Kevin O'Malley <kevmol...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Sorry, but I still say this is a mechanism to measure people's opinions, > or their feelings. > ***No, it is NOT. When I put up the contract for whether or not Dr. > Arata's experiment would be replicated in a peer reviewed journal, it had > zero to do with people's opinions or feelings. > On the contrary, that outcome depends on the opinions of the journal editors. Many fine experiments are not replicated because people will not fund them, or they are not published because the editors are biased. These decisions are political, or emotional, or they are made to protect funding, or out of spite. All of the reasons are emotional. None have any connection to science per se. If you win a bet, it is because of emotional changes in people, not because of any underlying facts. If facts made any difference, every scientist on earth would be convinced that cold fusion is real. You are measuring public opinion vis a vis cold fusion. > ***NO, you are not. If that were the case, then my contract would talk > about public opinion results rather than peer reviewed journal publications > and replication of a scientific finding. > Whether a replication is done depends not on public opinion but rather on the opinions of a small number of people who control funding. You mentioned Pam Boss. In her case, an Admiral in Washington has stopped her research indefinitely. His opinion is the only one that counts. He has no knowledge of the science. - Jed
