Like Ed says, What is the usefulness of all this discussion. Cude will not accept the most obvious and well supported arguments and he will not accept what I just said here. He makes no effort to find common ground or to add any insight to the discussion. In his mind, the CF claims are only pseudoscience - end of discussion. Why not let him go his way with this belief and discuss something useful because, as past experiences demonstrated, there is no end to this process.
On Wed, May 8, 2013 at 1:10 PM, Joshua Cude <joshua.c...@gmail.com> wrote: > Plate tectonics were accepted when the evidence became overwhelming, > particularly the fossil and seismologic evidence. Yes, it took a a long > time, because geology yields its secrets greedily, but it had nothing to do > with attrition. > > > > On Wed, May 8, 2013 at 12:15 PM, Kevin O'Malley <kevmol...@gmail.com>wrote: > >> A good example of the validity of Planck's observation to "fit reality" >> is to look at how plate tectonics were initially rejected, then embraced a >> generation later. >> >> >> On Wed, May 8, 2013 at 8:49 AM, Joshua Cude <joshua.c...@gmail.com>wrote: >> >>> On Tue, May 7, 2013 at 5:16 PM, Kevin O'Malley <kevmol...@gmail.com>wrote: >>> >>>> http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Max_Planck >>>> >>>> Max Planck: >>>> >>>> A new scientific truth does not triumph by convincing its opponents and >>>> making them see the light, but rather because its opponents eventually die, >>>> and a new generation grows up that is familiar with it. >>>> >>>> >>>> The irony is that not only is this not true, and that cold fusion is >>> seeing it work the other way, but Planck himself is a counter-example. >>> >>> >>> Some pathological beliefs, like N-rays and the planet vulcan, only >>> really disappeared when the believers died. In cold fusion, the strongest >>> and most active proponents are still the ones that were there from the >>> beginning (There are some exceptions like Duncan and Zawodny). Cold fusion >>> is likely to continue to fade away by attrition, although it clearly has a >>> surprising staying power. >>> >>> >>> Planck was slow to accept the idea of photons, but he did not have to >>> die to increase their acceptance: about 10 years after Einstein introduced >>> them, Planck came around. And of course, all the architects of modern >>> physics, including Planck, were alive and well before they could conceive >>> of relative time or discrete energy. So, the statement really doesn't fit >>> reality, and I suspect he said it in jest. >>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> >
