Re: Comment by J. Barandes
It may not be "politically correct" but, I still like the pancakes part. Perhaps Jed's Cold Fusion (without mumbo-jumbo) critics are really tigers? http://www.sterlingtimes.co.uk/sambo.htm I remember hearing this story at about age 4 and it sure wet the appetite for Black-Strap molasses on buckwheat pancakes. The "butter" was white oleo (at that time it was against the law in Pennsylvania to sell oleo colored to look like real butter) but there was a packet of dye that you could mix in provided with it.
Re: Comment by J. Barandes
At 07:54 AM 8/1/2005, you wrote: Has anyone considered the fact that by choosing to publish such an unprofessional reply by a GRAD STUDENT that perhaps The Crimson is actually showing covert support for CF by undermining the case against it? I agree with Jed, I don't think so. However, I think the profs' and other so-called physics pundits are being a lot more careful about what they say about CF these days. I think Happer was the only one to continue saying outright foolishness to the press in recent memory. I refer to a quote of his in Physics Today regarding the 2004 DOE CF where he said something about burying it again for a final time, and true believers will always keep on believing. s
Re: Comment by J. Barandes
Merlyn wrote: Has anyone considered the fact that by choosing to publish such an unprofessional reply by a GRAD STUDENT that perhaps The Crimson is actually showing covert support for CF by undermining the case against it? That occurred to me, but I do not think the Crimson editors are that subtle, or politically savvy. Also I doubt that most readers would see anything wrong with Barandes' remarks. Even at Harvard, people are not well versed in logic or the rules of debate. - Jed
Re: Comment by J. Barandes
Has anyone considered the fact that by choosing to publish such an unprofessional reply by a GRAD STUDENT that perhaps The Crimson is actually showing covert support for CF by undermining the case against it? --- Steven Krivit <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Jed, > > Oh, one more thing, > > Look who you are up against: a grad student. I went > up against one like him > from Columbia last year in a Wikipedia match. > Believe it or not, he may > actually be an innocent victim who's been spoon-fed > myths and > misinformation by his teachers. > > Want to see how this may be occurring? > > Look here for an example from Berkeley: > > http://newenergytimes.com/students/AcademicPerspective2004.htm > > It's no wonder our cold fusion friend and professor > at Berkeley needs to > keep off the record, lets he be labeled a heretic or > kook. > > s > > Merlyn Magickal Engineer and Technical Metaphysicist Start your day with Yahoo! - make it your home page http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs
Re: Comment by J. Barandes
Jed, Oh, one more thing, Look who you are up against: a grad student. I went up against one like him from Columbia last year in a Wikipedia match. Believe it or not, he may actually be an innocent victim who's been spoon-fed myths and misinformation by his teachers. Want to see how this may be occurring? Look here for an example from Berkeley: http://newenergytimes.com/students/AcademicPerspective2004.htm It's no wonder our cold fusion friend and professor at Berkeley needs to keep off the record, lets he be labeled a heretic or kook. s
Comment by J. Barandes
[My response, e-mailed to the Crimson. If they do not publish it, I will put it on LENR-CANR.org] To The Editors: Jacob A. Barandes says that cold fusion was not replicated. It is a matter of fact that hundreds of researchers think they replicated it, and published peer reviewed papers claiming they did. Barandes can confirm that at the Harvard library by looking up back issues of the Journal of Electroanalytical Chemistry, the Journal of Physical Chemistry, the Japanese Journal of Applied Physics, and so on. It may be that all of these papers are mistaken, and the replications are invalid. If Barandes thinks so, he will have to publish a peer reviewed paper himself, showing how and why mistakes were made. A skeptical or negative opinion does not get a free pass; all views must be held to the same rigorous standards. Barandes' statements about me and my background are ad hominem and irrelevant. I did not publish these papers; electrochemists from hundreds of different universities, national laboratories and corporations published them. Barandes should question their qualifications, not mine. Barandes can avoid a trip to the library and read the full text of over 400 cold fusion papers at our web site, http://lenr-canr.org/. Researchers from all over the world download 3,000 to 5,000 copies of these papers per week. They have downloaded over 350,000 copies since 2002. We cannot track individual users, but we know that many of these readers are students and professors, because they contact us, and because our traffic ebbs and flows with the academic calendar. (It drops close to zero during exam weeks!) If the papers were all mistaken, and all unconvincing, it seems unlikely that so many academic professionals would bother to read them. Sincerely, Jed Rothwell Atlanta, GA
