The parallel between Hot fusion and Darwinian Evolution is not in the theory per se, but in how people treat each theory.
It has become a religion to their respective adherents, There is no other truth to them. Nothing you say will change their minds. Parks will never consider any evidence of Cold Fusion and I suspect Jed will never consider any evidence of Intelligent Design. Parks will persecute any adherent of Cold Fusion by mockery and ridicule and labelling them quack pseudoscientists. I suspect Jed does the same. The parallel is clear, and the behavior is the same. The sooner we realize that this is a religiious movement, the sooner will can understand why people will not accept any evidence for Cold Fusion. Adherents of respective theories must slowly die away for the paradigm to shift to new thinking. Old adherents have too much to loose by changing their minds now. They will stick it out to the end despite the daily acculumation of piles of evidence to the contrary. It is futile to expect old adherents to accept "Tritium Evidence" or any other evidence for that matter, just as it is futile for me to expect Jed to accept any "DNA Information" evidence pointing to Intelligent Design. Jojo ----- Original Message ----- From: Guenter Wildgruber To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Saturday, May 26, 2012 6:02 PM Subject: Re: [Vo]:Darwinian Evolution (Was Tritium in Ni-H LENR) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Von: Jojo Jaro <jth...@hotmail.com> An: vortex-l@eskimo.com Gesendet: 11:17 Samstag, 26.Mai 2012 Betreff: [Vo]:Darwinian Evolution (Was Tritium in Ni-H LENR) There appears to be... ######################################### Jojo, ...My goal in brining up this discussion is to try to draw a parallel between what is happening with Hot Fusion and Darwinian Evolution Theory ... ----------------- My take:: ----------------- The immediate connection is not clear to me. 'Hot fusion' seems to be an established fact to me. Will say: It happens within our observing distance. The question is whether it can be brought down to earth, so to say. Which a technical issue, and NOT an epistemological or even scientific one. You say: ... In Darwinism or Neo-Darwinism thought, once again, there "appears" to be some "established" theories... ... Well. To connect LENR to Darwinism and then to intelligent design, seems dubious to me, to say the least. You say: ... Folks, there is a parallel here. We all have our pet "Hot Fusion" theories that we can not and will not deviate from. For Parks, its Hot Fusion, for Jed, its Darwinian Evolution, for me, its Intelligent Design and Creationism. ... Well. Not all 'pet theories' are created equal. To Your excuse: Even Popper was confused at times wether 'Evolution' was a tautology or not, but retracted that. (A tautology is nonfalsifiable, and as such is not debatable, except as a -ahem- non-debatable axiom. The debatability of axioms is a serious issue, and ultimately can lead to the destruction of our human habitat, which I not really appreciate as an option.) The LENR issue commands our utmost attention! So please do not confuse the issue by crossreferencing it to 'Evolution', which is, without conclusive LOGICAL connection: UNSUBSTANTIAL! Guenther
