On Mon, Aug 5, 2013 at 7:55 PM, Jed Rothwell <[email protected]> wrote:
On the contrary, that outcome depends on the opinions of the journal editors. Many fine experiments are not replicated because people will not fund them, or they are not published because the editors are biased. ***Ok, that seems reasonable enough. The bet was dependent upon at least 2 of such editors overcoming their objections and publishing the replication. The fact that editors in the past had overcome their own internal objections on a few rare LENR developments in the past would indicate this was a rational bet, but not necessarily a guaranteed one. How would you have worded the contract differently? I was working with Carl Wolfden at Intrade on the wording of the contract so that it was as rational as possible, but perhaps you have further suggestions? These decisions are political, or emotional, or they are made to protect funding, or out of spite. All of the reasons are emotional. ***Not ALL of them. I agree that SOME of them are, perhaps even most of them, but certainly not ALL of them. At a certain point it becomes a rational inductive exercise -- obviously, since it involves future events which cannot be known. But isolating that aspect (future events), it is a valid rational approach to acknowledge that since editors had published LENR replications in the past, they would be inclined to publish them in the future. None have any connection to science per se. ***I disagree. There is still some connection to science, but it is a tenuous connection. If you win a bet, it is because of emotional changes in people, not because of any underlying facts. ***The fact that editors of journals had previously published LENR articles and replications is an indication that the emotional changes you're emphasizing have already taken place. If facts made any difference, every scientist on earth would be convinced that cold fusion is real. ***Facts do make a difference. But the vast majority of scientists are deductive in their approach. They wouldn't know how to do inductive reasoning if something bit them in the ass and it was up to their inductive processes to determine the best treatment to prevent their own death.
