Mark Iverson <zeropo...@charter.net> wrote:
> Now that's a good idea... and one can start by simply scanning all the > comment sections of websites where a CF story ran, and summarize > each skeptic's question or statement, and counter it with the facts. > I have looked at previous compilations of skeptical assertions, such as this one: http://pages.csam.montclair.edu/~kowalski/cf/293wikipedia.html If Rossi succeeds, begins selling units, and it becomes generally known that cold fusion is real, all of the objections listed here will be voided. They will be "inoperative" as Nixon's people put it. There will be a new set of objections. Many are hard to predict now, but I have heard some of them already: 1. The device has not yet been extensively tested for safety and it may be dangerous. (I made this objection myself.) 2. Nuclear energy can never be trusted. We should rely only on solar, wind and other renewables. 3. It will hurt the energy sector of the economy. (This is what the Japanese government told Mizuno and other researchers as the reason to turn down their funding.) 4. It will cost jobs. 5. We cannot afford to replace all automobiles and heaters. It will cost too much. (This contradicts the previous objection that it will cost jobs. If it costs too much that means it makes too many jobs.) 6. "Giving humanity cold fusion is like giving a machine gun to a baby." (Rifkin) I have probably heard others but those are the main ones. The fossil fuel industry will emphasize #1 and 4 in public, and #3 when talking to Members of Congress on their payroll; i.e., "if you allow this, we will not cover your re-election campaign costs." I think I have heard #5 most often. This is factually incorrect. First it will not cost anything; it will save money. cold fusion is not a free lunch. I is a lunch you are paid to eat. Second, we have to replace all cars and heaters anyway, because they wear out. We will have to replace some of the factory manufacturing equipment earlier than normal. In my opinion, the only objection listed here with any merit is #1. This problem can be rectified by extensive safety testing. This will probably cost hundreds of millions of dollars but compared to the benefits and cost savings this is a trivial sum of money. Cold fusion will say this much every hour or so for the rest of human history. - Jed
