I honestly believe a serious scientist (even an unpublished one such as this guy) would never publish a serious, explosive document like this without massive caveats. If the caveats are in the paper, than I apologize, I don't read russian and there has been no good translation as of yet that I could find.
The lack of a control run is frightening in itself. On Sun, Dec 28, 2014 at 5:46 AM, Blaze Spinnaker <blazespinna...@gmail.com> wrote: > http://www.researchgate.net/profile/A_Parkhomov/publications > > On Sun, Dec 28, 2014 at 5:44 AM, Blaze Spinnaker <blazespinna...@gmail.com > > wrote: > >> Unfortunately, I don't think you can say 'scientist' without providing >> context. >> >> There is a wide gap between someone who has been primary author on peer >> reviewed papers in credible journals that have been cited by other peer >> reviewed scientists and someone who has not. >> >> Unfortunately, looking at Research Gate, this fellow falls in the latter >> category. >> >> I hope this turns out to be real and I hope the reason why Rossi editted >> his comment from "I do not know the particulars, therefore cannot >> comment, but it is normal that the so called “Rossi Effect”" to "I do >> not know the particulars, therefore cannot comment, but it is possible that >> the so called “Rossi Effect” is replicable after the data published in the >> Report of Lugano." was because he realized this guy doesn't appear to be >> credible. >> >> Anyways, I want to believe like everyone else, but I just don't find this >> guy credible at all. >> >> >> >> On Sat, Dec 27, 2014 at 6:23 AM, Jed Rothwell <jedrothw...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >>> See: >>> >>> >>> http://www.e-catworld.com/2014/12/27/lugano-confirmed-replication-report-published-of-hot-cat-device-by-russian-researcher-alexander-g-parkhomov/ >>> >> >> >
