Posted on 07/10/2013 3:57:15 PM PDT by Kevmo
The best proof would be for Rossi to start selling these things for cash money and for his customers to be happy.
What it, in order for his customers to be happy, they demand that he keep silent?
I don’t understand your question.
Ericson & Pomp???
Of Pomp & Prakt?
Typo removed. Was that the thing that impeded your understanding?
What if, in order for his customers to be happy, they demand that he keep silent?
And your point is...????
I don’t understand the premise. Why would his customers want him to keep silent?
Because his customers are in the business of heat generation... cheaply. If they open themselves up to the kind of scrutiny that is proposed, they become a demonstration company for LENR.
So, let’s see how good you are at inductive reasoning, shall we? If a company associated with Rossi has set up a request for a company to be a public demo, would that be more favorable for Rossi or less favorable? It’s a simple question, but those who can’t reason inductively are incapable of answering it simply.
Lol. Just a private joke. Norwegian-language joke.
I have no idea what your are talking about.
All I said was if he can sell his product to customers and they come back for more that would be the best proof that it works.
Yup. It was a very simple inductive question. And very, very simply: you are incapable of answering it.
Here’s another: His own customers demand proof. So how do you know they have not been provided it?
My prediction is that eventually you will answer one of these inductive questions because you can’t resist. It’s because your idea of inductive reasoning is that you keep quiet if it lends any support whatsoever to your opponent. Your approach to inductive reasoning is basically idealogical reasoning, not inductive reasoning. You’re an idealogist, not a scientist, nor an inductive reasoner, nor even a conservative as far as I can tell.
What in the hell are you talking about?
Why do you consider me an opponent? You must have confused with someone else.
I am your debating opponent. The fact that you play games with the term suggests that, again, you do not know how to engage in inductive reasoning.
Perhaps I have you confused with someone who actually knows how to reason inductively.
Clearly state the proposition you would like to debate.
Deflection. Note that you’ve answered none of the inductive questions.
You’re here to generate as much negativity towards LENR as you can. That seems to make you an anti-LENR anti-science activist. I’m not allowed to say more than that without trouble from the mods.
Clearly answer the questions put forth to you.
Nonsense. No I’m not. I have been following your threads but don’t post much. I’ve see the attacks you’ve been taking.
I’m afraid you are getting punch drunk.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.