Steve acts exactly as an "economical friend" of LENR- with such friends you do not need enemies.
On Wed, Mar 14, 2012 at 12:54 PM, Akira Shirakawa <[email protected] > wrote: > 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<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. > > -- Dr. Peter Gluck Cluj, Romania http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com
