Axil Axil <janap...@gmail.com> wrote: > Do you require more evidence to bolster your faith like doubting Thomas, a > skeptic in the faith who refused to believe without direct personal > experience, to plunge his suspicious fingers deep into the gaping > wounds piercing the lifeless hands still flowing forth in the sacred blood > as proof of the miracle that you so long hoped was possible? > Exactly! That's what Bacon meant when he said: "Lastly, we intersperse the whole with advice, doubts, and cautions, casting out and restraining, as it were, all phantoms by a sacred ceremony and exorcism. . . ."
You forgot to mention peer-review, and the Authorities on High who are Not To Be Questioned. At ICCF18 I overheard a researcher describing this. He said: "I was talking to a high official at the DOE. I asked why they do not fund these experiments. He said, 'until it is published in *Nature* it has no credibility and we will not fund it.' I asked him: 'Why does the DOE put * Nature* magazine in charge of US energy policy?' He did not respond. He was pretty mad." I would add that the editor at *Nature* who opposes cold fusion most is a certified nitwit. See: http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/RothwellJhownaturer.pdf If the facts are ever revealed, historians will wonder how on earth this particular nitwit ended up in charge of US energy policy for 25 years. It reminds me of the the way World War I was triggered by German military train schedules. Fiasco leading to disaster triggered by happenstance. - Jed
