“Ps. However, I will condemn Mills crack pot theory as false, because he is explaining cold fusion effect by dark matter. This is very
feeble argument, because there is no such thing as dark matter or at least, we do not have any evidence that supports that hypothesis! http://pubs.rsc.org/en/Content/ArticleLanding/2004/CP/b400402g Leif Holmlid : <snip>Rydberg Matter has recently been proposed to be part of the dark matter in the Universe, to be the source of the so called UIR emission bands from interstellar space and to give rise to the Faraday rotation in intergalactic space.<snip> Mills crack pot theory may be correct. On Wed, Aug 3, 2011 at 2:18 PM, Jouni Valkonen <jounivalko...@gmail.com>wrote: > 2011/8/3 OrionWorks - Steven V Johnson <svj.orionwo...@gmail.com>: > > Considering Jouni's recent challenge: > > > >> ...I will challenge you for 40 euros that Rossi does > >> not do a fraud. If E-Cat is true, you pay 40 euros to charity, > >> and if not I pay 40 euros for charity. > > > > Perhaps Charles and Hope should set a realistic time-table or deadline > > for when fraud should be officially declared. > > > > End of the year 2011 is reasonable deadline for scientific validation > of Rossi's Cold Fusion technology. > > I think that Rossi is reasonable enough person that even if he fails > with commercialization with his own efforts, he does not keep > partially working technology only by himself in order to perfect it in > unforeseeable future. This is why Randell Mills is a ethical criminal, > because he has had so long time working cold fusion device and he has > refused to bring it to public even though his commercialization > efforts has not borne any fruits for several years. Of course there is > that possible explanation that Mills does not have any new and ground > breaking scientific evidence, but we should not condemn people as > fraudsters without proper evidence. > > - Jouni > > Ps. However, I will condemn Mills crack pot theory as false, because > he is explaining cold fusion effect by dark matter. This is very > feeble argument, because there is no such thing as dark matter or at > least, we do not have any evidence that supports that hypothesis! > >
