As I suppose everyone reading this thread has already recalled, one of
Bill Beaty's "red flags of fraud" 'way back when was responding to
questions and challenges with outrage and anger, while failing to
actually address the question being raised.
We've certainly seen this sort of behavior bef
http://egooutpeters.blogspot.ro/2016/11/nov-17-2016-lenr-info-many-hydrino.html
Peter
--
Dr. Peter Gluck
Cluj, Romania
http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com
Russ George wrote:
> Why, because you are an armchair self-serving critic who never does
> anything but try to raise your own worth by trolling worthless comments . .
> .
>
Well, at least I have edited and published papers. You have published
little or nothing, so you have made no contributions.
Why not respond like your fantasy of a scientist? Why, because you are an
armchair self-serving critic who never does anything but try to raise your own
worth by trolling worthless comments at the expense of people who do real work
and have original ideas. The fact that you won’t spend 5 minutes
Russ George wrote:
Yes, of course why would anyone not do so. The methods used were all of the
> usual state of the art methods, just do your reading into the complexities
> of measuring helium in metals and you’ll see how it is done. It’s all at
> your Googling fingertips.
>
You sound like Mitc
O nuclear reactors and on the core nuclear bombs, the alpha decays makes
the material brittle. This might be part of the explanation of why cracks
are related to the efficiency of the material. Given the randomness, it
could be that the way cracks coalesce might end up making a reaction going
to th
6 matches
Mail list logo
