Jed, then you've got some extremely liberal definition of 'insider'! My definition of an insider is one who has at least done some experimental/theoretical research on the subject; LENR in this case. Robert Duncan is an expert in calorimetry, but he most definitely is NOT and insider!!! Insiders are most likely also experts (duh!), and they are usually viewed as not objective since they are 'invested' in the research, thus, their opinions, although most knowledgeable about the matter, do not carry as much weight as an expert who has not actually done any research in the field. Its all about perceptions at this point in time... As I stated, "I would hope that at least some of the experts were people who have never done any LENR research." The fact that Dr. Duncan was an expert but not an insider is what gave his assessment such a strong impact, not only on the media, but more importantly on the scientific world. What we need are more experts, NOT insiders, making independent assessments as did Dr.Duncan. But that takes guts, and integrity, now doesn't it... kudos to Dr. Duncan. Agreed, some may now refer to Dr. Duncan as somewhat of an insider, but his single assessment had MORE of a positive impact than anything that I can think of... it drastically reduced the "negative aura" surrounding LENR... win the perception battle, and all else will begin to follow a more rational scientific process. This report, although not a dam buster, is another major fracture/leak in the skeptics denial dam... lets all hope that Park and others are in its path when the dam finally bursts! ;^)
-Mark _____ From: Jed Rothwell [mailto:jedrothw...@gmail.com] Sent: Monday, November 16, 2009 9:02 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:Re: New Energy Times News Flash: DoD Report Released Mark Iverson wrote: > However, if by "experts" they mean Mosier-Boss, McKubre, etc., then less so > since these people, altho certainly experts, are also insiders. > I would hope that at least some of the experts were people who have never > done any LENR research... I understand where you are coming from, but this line of thinking soon leads to absurd conclusions. The only people qualified to make a serious analysis of cold fusion have either done the research, or they have done something similar. Robert Duncan, for example, is an expert in calorimetry, which is why CBS asked him to evaluate it. Heinz Gerischer was an expert in electrochemistry which is why he was invited to ICCF-2 as an observer. People with their level of knowledge look at the data for a few days and they conclude, as Gerischer put it: "there is now undoubtedly overwhelming indications that nuclear processes take place in the metal alloys." (Britz is the only expert I know who was not convinced by the data, and I do not think his reasons for rejecting it are rational.) The fact is, when a sane, unbiased, qualified expert looks closely at cold fusion he is inevitably persuaded, because the indications really are overwhelming. And the moment that expert is persuaded he transmogrifies into an insider! Certainly in the eyes of the "skeptics" he loses all credibility. A well known skeptic called Duncan a "charlatan" when all he had done was evaluate the data to reach a conclusion. Now that Duncan has published SEM photos of material and attended a conference, he is well and truly an "insider" and therefore -- by these rules -- he is beyond the pale. Where does that end? How many scientists have to be convinced before we say that Britz and a few others left out in the cold are the real weirdos who lack credibility? It is a bit like a game of "sardines" (reverse hide-and-go-seek) where every time a player finds the person who is 'it' that player disappears from the game. There are already thousands of scientists who have observed the cold fusion effect, and -- judging by the reader response at LENR-CANR.org -- tens of thousands who have read papers and are certain the effect is real. Are they all "insiders" now? Have they all magically ceased to be reliable? Duncan was completely reliable and highly trusted before CBS called him. Is he now persona non grata in science, and if so, why? The whole notion of insiders and outsiders has no place in science. And in fact there are no insiders in cold fusion as far as I can tell. Cold fusion is supposedly insular but it sure don't seem that way. On the contrary, most researchers are competitive and make little effort to assist one another, and no effort to cover for others or hide other people's mistakes. Their backbiting is often as nasty, and often as unfounded, as the skeptical attacks. - Jed No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 8.5.425 / Virus Database: 270.14.67/2506 - Release Date: 11/16/09 07:43:00
