On Tue, Dec 17, 2013 at 8:54 PM, Eric Walker <eric.wal...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 17, 2013 at 4:29 PM, Foks0904 . <foks0...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Yeah Goodstein even commented how good the work of Scaramuzzi was, but >> just avoided the question of whether excess heat was real or not. >> > > I rather like Goodstein's piece. The question facing him (whether he > perceived it or not) was: do I want to really embarrass myself and/or > continue to have a promising career? I do not blame him for speaking > equivocally about cold fusion. When one has colleagues like John Franks, > there is a lot of pressure to be politic. > As provost Goodstein had an obligation to demand that Lewis reproduce, based on the full F&P paper with its corrections, the errors Lewis claimed F&P made. This would have been the way to frame the additional effort and it would accord with standard scientific protocol. He would have taken virtually no risks in doing this.
