Replies

OK, I congratulate you on your prolific and speedy writing skills.
***Gee, thanks. 🤗

But if you really wanted to do something to promote LENR effectively on this forum
***I do. Here is a hint. I don’t know what you wrote in the second part of this sentence. I can already guess that it’s gonna be some sort of left-handed snide bullshiite that serves your skeptopathic interest far more than LENR.

you should go to one of the links that I provided earlier
***I regularly go to those links and regularly post them. That’s why I thought those links were some kind of post script and didn’t even comment on them.

and recruit someone who has the ability to make a good impression.
***Well, that is a bit different than I predicted. Here’s the thing. It is impossible to make a good impression when you are surrounded by seagulls. Once we cleared those threads of you seagulls, they became simple, quiet, scientifically minded threads. Consider that my “recruitment” of someone else “who has the ability to make a good impression. “ I am already doing what you said I oughta do.

In that respect it is good that you prohibit any form of
***There you go again. Regurgitating a thoroughly discredited point. We allow skepticism but not skeptopathy. There is a difference, and you are on the wrong side of it. Note how you go back to this argument again and again like a dog do his vomit, rather than trying to dive down on the difference because you probably already KNOW the difference.

skeptical comments on the threads you start.
***Feel free to log onto ~q threads and do what you do, against the qtards. See how well you do. That’s the definition of protected nonsense, and it turns out that the admin moderator is one of them and she even extends her protection to the unmarked threads. Once you have been through that, get back to me on the difference between skepticism and skeptopathy.

You actually come across as someone trying to discredit LENR.
***Then let me be. If such is the case, eventually all that work I put in will be somehow shown to be false. In the meantime there are dozens of great and positive LENR threads that I put up and there’s great invitation for REAL scientific discussion while zeroing in & stopping your level of bullshiite. If that’s discrediting LENR then let me be.

Although you do have the ability to identify seeming inconsistencies such as
***Such as yours. You have a lot of them. If you manage to wipe out your own inconsistencies AND get rid of your own usage of classic fallacies AND get honest about it, you might find you’re a better scientist.

your latest comments on consensus, your attempts at point-by-point stream of consciousness rebuttal are not effective.
***Not effective by your count. But you kinda DON’T count, because you are a skeptopath. So... take that critical thinking class, and even use some of your writings here on FR LENR threads as prime examples of classic fallacies that your professor can walk you through.

Maybe even someone active on one of the Reddit forums would be willing to assist you.
***Reddit? Whatevs. There are some luminaries in LENR such as Jed Rothwell & Alan Fletcher who have signed up with FR supporting LENR but you seagulls chase them away. I suppose that if YOU really wanted to support LENR then YOU could go on Reddit and invite some positive LENR dude over to here to help out LENR on FR. That would show some of the bona fides that you claim to have. In the meantime, nothing prevents you from posting your own LENR threads and counteracting what you perceive as the damage being done to the field. But you don’t do that. Why not? It’s enough to suggest that you aren’t really as honestly supportive of scientific pursuit as you claim you are.