On 2012-03-14 07:00, Peter Gluck wrote:
The Bardi paper is special due to application of the logical fallacy
"BAD ANALOGIES" All the
interesting examples have not much to do with
Rossi's case.
I have asked Krivit to stop the already boring campaign of
ROSSASSINATION- I wonder if my comment will be published.
He should also be warned of giving visibility to LENR enemies to prove
his point against Rossi. It might turn to be a double edged sword later on.
Overall I disagree too about this crusade on Rossi, anyway. If Krivit is
genuinely concerned about LENR science credibility, instead of doing
this he should have taken advantage of the momentum brought by him to
the field and show the valid science instead. I don't buy that Rossi's
doings delayed Krivit's reporting of that as he says.
Even Francesco Celani acknowledges that after all it was mainly thanks
to Rossi's wide exposure to the public of Ni-H LENR that a chain of
events which got him (Celani) invited to CERN to speak about this
subject was triggered.
Nobody can say that Rossi *didn't* help LENR get recognized:
http://www.google.com/trends/?q=lenr
It is the responsibility of LENR journalists, scientists and researchers
to take advantage of the increased public awareness on this subject and
show what it's good. Writing only about of what is bad and giving
widespread exposure of it, is exactly what pathological skeptics do and
will harm this field more than Rossi could ever achieve.
Ignoring Andrea Rossi completely (assuming he is a total fraud) would
have been the most sensible option.
Cheers,
S.A.
