Reproducibility is indeed the crux of most alt/fringe science technologies.
Conventional science is not so willing to accept hard to reproduce effects as real, effects where not all of the requirements for reproducibility are known or readily controllable. This does not mean that these effects can't become reliably reproducible, but it means that a reliable recipe must be found, and preferably the action behind it understood. John On Wed, May 29, 2013 at 9:49 PM, Peter Gluck <peter.gl...@gmail.com> wrote: > It was parallel thinking, I well know each field has its own > characteristics and fate. Cold Fusion had the problem of reproducibility > from the very start this > is the real cause of its bad reputation. Theoretical weakness has just > added > to the problem- it seems to be so intellectual. > I understand your position and role, you will not agree officially so > please do > not answer- I tell you that Rossi has discovered a new kind, a new level > of LENR, working with a different mechanism that gives more intense > excess heat. Rossi has excess heat, it is true he has tried to show he > has more than it is actually there. But excess heat is certain in the > 2011 series of experiments and this test of the Professors too. You > are highly intelleigent and creative and able to invent all kind of > imaginary flaws. > Time will pass, new experiments will come more and more convincing, then > LENR+ devices will enter the market and any resistence will be futile. > You, Mary Yugo and Gary Wright are outsider Rosssi killers and who knows > your real identity.. you will disappear with discretion from the sight. > Remember > my words when it will happen and drink a glass of what-you-like for my > soul and memory. > Steve Krivit is an other case, his professional suicide is a tragic event. > You can do with this message what you wish, save answering to it. > Peter > > > On Wed, May 29, 2013 at 12:25 PM, Joshua Cude <joshua.c...@gmail.com>wrote: > >> On Wed, May 29, 2013 at 4:08 AM, Peter Gluck <peter.gl...@gmail.com>wrote: >> >>> Both HTSC and CF were discovered before their time both >>> are very different from what was thought in the moments >>> of discovery and both need new tools, concepts and ideas >>> in order to be understood.. >>> >> >> The validity of the HTSC evidence says nothing about the validity of the >> cold fusion evidence though. >> >> HTSC shows that mainstream science is perfectly willing to accept >> experimental results without a theory to explain them. Therefore the >> rejection by the same mainstream of cold fusion-- a far more desirable >> phenomenon -- should be given *more* credence, not less. >> >> >>> > > > -- > Dr. Peter Gluck > Cluj, Romania > http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com >
