I need a better term than skeptopath.

 . How about Aggressively Skeptical 'Humans' Obfuscating Lenr Endeavors
(ASHOLEs)?


On Thu, Nov 28, 2013 at 7:35 PM, Kevin O'Malley <kevmol...@gmail.com> wrote:

> How to know you're dealing with a skeptopath:  they won't read the
> simplest evidence put in front of them.
>
> http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/3095784/posts?page=32#32
>
>
> To: *tacticalogic*
>  *"I'd be interested in a practical source of energy, and you keep
> hawking this like it is. Where's the beef?"*
>
> Nah, you're just regurgitating the standard crawfishing that all
> skeptopaths do when they can no longer claim that there is "no scientific
> evidence" for cold fusion.
>
> First the refrain was "cold fusion experiments cannot be repeated".
>
> Then, when the researchers "did" improve the repeatability, the refrain
> became "cold fusion experiments cannot be repeated fifty percent of the
> time.
>
> Then, when repeatability increased past 50%, the refrain became "cold
> fusion experiments cannot be repeated 100% of the time".
>
> Now, as some researchers repeatabiltity numbers approach 100%, the refrain
> has become "the amount of power is miniscule, even if it "can" be repeated".
>
> So, the answer to your question is "the beef is still growing". And an
> HONEST respondent would admit that.
>
> But in the not too distant future, I look forward to when LENR "does"
> produce usable amounts of power. I wonder what you skeptopaths will say
> then.
> 32 <http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/3095784/posts?page=32#32>posted on 
> *Wed
> 27 Nov 2013 05:28:54 AM PST* by Wonder 
> Warthog<http://www.freerepublic.com/%7Ewonderwarthog/>
> [ Post Reply <http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/3095784/reply?c=32>| 
> Private
> Reply<http://www.freerepublic.com/perl/mail-compose?refid=3095784.32;reftype=comment>|
>  To
> 31 <http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/3095784/posts?page=38#31> | View
> Replies <http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/3095784/replies?c=32> | Report
> Abuse <http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/3095784/abuse?c=32>]
> ------------------------------
> To: *Wonder Warthog*
>  *Nah, you're just regurgitating the standard crawfishing that all
> skeptopaths do when they can no longer claim that there is "no scientific
> evidence" for cold fusion.*
>
> Lemme guess. You can't show me the evidence to back that up, I'm supposed
> to go find it.
> 33 <http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/3095784/posts?page=33#33>posted on 
> *Wed
> 27 Nov 2013 05:34:11 AM PST* by 
> tacticalogic<http://www.freerepublic.com/%7Etacticalogic/>
> [ Post Reply <http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/3095784/reply?c=33>| 
> Private
> Reply<http://www.freerepublic.com/perl/mail-compose?refid=3095784.33;reftype=comment>|
>  To
> 32 <http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/3095784/posts?page=38#32> | View
> Replies <http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/3095784/replies?c=33> | Report
> Abuse <http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/3095784/abuse?c=33>]
> ------------------------------
> To: *tacticalogic*
>  *"Lemme guess. You can't show me the evidence to back that up, I'm
> supposed to go find it."*
>
> Not quite. I'll give you two starting places. The first is George
> Beaudette's book "Excess Heat". You can access this either by buying a copy
> (Amazon)($), or via interlibrary loan (free or $ depending on the policies
> of your local library.
>
> The second is Edmund Storm's collection of summaries of LENR research,
> which can easily be found with Google search terms ("Edmund Storms" cold
> fusion pdf). Most of the pdf's can be found at LENR-CANR.org. All are
> available free.
>
> Now, why don't I give you direct links?? Because I have found that there
> is no better litmus test about the honesty or lack of same of the various
> skeptics that show up on these LENR threads. The skeptopaths will NOT
> follow up. NOTHING will induce them to actually examine the evidence. The
> honest skeptics do.
> 34 <http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/3095784/posts?page=34#34>posted on 
> *Wed
> 27 Nov 2013 08:46:23 AM PST* by Wonder 
> Warthog<http://www.freerepublic.com/%7Ewonderwarthog/>
> [ Post Reply <http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/3095784/reply?c=34>| 
> Private
> Reply<http://www.freerepublic.com/perl/mail-compose?refid=3095784.34;reftype=comment>|
>  To
> 33 <http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/3095784/posts?page=38#33> | View
> Replies <http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/3095784/replies?c=34> | Report
> Abuse <http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/3095784/abuse?c=34>]
> ------------------------------
> To: *Wonder Warthog*
>
> I've looked at LENR-CANR.org. It's interesting research, but I can't find
> any research that's actually producing measurable amounts of power to
> justify the hyperbole surrouding the phenomenon.
>
> 35 <http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/3095784/posts?page=35#35>posted on 
> *Wed
> 27 Nov 2013 10:24:46 AM PST* by 
> tacticalogic<http://www.freerepublic.com/%7Etacticalogic/>
> [ Post Reply <http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/3095784/reply?c=35>| 
> Private
> Reply<http://www.freerepublic.com/perl/mail-compose?refid=3095784.35;reftype=comment>|
>  To
> 34 <http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/3095784/posts?page=38#34> | View
> Replies <http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/3095784/replies?c=35> | Report
> Abuse <http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/3095784/abuse?c=35>]
> ------------------------------
> To: *tacticalogic*
>  *"I've looked at LENR-CANR.org. It's interesting research, but I can't
> find any research that's actually producing measurable amounts of power to
> justify the hyperbole surrouding the phenomenon."*
>
> LOL. Yeah, right. You're read all the thousands of papers at
> LENR-CANR.org. SSUUUURREEE you have.
>
> If you proceed from either of the start points I gave you, you will find
> the data quite easily, as the references to specific papers are well
> documented in both of them.
>
> But you won't, will you.
> 36 <http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/3095784/posts?page=36#36>posted on 
> *Wed
> 27 Nov 2013 01:36:37 PM PST* by Wonder 
> Warthog<http://www.freerepublic.com/%7Ewonderwarthog/>
> [ Post Reply <http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/3095784/reply?c=36>| 
> Private
> Reply<http://www.freerepublic.com/perl/mail-compose?refid=3095784.36;reftype=comment>|
>  To
> 35 <http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/3095784/posts?page=38#35> | View
> Replies <http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/3095784/replies?c=36> | Report
> Abuse <http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/3095784/abuse?c=36>]
> ------------------------------
> To: *Wonder Warthog*
>
> No, I won't go through those thousands of pages looking for the
> documentation of a practical demonstration of the technology. That's based
> on an assumption that if any such documented demonstration had taken place
> it wouldn't be buried somewhere down in those thousands of pages, where it
> could only be found by sifting through those thousands of pages.
>
> 37 <http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/3095784/posts?page=37#37>posted on 
> *Wed
> 27 Nov 2013 01:47:35 PM PST* by 
> tacticalogic<http://www.freerepublic.com/%7Etacticalogic/>
> [ Post Reply <http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/3095784/reply?c=37>| 
> Private
> Reply<http://www.freerepublic.com/perl/mail-compose?refid=3095784.37;reftype=comment>|
>  To
> 36 <http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/3095784/posts?page=38#36> | View
> Replies <http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/3095784/replies?c=37> | Report
> Abuse <http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/3095784/abuse?c=37>]
> ------------------------------
> To: *Kevmo*
>  *Nuclear energy is based on the use of fissile materials, and is not a
> solution, because the stock of these materials is limited.*
>
> Not with breeder reactors.
> 38 <http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/3095784/posts?page=38#38>posted on 
> *Wed
> 27 Nov 2013 06:57:26 PM PST* by 
> aruanan<http://www.freerepublic.com/%7Earuanan/>
> [ Post Reply <http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/3095784/reply?c=38>| 
> Private
> Reply<http://www.freerepublic.com/perl/mail-compose?refid=3095784.38;reftype=comment>|
>  To
> 1 <http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/3095784/posts?page=38#1> | View
> Replies <http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/3095784/replies?c=38> | Report
> Abuse <http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/3095784/abuse?c=38>]
> ------------------------------
> To: *tacticalogic*
>  *"No, I won't go through those thousands of pages looking for the
> documentation of a practical demonstration of the technology. That's based
> on an assumption that if any such documented demonstration had taken place
> it wouldn't be buried somewhere down in those thousands of pages, where it
> could only be found by sifting through those thousands of pages."*
>
> LOL...you're precisely proving my point. Pure Skeptopath.
>
> Clue.....if you start with the Storm's freely available PDF writeups (any
> of them), the information is nicely broken down according to what sort of
> proof is available, including direct references to (at least the important)
> papers on the subject. This includes heat, tritium production,
> transmutation, correlation of heat to He4 production, and other.
>
> This means exactly that you don't "have" to "go through thousands of pages
> of documentation looking.......", as the references are already sorted out
> and documented. Storms has already done that. Beaudette's book likewise,
> though a bit dated nowadays.
>
> And of course, most of the full papers are available at LENR-CANR.org.
>
> Route of easiest discovery....Beaudette first, then Storms for newer
> information, then LENR-CANR for full papers.
>
> But you won't look at any of those, of course, because your real interest
> is not in discovering how the world works, but bashing LENR.
> 39 <http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/3095784/posts?page=39#39>posted on 
> *Thu
> 28 Nov 2013 04:50:15 AM PST* by Wonder 
> Warthog<http://www.freerepublic.com/%7Ewonderwarthog/>
> [ Post Reply <http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/3095784/reply?c=39>| 
> Private
> Reply<http://www.freerepublic.com/perl/mail-compose?refid=3095784.39;reftype=comment>|
>  To
> 37 <http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/3095784/posts?page=38#37> | View
> Replies <http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/3095784/replies?c=39> | Report
> Abuse <http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/3095784/abuse?c=39>]
> ------------------------------
> To: *Wonder Warthog*
>  *LOL...you're precisely proving my point. Pure Skeptopath.*
>
> Clue...you throw "Skeptopath" around the way gays do with "homophobe".
> 40 <http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/3095784/posts?page=40#40>posted on 
> *Thu
> 28 Nov 2013 04:56:27 AM PST* by 
> tacticalogic<http://www.freerepublic.com/%7Etacticalogic/>
> [ Post Reply <http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/3095784/reply?c=40>| 
> Private
> Reply<http://www.freerepublic.com/perl/mail-compose?refid=3095784.40;reftype=comment>|
>  To
> 39 <http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/3095784/posts?page=38#39> | View
> Replies <http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/3095784/replies?c=40> | Report
> Abuse <http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/3095784/abuse?c=40>]
> ------------------------------
> To: *tacticalogic*
>  *"Clue...you throw "Skeptopath" around the way gays do with
> "homophobe"."*
>
> Only to those who prove themselves to be such by their own behavior on
> these threads. But thanks for proving my points so fully and
> wholeheartedly. As usual, total refusal to actually look at the published
> information, and any comment to shunt attention to that behavior away the
> one refusing. An exact fit to the phrase "pathological skepticism".
> 41 <http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/3095784/posts?page=41#41>posted on 
> *Thu
> 28 Nov 2013 09:52:21 AM PST* by Wonder 
> Warthog<http://www.freerepublic.com/%7Ewonderwarthog/>
> [ Post Reply <http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/3095784/reply?c=41>| 
> Private
> Reply<http://www.freerepublic.com/perl/mail-compose?refid=3095784.41;reftype=comment>|
>  To
> 40 <http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/3095784/posts?page=38#40> | View
> Replies <http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/3095784/replies?c=41> | Report
> Abuse <http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/3095784/abuse?c=41>]
> ------------------------------
> To: *Wonder Warthog*
>  *Only to those who prove themselves to be such by their own behavior on
> these threads.*
>
> That's what the homos say, too.
> 42 <http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/3095784/posts?page=42#42>posted on 
> *Thu
> 28 Nov 2013 09:54:33 AM PST* by 
> tacticalogic<http://www.freerepublic.com/%7Etacticalogic/>
> [ Post Reply <http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/3095784/reply?c=42>| 
> Private
> Reply<http://www.freerepublic.com/perl/mail-compose?refid=3095784.42;reftype=comment>|
>  To
> 41 <http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/3095784/posts?page=38#41> | View
> Replies <http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/3095784/replies?c=42> | Report
> Abuse <http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/3095784/abuse?c=42>]
> ------------------------------
> To: *tacticalogic*
>  *"That's what the homos say, too."*
>
> LOL. More proof. You'll say or do anything to avoid confronting the issue
> of the existing data.
>
> Here is the difference between you skeptopaths and real skeptics. A real
> science skeptic, given the references I have provided would not rest until
> he/she had read them.
>
> A skeptopath will say or do anything to avoid reading them and change the
> subject to avoid acknowledging their existence, much less actually read and
> study them.
>
> Methinks the shoe fits you quite well.
>
> Enjoy your turkey, turkey.
> 43 <http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/3095784/posts?page=43#43>posted on 
> *Thu
> 28 Nov 2013 03:49:43 PM PST* by Wonder 
> Warthog<http://www.freerepublic.com/%7Ewonderwarthog/>
> [ Post Reply <http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/3095784/reply?c=43>| 
> Private
> Reply<http://www.freerepublic.com/perl/mail-compose?refid=3095784.43;reftype=comment>|
>  To
> 42 <http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/3095784/posts?page=38#42> | View
> Replies <http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/3095784/replies?c=43> | Report
> Abuse <http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/3095784/abuse?c=43>]
>
>
> On Mon, Aug 12, 2013 at 9:23 PM, Kevin O'Malley <kevmol...@gmail.com>wrote:
>
>> I'm growing weary of the same objections, over and over and over again on
>> various internet sites.  So I'm going to post each q&a here & just send
>> links.
>>
>>
>>
>

Reply via email to