On Wed, Dec 21, 2011 at 3:43 PM, Jed Rothwell <jedrothw...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Giovanni Santostasi <gsantost...@gmail.com> wrote: > > >> I didn't say that being reproducible by amateurs would be the only way I >> would take LENR seriously. >> Multiple tests done by respectable scientists, with high sigmas, and >> blind methods would be acceptable. >> > > This has been done for 22 years. High sigma data has been reported by > hundreds of researchers. > You've often said that Rossi's results are the best so far, and most people don't even believe Rossi's results, so that says that all the previous results are even less convincing. > If any other claim were so widely replicated with so much high-sigma data, > every scientist on Earth would believe it. They would be no controversy. > This is only controversial because it is cold fusion, and people ignore the > usual standards of science and invent countless reasons to deny the facts. > And what is it about cold fusion that it gets treated differently from every other claim? The fact that no one wants cheap, clean, and abundant energy? The response in 1989 proves that everyone is desperate for what cold fusion claims to offer. The experiments all over the world, the standing ovations for Pons, the crowded theaters, the front-page coverage, all show that the world would love nothing more than for the cold fusion claims to be valid. They just didn't hold up to scrutiny. And there is no other claim with similar dubious and marginal results that have been widely accepted as valid. At least not claims that stood the test of time. > That is what you are doing, now. > > - Jed > >
