Given your own admitted shortcomings in physics, why should we trust that your judgement of someone else’s critical thinking is any better,
***You’re none too bright. Critical thinking is a Freshman level college course, REQUIRED for all grads now, for the most part. Fred’s a physicist, which is an elective set of courses that not everyone takes, and is obviously higher level than a required freshman level class. If someone shows lack of critical thinking skills, their physics judgement is open to question. And you don’t have to trust me, you can trust yourself. If a person asks a question and the answer (by some superduper physicist) does not answer the question but sets up a straw question to answer, it is simply straw argumentation. The fact that you cannot see it does not surprise me. But for you to think that a person’s physics subsumes the critical thinking requirement is so incredibly ignorant that it’s beyond the pale. If that were true, Calculus-based physics would be the requirement for college freshmen to graduate and critical thinking would be the elective. Once again, you’ve got the whole world turned upside down.
Thanks for bumping the thread, yet again.
The one who has shown lack of critical thinking on this thread in regards to the relationship between room temperature BEC's and cold fusion is you, not Fred, plus you admit that your physics knowledge is pedestrian.
I like this definition:
3. Undistinguished; ordinary: pedestrian prose. See Synonyms at dull. Link