Well said, Randy.
It is a mystery why someone with considerable talent would indulge in this kind of negativity, when at best the greatest satisfaction that can be derived from it - is far exceed by the risk that the questioned effect is real, but can be understood - but the peer pressure and negativity actually succeeds in keeping that real effect hidden. I think we should call it the "Mary Yugo" symptom. If LENR is real, every year it is delayed from commercialization will be looked at, a decade later, as hundreds of billions of dollars wasted. From: Randy wuller Cude would argue that there isn't a newly discovered (new is of course relative) phenomenon and that everyone investigating it is deluded, incompetent or both. What he can't explain is why anyone would run around the internet trying to stop people from investigating a phenomenon. It makes no sense and is probably a symptom of the very negative period (I would describe it as the age of pessimism) we find ourselves living through. When the pendulum shifts and we enter an optimistic age, everything will seem possible and as such being for something will be much more productive (it always is) than being against something. You will find a lot less Cude's running around, thank goodness. Personally, while he is obviously bright, Cude's position is just about the dumbest fool thing I have ever read. Anyway, if you push him he will morph the argument to government support (no one can really argue against private investigation of Cold Fusion) for investigation of Cold Fusion and act like a citizen advocate against wasted government spending as though we don't waste enough on other energy investigations like ITER. In answer to your question, of course we should investigate a phenomenon of the significance of Cold Fusion even if the chance of it being real is miniscule. I also think it is absurd to believe we have an adequate understanding of physics today to rule it out. Ransom But you waste your time on Cude, he is a rock head. ----- Original Message ----- From: Edmund Storms <mailto:[email protected]> Joshua, cold fusion is either a real phenomenon in Nature or it is not. You argue that it is not real, but simply the result of many mistakes made repeatedly by many well trained scientists. Regardless of what is suggested as evidence, you will find a way to reject it. While this approach is useful up to a point, you frequently go beyond this point into arbitrary and irrational argument done apparently simply to saying something. In the process you confuse people who are new to the subject and are trying to wade through the complexity that is cold fusion. My following comment is only for readers who are still following this exchange. I do not have the time to refute all of what Cude says, which would only lead to an growing collection of comment and rebuttal without end. For your benefit, I need to emphasis that I and most other believers are just as skeptical of what we observe as is Cude. We question and repeat until we are sure the results are real, which we now accept as reveling a new phenomenon. However, no data is perfect. The goal after any new phenomenon is discovered is to keep looking until it is understood. Cude would stop that process. You, as a new evaluator of the claims, need to decide whether the investigation process needs to be stopped or expanded. That is the only question of importance. I would be very interested in your answer. If I get no response to this request, I will make no further response to Cude. Ed Storms
