It's not relevant, because his criticism is against innumeracy, which applies to such delusions as astrology and homeopathy, but not cold fusion, where the most serious advocates are scientists, who certainly know their differential equations.
Why would anyone mention cold fusion in 2011, and raise P & F as the example, while neglecting Rossi? That's really bizarre. On Dec 15, 2011, at 16:36, Joshua Cude <joshua.c...@gmail.com> wrote: > The whole thing is related to pseudoscience and ignorance, and it's all > relevant. Here it is: > > > 1. HACKS: SHODDY PRESS COVERAGE OF SCIENCE. > The Leveson Inquiry into the standards and ethics of the UK press, headed > by Lord Justice Brian Leveson, was prompted by the News of the World phone- > hacking scandal (WN 22 Jul 2011). The seamy British tabloid was the top- > selling English-language newspaper in the world when owner Rupert Murdoch > had to close it five months ago after its news-collection methods were > exposed. The intense public interest in the sex and drug culture of > celebrities is certainly troubling, but the same journalistic standards > applied to science news may be more dangerous. In 1998, for example, > Andrew Wakefield, an obscure British gastroenterologist, set off a > worldwide vaccination panic when he falsely identified the common MMR > vaccination as a cause of autism. Widely reported by the press, > Wakefield's irresponsible assertion led to a precipitous decline in > vaccination rate and a corresponding 14-year rise in measles cases. An > editorial in the current issue of Nature (8 Dec 2011) urges scientists > to "fight back against agenda-driven reporting of science." Who could > disagree? It is, after all, a fight against ignorance. > > 2. IGNORANCE: THERE'S PLENTY MORE WHERE THAT CAME FROM. > A commitment to intellectual openness provides a mechanism for self- > correction that sets science apart from the unchanging dictates of revealed > religion, raising the prospect of transforming Earth into something close > to biblical paradise, at least for Homo sapiens. Directions to this > earthly paradise, however, are written in mathematics. In particular, the > dialect of scientific progress is differential equations. Unfortunately, > few people speak mathematics or have any interest in learning it. In the > modern world, the engine of scientific progress is driven by a subset of > the human race that speaks mathematics as a second language. This is not > healthy. Many people, unable to distinguish science from pseudoscience, > are duped by crackpots and swindlers who attempt to mimic scientists, and > often manage to fool themselves. How do they do it? > > 3. LET ME COUNT THE WAYS: PSEUDOSCIENCE IS AN ENORMOUS FIELD > There are, I think, many more of them than there are of us. Let me mention > just a few of the more notorious: Stanley Pons and Martin Fleishman, who > gave us Cold Fusion in 1989, are the most famous in the Free Energy > Category. Even so, physicists had their number in a couple of weeks. More > recently (2006) in the same category, the Steorn Company in Dublin gave us > Orbo, a classic perpetual motion machine. So classic it gets reinvented > every century or so. Unfortunately Orbo is shy and refuses to perform when > anyone’s watching. In the Chicken-Little Category, Devra Davis says the 5 > billion cell-phone users are toast when we reach the latency period of > brain cancer. Alas, I'm reaching my limit and there are hundreds more on > my list. Maybe I'll write a book, or did I already do that? > >
