o: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]: Yet another Wikipedia use of CF in a bad light...
At 08:41 AM 1/5/2010, you wrote:
Wikipedia's use of CF as an example for 'science by concensus' and 'burden of
proof'...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burden_of_proof
About 4/5
>From Stephen:
> The "theory of cold fusion" would be a theory explaining
> how such nuclei join, not simply the assertion that they do
> join. The assertion that fusion happens at room temperature
> is a simple binary statement, and is either true or false;
> it's quite different from what is me
On 01/05/2010 04:57 PM, Steven Krivit wrote:
> At 08:41 AM 1/5/2010, you wrote:
>> Wikipedia's use of CF as an example for 'science by concensus' and
>> 'burden of proof'...
>>
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burden_of_proof
>> About 4/5s the way down the page.
>>
>> "Examples in science
>>
>> As
At 08:41 AM 1/5/2010, you wrote:
Wikipedia's use of CF as an example for 'science by concensus' and 'burden
of proof'...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burden_of_proof
About 4/5s the way down the page.
"Examples in science
As a general rule, the less coherent and less embedded within convention
On Tue, Jan 5, 2010 at 11:41 AM, Mark Iverson wrote:
> Wikipedia's use of CF as an example for 'science by concensus' and 'burden of
> proof'...
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burden_of_proof
> About 4/5s the way down the page.
>
> "Examples in science
>
> As a general rule, the less coherent a
5 matches
Mail list logo
