wooowooo Member
  • Member since Mar 2nd 2014
  • Last Activity:

Posts by wooowooo

    wooowooo, "Mats Lewan and andrea.s are two Rossi-believers starting to have serious doubts on the last test report."

    What the heck are you talking about! I just listened to the interview you linked to (its a bit hard to find because it is now in archive.) I certainly didn't hear anything at all that would suggest that Mats Lewan "is starting to have serious doubts". The closest I heard was that he put in a soft note of caution, as is necessary for one in his profession (media).

    Yes, you are right. Lewan was doubting some of the numbers in the report but not its major conclusions. Andrea.s on the other hand has moved to the other camp. I guess we all just have to wait for Levi et.al to answer the critique so far, some of it devastating I think.

    The "there were restriction" is the usual all or nothing excuse...

    Independent means just that, independent.


    in eral works there is restriction linked to business practice. real scientist respect that provided things stay honest

    No, real scientists doesn't put their name under something they don't have full control over.


    ... when you desire to refuse, you take the first excuse.

    No, you are guarding your good name against bad science or fraud.


    what the scientist was needing is to be able to say "it does not work" or "we cannot check enough" , and they can.
    the excuse of the blackbox, or the embargo on results until the final report is not a challenge to their honesty.

    You do not know the restrictions Pons had to accept.


    I don't see what Essen and Kullander have abandonned ?

    They have abandoned their good judgement as senior scientists representing, willingly or not, science as a trustworthy institution.


    they have seen it worked, they said it...

    No, they say that the test result from the march 2013 is "interesting", but more testing is required before more final conclusions can be made.


    Now nobody believe them, that is deniers problem. We should not inverse the reality.

    Nobody believes them until truly independent tests are presented in a truly independent manner.


    If you see something that work, assume just that you see it working, you cross check, it work ... what do you do ?

    As I said, you have to be in full control of the test before you can state that it works. That is why Essén et al still haven't stated that. Still, they have lend their good reputation to an entrepreneur well known for shady business in the past.


    Like Lewis and Garwin, you just kept silent ?

    No, you can't compare Rossi with serious scientists like McKubre. That's my point!


    That is your conception of honesty ? I imagine no.

    Rossi and other more or less shady characters are symptoms of an unfortunate development of the field, starting with the infamies Utah press conference 1989. A couple of months later the new field became pariah and had to develop out of sight in a ghetto with little or no communication with the rest of the scientific community. A situation easy to exploit by less serious people.


    That is the conception of honesty by some people I agree. Not mine.

    The cf/lenr field needs more credibility, not less.

    when you call someone that have written a nasty biased critics accusing the testers to be fraudsters (to the point Bo Hoistad say the paper is shameful) , to participate to the next test, you are ready to face hard-skeptic...

    No, there were restrictions on what to write or not. That is not research independence.


    ... now to see him flee with a bad excuse, is expected.

    No, he doesn't flee, he´s safeguarding his independence.


    The problem with honest skeptics like Essen, Küllander, Celani, Dawn Dominguez, is that once they look into the telescope... they became convinced, thus instantly bad scientists.

    I don't know about Celani or Dominguez, but Essén and Kullander has given Rossi a free ride on their credentials. This is bad judgement even if the e-cat works. The whole thing smells like a scam, and especially Essén should have known better.

    Yea they are all frauds aye?

    No, I'm talking about Rossi here.


    Do you think fossil fuels and other inefficient energy sources are the be all end all?



    Where was the formula in Franklins experiment? The right brothers? It took the world 5 years to believe flight real.



    And with the left



    ... propaganda machine humming in the 21st century, we are denied innovation for 25 years and counting on this one.

    As i said, Rossi is the one att issue here.


    As soon as pons and flieshman made their discovery, the world should have start funding it to figure it out.

    I agree.


    But the paycheck collectors put a stop to that funding didn't they?

    Probably one of the reasons, yes.


    You will better spend your time in something you believe in. Then you begin to get borderline disrespectful to someone who actually does some work to keep we fans informed.

    Rossi hasn't yet showed that his inovation works, until then, I'll treat it as a scam.


    And you want to rain on parades.

    No, I propose the need for evidence. There's good science on cf/lenr, but this kind of circus doesn't promote a serious evaluation of the phenomena.


    Why aren't you busy creating something that will change the world?

    I'm very active promoting science on cf/lenr in my spare time, yes.


    Hell you know it all. Or is it the fossil fuel you claim to hate that is really what you want to keep YOUR people in power.

    This kind of foil hat rants doesn't promote serious research in the field, on the contrary.


    LENR is real to the point of people laughing at you new flat earthers.

    The evidence is compelling, but there's still issues of reproducibility and so on.


    You should just sit there and do nothing and when your neighbor tells you he has one you can call him a liar and say he has got receptacles hidden. The funny thing is the quantum worshippers are way behind and when lenr hits, they will have rendered themselves obsolete along with fusion and fossil fuel. So if you can't say something productive, keep it to yourself and present an alternative. Liar liar pants on fire is old and had been used on innovation in an attempt to keep them suppressed.

    As I said, this kind of uneducated rants is a disservice to the science of cf/lenr, and to yourself.

    not the business...
    the academics who did that epic failure, and their fanclub, will try to save their beliefs. Typical of groupthink. Forget about rationality or money, it is a cognitive war. take creationist war as the model.

    If the test really is a true third party test, it's easy to defend.


    Business will jump in, but big slow business will ask for regulation, so they can adapt at their own maximum but moderate speed. See how electric companies, absorb renewable energies.NGO whose business model is based on scarcity and pollution, or whose beliefs oppose comfort and abundance will try to scare the population. Take the Pope vs Condom war in africa as the model.

    If the test confirms the workings of Rossi's e-cat, nothing can stop it's fast worldwide distribution, it's too cheap and too clean to be ignored by the market ... except maybe some overlooked safety issues which of course have to be looked in to and if needed, regulated.

    we agree on that point as the definitive answer, but I have experience that anyone having tested cold fusion is declared not third party.
    The usual catch-22.

    Again, you have to distinguish between scientific- and entrepreneurial efforts:

    1. In lenr science there is a somewhat catch-22 problem, I agree. Mainstream science will not accept the field until complete reproducibility is reached, and sufficient funding will not appear until mainstream science accept the field, that is, enough funding necessary for this kind of multi disciplinary effort. Baudette describes this unfortunate situation from 1989 - 2001 in his excellent book Excess Heat.

    2. When it comes to entrepreneurial efforts, the situation becomes less complicated. The only thing needed is an independent black box testing of the technology, and if positive, the inventor will become a billionaire, noble prize winner and a hero bigger than Jesus, Muhammed and the Buddha combined. Until then, I'll remain sceptical.

    Quote from AlainCo

    Anyway, businessmen if informed, this mean if more curious than dis-informed, will catch the reality.
    Probably they already have. What I've heard is that the problem of executives in corps is not to be ridiculed and fired before they have time to show evidences.


    Quote from AlainCo

    I expect a big campaign to attack the incoming test as not third-party, whatever are the participants, the reviewers, the evidences. The goal will be to prevent data to reach the CEO level by frightening the lower level. It has been successful until now.

    Who will be behind this big campaign, and why?

    Will have to decide according to the content of the report.
    Would it be failure for fraud, dysfunction, unreliability, explosion, stealing of the reactor, alien conspiracy, CIA operation?

    So, if the e-cat doesn't work, it's because of CIA infiltration? Really?

    Quote from AlainCo

    This won't make F&P phenomenon less confirmed, less replicated, less published. So someone else will continue investigating the domain... Brillouin, Nanortech, Lenuco...

    So, you do not distinguish sound scientific protocol from more or less shady entrepreneurs?

    Quote from AlainCo

    What if Apollo moon landing was fake? does it makes the moon less real?

    No, it makes the Apollo moon landing less real.

    Quote from AlainCo

    Anyway that the test lasted for 6 month is already an information.
    Maybe the reactor was stolen by alien the last day, making the result negative... ;)
    what is surprising is the time taken to report that, making my hypothesis hard to believe.

    Thorough testing takes time.

    Quote from AlainCo

    My more rational question is what would be the impact of this test if the COP is modest, like 3, without any doubt.

    No, the more rational question is if it works at all.

    Quote from AlainCo

    Scientifically is is a bomb

    If it works it certainly will revolutionise everything, including science.

    Quote from AlainCo

    challenging the fake consensus of terror against cold fusion... It is what most skeptics fear... attack on settled science.

    I agree with Lewan, it's the fear of ridicule that is the main cause of avoidance from mainstream science.