, “But you are entirely mistaken. We shall >> be dismissed as well." >> >> >> >> Their ideas were dismissed, but they were not fired from academic >> positions. Fleischmann was already retired, and continued to list his >> affiliation with Southampton until at least 1994. Pons was tenured, and >> left voluntarily for greener pastures and more money in France. Even so, he >> also listed his affiliation with Utah for several years after he left. >> >> >> >
