It's not the personal friendship being questioned. It's the fact that the scientists are repeating facts given to them by Rossi without verifying them.
That shows a clear lack of skepticism and independence on the part of the scientists. It shows the beginning of a pattern that there may be other facts that they are reporting without verifying. On Fri, Jun 28, 2013 at 10:32 AM, Jed Rothwell <[email protected]>wrote: > blaze spinnaker <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hardly the criticism of the comments here isn't much better. You guys >> are just resorting to pointless insults. >> >> I will say one thing about the paper, they're very very right on front. >> The so called "independent investigators" . . . >> > > I think you are missing the point. The independence of the investigators > is not an appropriate subject for a physics paper. It is okay for a > discussion group or even a magazine article, but in physics, personal > friendships should not be an issue. > > Many physicists are close friends for life. Or rivals. People such as > Fleischmann and Bockris knew one another for decades. To say that would > disqualify Fleischmann from critiquing Bockris, or working with him, or > reviewing his papers would be absurd. There were not more than a dozen > electrochemists of their caliber in the whole of the 20th century. They all > knew one-another. Saying they should not collaborate would be like saying > that Bohr could not be trusted to work with Einstein. > > Apart from this problem, the paper is riddled with errors and absurdities. > > - Jed > >
