Cold Fusion Confusion and Questionable Ethics
http://www.ptei.org/docs/ColdFusionPresentation.pdf
From your slides...
III. Consequences and Outcomes
6. What are the costs to society?
•
Millions of dollars lost in research trying to replicate the experiment
and results.
***Bowlsheet. The effect was replicated more than 14,000 times.
asked & answered
———————www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l@eskimo.com/msg85732.html——————
Re: [Vo]:Cold Fusion Confusion and Questionable Ethics
-——————www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l@eskimo.com/msg87704.html——————
Foks0904 . Mon, 09 Dec 2013 17:20:14 -0800
Obviously major mistakes were made by P&F. The press conference was a
mistake. Calling it fusion was a mistake. The question is: were the results
(excess heat + nuclear products) a delusion? 25 years later and hundreds of
successful replications later and 3 major commercial products in the works
the clear answer is a resounding “NO”.
This presentation is both insightful yet beyond myopic and ignorant at the
same time. Stress on myopic and ignorant.
Regards.
> Cold Fusion Confusion and Questionable Ethics
> http://www.ptei.org/docs/ColdFusionPresentation.pdf
Edmund Storms Mon, 09 Dec 2013 17:28:40 -0800
-—————————www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l@eskimo.com/msg87706.html————————
On Dec 9, 2013, at 6:19 PM, Foks0904 . wrote:
Obviously major mistakes were made by P&F. The press conference was a mistake.
That is obvious only after the fact. If F-P had not made a public announcement, Jones would have. In fact, the claim would have gotten attention without the announcement
Calling it fusion was a mistake.
But it is fusion. Do you want F-P to lie?
The question is: were the results (excess heat + nuclear products) a delusion? 25 years later and hundreds of successful replications later and 3 major commercial products in the works the clear answer is a resounding “NO”.
Yes, this is true. The evidence is now overwhelming. Ignorance is the only problem.
This presentation is both insightful yet beyond myopic and ignorant at the same time. Stress on myopic and ignorant.
I see nothing insightful. The claims are a simple-minded repetition of what the skeptics said 23 years ago.
Re: [Vo]:Cold Fusion Confusion and Questionable Ethics
————————www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l@eskimo.com/msg87708.html———————
Foks0904 . Mon, 09 Dec 2013 17:37:14 -0800
*That is obvious only after the fact. If F-P had not made a public
announcement, Jones would have. In fact, the claim would have gotten
attention without the announcement*
Yes I agree. After the fact or not however, it is what it is.
*But it is fusion. Do you want F-P to lie?*
At the time of the press conference they were going out on a serious limb
saying that (scientifically speaking) and only basing that claim based
on then A) suspect evidence of weak neutron emissions, and B) the energy
output was in the nuclear range. They didn’t have access to the Helium-4
ash data that we do. That is the only nuclear ash correlated with the
excess heat reaction. All other products, as you have noted in your most
recent ICCF18 paper, may very well be secondary reaction pathway products
(tritium, neutrons, etc. caused by hot fracto-fusion).
*I see nothing insightful. The claims are a simple-minded repetition of
what the skeptics said 23 years ago.*
We agree. I’m only *slightly* more forgiving.
Regards,
John
Re: [Vo]:Cold Fusion Confusion and Questionable Ethics
-———————www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l@eskimo.com/msg87705.html-——————
Edmund Storms Mon, 09 Dec 2013 17:22:14 -0800
....this presentation itself is based on questionable ethics. Many of the statements are lies that are well known to be false. Go to LENR.org and read a students guide to cold fusion by Storms.
Ed Storms