On 10 September 2012 07:39, Jed Rothwell <[email protected]> wrote:
> > In essence, you are saying we should ignore the data because people > opposed to cold fusion have successfully cut off funding. We should let > politics dictate what we believe. > I did not say that. I just said how science works and it is working very well. Science has (almost!) nothing to do with politics and actually it is surprising immune for political prejudices. And usually when someone gets caught on political bias (such as Climate Gate) that will lead into global scandal. Cold fusion research is far more valuable than puny climate science. However as I said, it is question of marketing ideas and successful marketing is not impossible. Mark Gibbs said it well, that with all your brain power, yet you are unable to bring even single convincing argument. Even moderate understanding does require open mind and quite a lot literature research. Besides that your idea about the funding cuts is silly conspiracy theory and if you are throwing such lazy arguments, it will not help the field. Miley et al. experiment was not expensive by any means and yet Miley was unable to produce an apparatus for demonstration purposes that could have allowed other scientists to replicate helium correlation experiment with their own instruments. If nothing else, Miley should have invited several groups of scientists into his own lab to replicate the correlation studies. Successful replication of his findings would have been the greatest science news of the 90's and it would have diverted hundreds of billions of dollars research funding to the field. This is really important thing. Also if Celani is not going to let other people to validate his quantum reactor with their own instruments, then that means only one thing that Celani has nothing that has scientific significance. —Jouni
