Re: Ad Hominem against Joshua Cude, or is that "Ad Pseudonym" against "Joshua Cude" ?
https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/?ui=2&shva=1#label/Fusion2011/130bdafaefd392d9 Jed said to Joshua: "So you will stick to the Krivit demo and ignore the others. You look at one piece of data at a time while ignoring other pieces. That is a common technique used by people who are determined to deny reality." Rich: This is denigrating Joshua. https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/?ui=2&shva=1#label/Fusion2011/130bf3abecbfc708 On June 23 -- I believe Jed later admitted to getting too heated: "You can nitpick Rossi. Anyone can. But you cannot find an error in any mainstream scientific paper. You never have, you never will. You are a faker. A pseudo-skeptic true believer! You think the laws of thermodynamics are wrong, but you have no reason. You think you can compare a Loch Ness photo to SRI calorimetry and that's a valid argument. You don't get a free pass. Anyone can see you have zero credibility. I am sick of your puerile nonsense. I will not respond to you again. If you ever have the guts to write a real paper, let us know." https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/?ui=2&shva=1#label/Fusion2011/130b734895c2f2ec Abd, June 22, talking about Joshua, actually is pretty skeptical about the Rossi claims: "The Krivit video does not show the steam production rate, that's the problem. It shows what's left after the steam runs through three meters of rubber hose. We know that steam will condense in this hose, and some estimates have been made of how much. It's quite enough to explain that weak showing. All this means is that the demo is a piece of crap. It would only convince someone who is inclined to believe. It is not in any way proof that the E-Cat is *not* producing excess power. That conclusion would only come from someone who is inclined to disbelieve. My sense, from the weak steam coming out of the end, is that what seems to be marginal at the end is an indication that more power is being generated than the input electrical power, but I'd not want to claim that this demo shows that, it's way too shaky. The sad thing about this is that a convincing demo -- absent true and serious fraud -- could be easily done. I've pointed out many times that there is no way, with a demo controlled by the inventor or close allies of the inventor, to rule out a sophisticated fraud. But the demo Krivit video'd, that isn't a "sophisticated fraud," it's an obviously deficient demo! If Rossi were interested in fooling people, he could manage much better than this! Look, Rossi, attacking Krivit, looks like a complete nut case. Jed excuses this as an idiosyncracy of an inventor. Maybe. I'm skeptical. I suspect that Rossi is smarter than that, that he knows how he looks and is deliberately creating the impressions that he's creating. I can think of a number of reasons for this, both psychological and practical or economic. And, of course, none of this helps us to actually know how much power this kitten is producing. Kullander and Essen did see a more convincing demo, and apparently did see (directly) the quality of the steam, at least at one point. Unfortunately, their report doesn't allow us to rule out that significant water may have been flowing out the outlet tube, consider the possibility that their inspection of this tube was controlled precisely how Rossi controlled it with Krivit. Measuring steam quality with their meter, even if it actually worked for that purpose, would not rule out this water flow problem. I love it, in a way. The situation causes many observers to reveal their biases, by how they respond. However, I'll caution myself that Rothwell, for example, does claim to have private information that he trusts, and private information can create an appearance of "bias." Still, Jed's attachment to the "expert testimony" here is not a good sign, I urge him to quickly climb down from that! The sooner the better! It's fascinating to me that the Levi paper included detailed information about the calibration of the fundamentally irrelevant radiation measurements, and nothing, in fact, on the steam quality measurements. The results of those measurements was not even reported, it was merely *implied* that the issue was addressed. And then everone is falling all over themselves over whether the non-reported measurements were based on mass or volume! It would be like arguing over the result of zero divided by zero. Hey! my result checks correctly and perfectly, therefore your different result is wrong!" Rich: So I couldn't manage to find any quotes by Abd that were Ad Psdudonym against Joshua, so I retract that claim and regret my error and remind myself how very easy it is to shift into criticizing and judging our fellows... I like his humorous, wry appreciation of how we all get tangled up in the Rossi web. In mutual service, Rich
