Asked & Answered: Capricious Moderation We have had some interesting back & forth lately between skeptopaths and LENRphiles on Free Republic. Here is the latest: https://freerepublic.com/focus/chat/4004206/posts?page=42#42 To: *Kevmo*
Just heat a body of water in a closed system reliably and you’d have trillion dollar invention. No one has. What are your credentials for being this arbitrator of what level of skepticism is appropriate? Scientific papers published? University degrees? Successful experiments run? You act as if you have a lot of go fund me projects looking for suckers. Any vested interest you should be disclosing? 42 <https://freerepublic.com/focus/chat/4004206/posts?page=42#42> posted on *10/16/2021 8:31:29 PM PDT* by bhl <https://freerepublic.com/~bhl/> My response was deleted by the admin moderator [it would appear]. My response was something along the lines of pointing out that the closed system heating water has been replicated more than 150 times, with the link to various threads on LENR forum and here where the 153 replications were discussed. https://www.lenr-forum.com/forum/thread/5728-how-do-you-convince-a-skeptic/?postID=105777&highlight=dolly#post105777 https://freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/3963819/posts I also pointed him to threads where it's been asked & answered multiple times about moving the goalposts. Then I repeatedly asked him to leave the thread because he is a troll. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- There is a seeming disagreement between the sidebar moderator and the admin moderator. The admin moderator has been particularly one-sided and capricious when it comes to LENR as well as other subjects. ----------------------------------------------- Updated No Internal Trolling Rules for FR per Jim Robinson https://freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3928396/posts If someone says stop, then stop. Do not enter onto a thread on a topic you don't like just to disrupt, rattle cages, poke sticks, insult the regulars, or engage in trolling activities, etc. ~Jim Robinson The issue isn't whether we allow skepticism, it is whether we allow hyperskeptics and skeptopaths to ruin the scientific dialog. Such FReepers as Moonman62, TexasGator, CodeToad, Fireman15, bhl and others who persist in polluting these threads have been asked to leave, and we are asking that they open their own threads if they have comments. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- https://freerepublic.com/focus/chat/3977426/posts?page=19#19 Comment #13 Removed by Moderator Comment #14 Removed by Moderator Comment #16 Removed by Moderator Comment #17 Removed by Moderator Comment #18 Removed by Moderator This topic has a following, people who wish to learn and discuss the materials presented. Please refrain from posting anything that doesn’t legitimately address the issue. Something is going on in this segment of science. There are a considerable number of research groups studying the matter. 19 posted on 7/19/2021, 6:45:09 PM by Sidebar Moderator [ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies | Report Abuse] On Thu, Aug 15, 2013 at 6:43 PM Kevin O'Malley <kevmol...@gmail.com> wrote: > Thanks for bumping the thread -- T4BTT > > LENR seems to have its own set of Anti-Science Truthers. In the last > couple of years, there has been quite a bit of activity in the area of Low > Energy Nuclear Reactions. Originally, the field was called Cold Fusion in > 1989 when Pons & Fleischmann announced their findings prematurely. They > were ridiculed and blacklisted by scientists who could have lost funding > for their nuclear projects in 1989, even though some of their findings were > soon replicated.. You can get the story here: > > http://lenr-canr.org/wordpress/?page_id=263 > > > In fact, the only verified instance of Fraud in LENR was when MIT > scientists fudged their results to show a negative result rather than the > positive one the data supports. > > The ongoing story here on Free Republic has been one where the detractors > use ridicule, falsehoods, false argumentation, classic fallacies, > misdirection, and all manner of unscientific and ugly behavior other than > to discuss the science behind the claims. In order to fight fire with fire, > I started calling these pathological skeptics “seagulls” but the moderator > told me not to do that. So the skeptopaths are allowed certain tactics on > FR but the LENR afficianados are not. It turns out that one of the > moderators resigned, and his scientific background was lacking in terms of > being able to properly absorb this material. At one time he even put it on > the same level as BigFoot without backing it up when confronted: > http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/backroom/2917406/posts?page=3976#3976 > > > And even though the Anomalous Heat Effect has been replicated hundreds of > times by more than a thousand scientists, even in mainstream peer-reviewed > journals. > > > https://springerlink3.metapress.com/content/8k5n17605m135n22/resource-secured/?target=fulltext.pdf&sid=xwvgza45j4sqpe3wceul4dv2&sh=www.springerlink.com > . > Jing-tang He > • Nuclear fusion inside condense matters > • Frontiers of Physics in China > Volume 2, Number 1, 96-102, DOI: 10.1007/s11467-007-0005-8 > This article describes in detail the nuclear fusion inside condense > matters—the Fleischmann-Pons effect, the reproducibility of cold fusions, > self-consistency of cold fusions and the possible applications > . > Note that Jing-tang He found there were 14,700 replications of the Pons > Fleischmann Anomalous Heat Effect. > http://www.boliven.com/publication/10.1007~s11467-007-0005-8?q=(%22David%20J.%20Nagel%22) > > . > National Instruments is a multibillion dollar corporation that does not > need to stick its neck out for “bigfoot stories”. After noting more than > 150 replications, they recently concluded that with so much evidence of > anomalous heat generation... > http://www.22passi.it/downloads/eu_brussels_june_20_2012_concezzi.pdf > Conclusion > • There is an unknown physical event and there is a need of better > measurements and control tools. NI is playing a role in accelerating > innovation and discovery. > > > > The current state of the science of LENR is that the Pons Fleischmann > Anomalous Heat Effect has been replicated and it is an established > scientific fact. But it is not an established ENGINEERING field because the > effect is difficult to generate and there is still some lingering stigma > associated with the field. The level of pathological resistance this field > receives is unconscionable for those of us who seek scientific answers and > engineering solutions. > > If you find that the thread leads to this post it is because I no longer > respond to the seagulls, I send all inquiries to this post so that crickets > are not generated, nor is there an impression left that they have an > objection worth pursuing. If lurkers feel the objection is worth pursuing, > they can repost the same question. > To learn more about LENR, I recommend the LENR-CANR website > http://lenr-canr.org/ > > > On Thu, Aug 15, 2013 at 4:46 PM, Kevin O'Malley <kevmol...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> Basic derision >> >> ***That's all the skeptopaths seem to be able to muster. They can't >> counteract the science. They downshift into ridicule because they can get >> away with it. It's basically like saying, "hey, look, I can be an asshole >> and get away with it, so that's what I'm going to do." It does NOTHING to >> further the science. There isn't even an attempt to refute the science >> behind the claims. >> >> The same thing happened to the Wright brothers for 5 years between the >> time they first flew an airplane in 1903 and the time they had a contract >> to demo against in 1908. What happened to those skeptopaths in 1904? They >> were utterly discredited, but within a few weeks of the Wright brothers >> demonstration, they were spouting off yet again about how things should be >> done differently, better, more to their liking. It's horse shit. >> > >
