I learned my spelling in an older school, not what passes for it in today's bastardized journo-speak.
"Next will come thought crime unless the skeptics are kept off these “fora”.
Not at all. The solution is for the skeptopaths to be held to ONE original posting per thread. The tactic is for a single individual to post dozens of marginally related comments on a single thread. Hence dropping the signal/noise ratio close to zero.
Other FORA handle the problem exactly that way. Nobody is banned. One Yahoo group (on lathes) has set up a separate subgroup for "off topic" comments, and all such get routed there. The fact that the mods here give the vigilantes free reign speaks poorly for them and FR as a whole.
"A LENR/CANR/COLD FUSION/LANR/ CAUCUS....has a nice ring to it, doesn’t it?
Yes, actually it does. A caucus limited to postings ON THE SCIENCE INVOLVED without the extraneous "it's a scam" baloney.
From the Oxford Dictionaries:
“Spelling help
The plural of forum is usually spelled forums; the plural fora (as in the original Latin) is chiefly used when talking about a public square in an ancient Roman city.”
I don’t converse in Latin or live in an ancient Roman city.
But going to the science involved:
Cold Fusion ECAT Passes Major Test
Posted on September 9, 2012 by BTE-Dan
www.buildtheenterprise.org/cold-fusion-ecat-passes-major-test
“In their tests they found that 20 grams of material disappeared, meaning it was used up during the generation of energy. They measured 1.78 kW average thermal power output (I took an average of their two methods) from this 20 grams of fuel. The thermal energy production by the device went on for 6.48 hours. So they came up with an energy density of 1.78kW /.020 kg x 6.48 hrs = 578 kWh/kg. (kWh = kilowatt hours like in your electric bill.)”
Science you want, science you got...maybe. The above is a description of tests (much more available at the site) made by experts in the field of nuclear physics, etc. of a device that used the LENR process to produce excess energy over what is put into the system to start and/or sustain it.
Supposedly the device was weighted before and after the operation and that is how it was determined that 20 grams of material had ben consumed in the production of heat, light and possibly small amounts of radiation. 20 grams!
Keep that figure in mind since that’s about 2/3 of an ounce, no small amount of matter to be consumed without smoke or gases being given off.
So how much energy does 20 grams of matter make when converted to heat (mainly), light and some small amount of radiation? E=MC2 and all that?
Well.... .1 gram of matter, if totally converted to energy, would produce the equivalent of 25,000,000 kwh and the experimentors claim 20 times that matter conversion to power output over a 6 to 7 hour period.
And that doesn’t consider the power inputs!
Shall we review...20 grams of the device or its fuel was turned into energy! If true, the entire area should either have disappeared in a flash or melted down per WW2 atomic bombs.
Care to comment on this “science”?
That is precisely what I asked for. It was denied by the PTBs.
And now, many months later it strikes me that such a simple caucus in the posting choices could be "VEHEMENCE". And the rules would be that you need to post without engaging classic logical fallacies. Pretty simple, huh? I doubt the anti-science Luddite crowd would go for it.