Edmund Storms <[email protected]> wrote: > If it becomes generally known that cold fusion is real, similar dramatic > events might ensue. > > > "If it becomes generally known." Yes, but my point is that it is not > becoming generally known and it will not be anytime soon. >
You are not making a point here. You are making a prediction. I do not think anyone can know the future with as much assurance as you express, especially with regard to an event that might be triggered by a small change in opinion or a random event. For example, suppose someone like Bill Gates is persuaded to support cold fusion. This might have a large impact on public opinion, very quickly. I can see from the traffic at LENR-CANR.org that there is widespread interest in cold fusion. It is not possible for anyone to say with assurance that this interest will not suddenly spread to a much wider audience. Given the nature of the Internet and the speed at which information can be disseminated, this might happen with exponential speed. See my paper: http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/RothwellJthefuturem.pdf Once known, application of CF will have to fight the self-interest of the > present energy sources. > Perhaps. That may even be likely. But it is not a sure thing. It would depend on historical forces beyond anyone's control. If the force of public opinion is mustered strongly in favor of cold fusion, all opposition will be swept aside. That sort of thing has happened in the past. Take, for example, public health improvements. The dairy industry resisted pasteurization of milk in the US for 60 years, from the 1860s until 1917. This killed hundreds of thousands of children. The industry resisted this because milk producers did not want to add a penny or two to the cost of a bottle of milk. That is an example of opposition that lasted for a long time even though it hurt everyone's interests (including the dairy owners'). In contrast, when polio vaccines were developed, there was no public opposition. Everyone, adults and children, was vaccinated. There might have been opposition the polio vaccine. There is opposition to it today in countries such as Pakistan. People are opposed to modernity, or frightened by it. Other people make political use of scare tactics. The opposition to the global warming hypothesis is also mainly cause by people such as the Kotch brothers, who are making political use of scare tactics to promote their own interests. See "The Merchants of Doubt": http://failuremag.com/feature/article/merchants_of_doubt/ Opposition to vaccines in the U.S. is caused by irrational ignorance, and an anti-scientific attitude that has always been widespread in our society. See, "An Epidemic of Fear:" http://www.wired.com/magazine/2009/10/ff_waronscience/ Forces such as these might prevent the development of cold fusion. They might engulf us in 9 m of ocean water in 80 years. Sometimes stupid people prevail. But sometimes smart people win. History has generally been in one direction, away from ignorance toward enlightenment, knowledge, invention, wealth and improvements for everyone. Century by century, things have usually gotten better, not worse. So that is the side I would bet on. There have been exceptions, such as the Dark Ages. They were not as Dark as history portrays them. - Jed
