On Mar 5, 2014, at 3:44 PM, Jones Beene wrote: > From: Edmund Storms > > So your argument is that Hagelstein has generated incorrect arguments simply > to support his own theory. > > They may or may not be incorrect, but they are definitely self-serving.
Have you read them? I have and the papers simply show the consequences of particle emission from any source. His arguments are correct and place a limit on the energy compared to what is observed. This is less self-serving than your arguments. > > And that no matter what is said about the Takahashi theory, it must be > correct because it does not emit strong gamma and it must be better than my > theory. > > Any theory of deuterium to 4He fusion is more likely to be correct to the > degree that it does not “wish away” a strong gamma. Yes and I accept that you obsessed with this argument. I now give up trying to show you how this opinion is not correct and is not consistent with what is observed > > You apparently do not acknowledge any fact of nature independent of personal > motivation. Amazing. > > You have presented no fact of nature to consider, and no indisputable fact of > any kind - so my personal motivation does not enter into the discussion. Once again, you defect the issue and ignore what I have provided. Are you a lawyer, Jones? Ed Storms > > Jones > > >
