Rossi Answers Questions on Independent Test

Good news they addressed the question of skeptics.
The DC will be tested.
Like previously they will be free to use their instruments, check all...

No doubt it won't be enough, as nothing can.
In French we have a wikipedia page on "Hypercritical methodology"
(google translated)
there is no English equivalent, and this should be corrected

Quote

The hypercritical method is a method of argument, consisting of systematic and excessive criticism the smallest details of a statement or its opposing sources. It differs from the critical thinking that it is contrary to the judicious use of reason .

This method usually returns to a suspicious charge analysis and insignificant details or related to a subject, to disqualify block a thesis in the sifting, or suffer this fate by his sources , in order to repel an opposing theory, even though the evidence brought by it are they not negligible.

The hypercritical method is difficult to counteract, to the extent that it is launching a large number of peremptory assertions and sometimes quick to make, which require work to be checked. The vanity of these refutations was raised about the approach denier who makes extensive use and, more generally, in history by Henri Irenee Marrou , who sees a "obstinacy in unbelief "and which joined Raymond Aron in the conclusion that "we touch the bottom: the historical truth is only for those who want the truth . "

Michel Wieviorka finally emphasizes the role of contemporary media and their expectation of expertise in a number of successful hypercritical humanities and social sciences, it promotes the dramatic and provocative .

The hypercritical is particularly used in various forms of denial that take, for example, the denaturant, Jean Norton Cru and Witnesses as a model . Indeed, it allows with the consensus of historians, in particular, the validity of the testimony, offering the syllogism following :

• Such details are unclear or contradictory;
• so any explanation is false;
• therefore the explanation advanced for this evidence is actually rebuttals .

Display More

The key of hypercritical method is an asymmetry, that is not different from "extraordinary claims requires extraordinary claims" which could be translated, as the "null hypothesis" : "consensual claims need no evidence".

It is not far from "confirmation bias" and from the resistance to paradigm change that Thomas Kuhn describe. He explain well that "normal science" refuse anomalous facts, without a theory, until there is a theory that not only explains the anomaly, but also ALL of the known facts that current paradigm explain.

In fact like Jed Rothwell I support the neutral position : "extraordinary claims require normal evidence, as consensual claims require ordinary evidence". At worst we should admit "we don't know". The key of current science tragedy is "ego"/"hubris", denial of the famous "uncertainty monster"; tell that to the physicist on cold fusion, and to other consensual science who abuse of null hypothesis to sell theory without/despite evidences.

Is Rossi talking about the last May (2013) Test, or the currently in course Test (whose report is hopefully released till May 2014)? It's a bit confusing, because he first talks about the May 2013 Test-Report.

It really seems to be about the soon to be delivered test.

Past test missed the DC measurement.
For the rest, it was allowed but from the many critics I imagine they will clearly show what they have done themselves... it seems more important than the measurement, since measurement are quite basic.

in a way for skeptics it is seen more as a Las Vegas magician show than as science.

A recent answer of rossi is clearer.

Quote

Andrea Rossi
March 14th, 2014 at 2:15 AM
Mark:
I suppose yes. The control of the energy consumed has been made very sophisticated, after the experience made in the 6 days test of March 2013 published on Arxiv. But let me add this: should be there a microwave electromagnetic interference of that power all the persons around the reactor would boil …
Speaking seriously: between the control panel of the reactor and the plug of the electric power beside their PCE 830 Wattmeter the Professors have also put instruments able to measure any immission of direct current, if any ( there is not direct current, anyway) and the frame in which the E-Cat has been put has been totally electrically insulated by the same Professors.
Warm Regards,
A.R.

Display More

Maybe they published on arxiv first to call for critics and be able to address the critics... a kind of peer-review.