The reason I posted the message here with the title "To Arms" is that I perceived this to be a unique opportunity to goad the acolytes of pseudo-skepticism into laying it on the line.
I was right. You see /. is one of, if not the most read news blog by techies. Fusion is one of a few "ultimate techs" so it is hard for them not to have strong opinions about it and since they aren't all "scientists" they aren't necessarily going to be buying into the party line. Some, however, are sheep and will buy into the party line even though the party is striking at the heart of their love for technology -- and science for that matter (by promoting a theocratic regime in which experimental results are blocked from publication if they would falsify currently fashionable interpretation of physical theory). Those sheep take very personally attacks on their "shepherds". On Sat, Oct 18, 2014 at 2:57 AM, Kevin O'Malley <[email protected]> wrote: > ...How did you get someone to bite? These guys are full of bluster but > when it comes to putting their money where their mouth is, they are full of > shit. Case in point on this forum is Blaze Spinnaker. > > http://intrade.freeforums.org/re-anyone-willing-to-make-a-bet-the-ecat-is-not-real-t31.html > > > > On Fri, Oct 17, 2014 at 7:15 PM, <[email protected]> wrote: > >> In reply to James Bowery's message of Fri, 17 Oct 2014 21:03:00 -0500: >> Hi, >> [snip] >> >Bruce Perens just bet me 10,000 to one odds that "no credible >> commercially >> >utilized cold fusion by 2024". >> >> Cold Fusion, or LENR? >> >> >> >I of course accepted his generous and >> >honorable bet. If only the scum responsible for its suppression would put >> >their money where their mouths were. But then, no amount of "fine" can >> make >> >up for what they've done. >> > >> >http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=5842595&cid=48173885 >> Regards, >> >> Robin van Spaandonk >> >> http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html >> >> >
