On Thu, May 9, 2013 at 3:42 PM, Kevin O'Malley <kevmol...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > On Thu, May 9, 2013 at 2:36 AM, Joshua Cude <joshua.c...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Doesn't answer the question. > > ***Of course it does. > The question was why don't intelligent people believe cold fusion. If the mainstream believed it, then believers would not suffer derision. > > > It just establishes the failure of the evidence. > > ***No, it establishes the real reason why "intelligent people" don't get > involved in Cold Fusion. > > > The reason for the derision > > ***Sneering is against the rules here. > As important as this forum is, it does not have jurisdiction over mainstream science, which is where the derision I was talking about allegedly takes place. > > > is because intelligent people don't buy your indisputable proof. > > ***Nope. It's because you're a skeptopath. Others just like to pile on > and when we scratch the surface, we find they're utterly uninformed about > the evidence. > If the evidence were indisputable, the ones who do get informed on DOE panels or journal reviews would be convinced (they're anonymous), and then the masses would take note, become convinced, and it would be 1989 all over. > > > If intelligent people bought it, the skeptics would be the ones whose > careers would be dragged through the mud. > ***You proceed from an odd form of idealism. Scientists are human. > > > Nothing ideal about it. People that are skeptical of relativity would have no career in physics. People skeptical of evolution would have no career in biology. People skeptical of the mood landing would have no career with NASA.
