I love that quote: that is all what we see Pol Pot:* So even though mathematicians spend their lives exploring the full implications of a few axioms and barely make a dent in the potential theorems, and even though physicists can't claim the formal rigor of mathematical proof, you claim that it has been proven beyond a reasonable doubt that the statement "deuterium fusion cannot occur with heat but without neutrons, gamma rays or tritium" is true?*
Government funded "physicist":* Well, when you twist my words around that way, I suppose I'd have to say no.* Pol Pot to Khmer Rouge as he steps back:* OK guys. But don't eat his brains. It might be contagious.* 2013/6/22 James Bowery <[email protected]> > Again, the analogy does not hold. The achemists were claiming to > transmute base metals to gold and were "discredited" when the chemists > claimed to have been the victim of the alchemists' "incompetence and > delusion <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wR-AohRWbBo>". > > We'll be lucky if we don't get another Pol Pot out of this > mess<http://jimbowery.blogspot.com/2011/07/institutional-incompetence-conspiracy.html> > . > > > On Sat, Jun 22, 2013 at 1:18 PM, Eric Walker <[email protected]>wrote: > >> On Sat, Jun 22, 2013 at 10:35 AM, Jed Rothwell <[email protected]>wrote: >> >> Most skeptics are conformists and they will believe whatever the >>> mainstream institutions tell them to believe. >> >> >> The general public may not believe this is true, but I am beginning to >> think it might be. >> >> >>> The day after the Times says "cold fusion is real" the skeptics will all >>> say they believed it all along. Many of them will modestly take credit for >>> introducing cold fusion to society, and for keeping the researchers honest. >> >> >> If I were with a New York PR firm hired by a consortium of research >> universities to provide counsel on how to respond to a congressional >> inquiry on the handling of cold fusion, four years in the future, say, I >> might try to spin things like this: >> >> "When Pons and Fleischmann first made claim of their 'results,' the least >> competent in science rushed to the scene and made it very difficult to sift >> wheat from chaff. No one would publish their results in reputable >> journals, and the 'papers' they prepared were of such substandard quality >> that they were indistinguishable from promotional literature >> for homeopathic remedies and magnet motors. We did our best to bring >> scientific scrutiny to bear on the multitude of claims that were being made >> by any electrical engineer or computer programmer that could get ahold of >> some palladium and a test tube, but they would not work with us. It was >> not until 2015 that Caltech, Harwell and MIT were able to >> independently piece together some of the critical details that Andrea Rossi >> was unwilling to divulge that we first had any kind of scientific basis for >> 'solid-phase mediated fusion,' as the field is now known. (Note that they >> found a COP of 2.54 rather than 2.6, as was initially claimed.) Prior to >> the very difficult experiment that Caltech, Harwell and MIT were heroically >> able to carry out, solid-phase mediated fusion was the stuff of >> near-threshold events recorded in the spreadsheets of hobbyists playing in >> their garages. We liken the critical transition to professional science to >> the transition of alchemy, in the middle ages, to chemistry, with the >> systematization of the scientific method. The early tinkerers had a role >> to play, obviously, but now we can look to professional scientists to carry >> out a rigorous and systematic investigation and to publish quality results >> in mainstream scientific journals." >> >> Eric >> >> >
