interested observer Member
  • Member since Feb 10th 2017
  • Last Activity:

Posts by interested observer

  • How do you convince a skeptic?

    “Oddly enough I did used to block your comments, putting you in the category the the three worst posters here (IMO). Then someone quoted a comment of yours that was not only sensibly and helpful, but I even agreed with it. So I reconsidered.”


    Top 3, eh? Who are the other two?


    And what did I say that you thought was sensible and helpful that you agreed with? I can’t even begin to hazard a guess since, unbeknownst to all my colleagues over the years and despite the things I have done, I am an anti-science Luddite. Gosh I hope they don’t find out. It would be a real shock.

  • Clearance Items

    @Bob: this site has been changing recently, and not for the better. I appears as though it is headed in the direction of being just an echo chamber for a specific set of opinions. It is not an issue of behavior - that is abundantly obvious. It is a matter of what team you are on. Unfortunate, but if that's what the proprietors want, that's what it will be.

  • Clearance Items

    Quote from Alan Smith

    For somebody who isn't interested in Science interested observer posts a lot.

    So now I am not interested in science? I’d like to see where I said that. I seem to be a man of many legends. (Cue kevmo to post my comment that I don’t post here to further science in you missed it the previous 300 times.)


    This thread notwithstanding, what percentage of posts on this site are actually about science as opposed to personal attacks, amateur psychoanalysis, legal matters, snide remarks (like the post I am responding to), critiques of IH, conspiracy theories and, mostly, discussions of the adventures of Rossi? Yes, there are threads and discussions that are actually about science, but scientific matters are hardly the bulk of what appears here.

  • How do you convince a skeptic?

    Quote from JedRothwell

    Perhaps you are forgetting that the fact that cold fusion is difficult to replicate has no scientific significance. It is not relevant to whether the effect is real or not. There is no rule that something difficult to replicate might not be real. Many other experiments are much harder to replicate, with lower s/n ratios, but everyone believes them. The top quark is an example. If scientists would evaluate cold fusion strictly on the merits of the experiments -- s/n ratios, replications and so on -- while ignoring irrelevant issues such as the fact that it is difficult to replicate, they would all believe it is real.

    Did I say something that prompted this comment? I am not forgetting the fact that difficulty in replication is not relevant to whether the effect is real or not. I agree with that statement. What it has to do with anything

    I actually said is beyond me.


    Pretty much your entire comment deals with the unfair treatment of CF researchers and the topic in general. I am not arguing otherwise. I also have never played any role in it. So why are you arguing with me about it? The real question - at least the one that interests me - is what should/can be done about it? People like me who are here for the most part to rubberneck at the Rossi trainwreck have no role whatsoever to play in the fate of cold fusion.

  • How do you convince a skeptic?

    Quote from JedRothwell

    I believe that is correct. When there is an existing technology, the people selling it oppose progress. There was no entrenched low temperature superconducting industry, but if there had been, they would have opposed HTSC. To take an actual example, there was tremendous opposition to the development of the MRI machine. I do not know the details, but I believe most of it came from the people who make x-ray equipment. They saw the MRI as a competing technology. They trashed the inventor for many years.

    Actually, there was an entrenched low-temperature superconductivity industry, ironically mostly involved in building superconducting magnets for MRI machines (as well as a much smaller market for particle accelerators and other scientific applications.) With the discovery of HTS, virtually every company and laboratory involved with LTS immediately started research programs in HTS including industrial, academic, and government labs.


    Opposition? Well, nobody argued that HTS wasn’t real. Pretty much anybody with modest laboratory skills could demonstrate it. Skeptics - and there were plenty - argued that it would never really be all that useful for a variety of technical reasons. To a fair extent, so far the skeptics have been right. There have only been very modest and not very successful forays into commercialization despite substantial investments of both public and private money and decades of effort. For remaining diehards in the field, though, as the old saying goes, the opera ain’t over until the fat lady sings.

  • How do you convince a skeptic?

    Why the ongoing discussion belongs in a Rossi-Blog Comment thread I can’t imagine. In any event, the bone of contention appears to be whether LENR has been adequately demonstrated to exist with some suitably defined set of parameters. THH and SOT are unconvinced. So let’s say you all manage to convince them. Suppose they capitulate and acknowledge that high-power, long-duration, high-“COP” LENR has been demonstrated and replicated by appropriate entities. Then what? Surely defeating some internet skeptics is not an important goal. What is it that is supposed to happen next? Who is supposed to do what?

  • Rossi-Blog Comment Discussion

    By March 1, 2020, rest assured that much will have happened here, none of which having any real significance.

  • Rossi E-Cat SK Demo Discussion

    Quote from Shane D.

    You always say that. Maybe one day you will be right, but not yet. Unlike you, I see something positive happening, and that is kevmo is finding his place, and the members opposed to his abrasive style are beginning to adjust. Like they did with Adrian, and many others before.


    To his credit, kevmo is a quick learner, and after being informed of the unwritten Rossi thread rules, has made his own adjustments, and has since played within. He pushes the boundaries at times, but who does not?

    You see something positive happening? One by one, people here are ignoring kevmo while he carries on his crusade to try to drive off the people he does not approve of. What a futile exercise in self-important grandstanding. You seem to think that this nonsense is somehow adding something positive to the site so onward we go. It does save time not having to read roughly half the posts here, so that is a positive thing I suppose.