On Thu, May 9, 2013 at 3:56 PM, Kevin O'Malley <kevmol...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > On Thu, May 9, 2013 at 2:42 AM, Joshua Cude <joshua.c...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> >> >> >> That's a reflection of what mainstream science thinks of cold fusion. It >> doesn't answer the question of why, if the proof is so obvious, >> > ***Interesting little conditional you've inserted here. The proof is not > obvious but the evidence is. With so much evidence, with >14000 > replications, the evidence is compelling. This is far from a pathological > science. > There are a lot of claimed examples of excess heat. They are not replications, because many of the experiments are different, and the levels of claimed heat are all over the map. The question stands. If the evidence is so compelling, why don't intelligent people accept it? >> A graduate student in science would probably ruin their career by >> studying astrology or creationism too. It says something about the fields. >> >> > > ***If a grad student in physics were to study astrology, it's obvious > they've stepped out of their core competence. But if they want to > study Condensed Matter Nuclear Science and LENR, they're within their core > competence. It says nothing particularly relevant about the field of > astrology. Your ridiculous analogy says something about human nature. > >> >> > Is said science, not physics. A psychology student could propose to study astrology. And a biology student could propose to study intelligent design.
