This remind me the controversial concept of "incommensurability" of Thomas Kuhn, that I conforms practically. As many show them, and even more deeply that what Kuhn says, a paradigm is admitted nearly only when it is "industrial" ... the other case, similar, is when laymen can have access to so clear data that the denial by elite is impossible. Industrial application is such a case. In a way the old paradigm surrender only by foreign force.
this observed fact have been strawman-ized by the "relativist of science"... those guys who pretend that scientific theory are purely linked to political interests, forget that the reality most of the time have the last word in the debate of "vested interests". however it can take centuries, and it does not always happen in some very political/funded domain like economy, medicine... 2014/1/2 David Roberson <dlrober...@aol.com> > > It just appears that many people maintain some level of doubt regardless > of the evidence before them. They always suspect that a trick of some > sort is being conducted. Consider the major problem we recently had > convincing the skeptics that the latest Rossi 3rd party test was > legitimate. I seriously doubt that any of them changed their minds even > though they could prove nothing of substance. There is always room for > doubt when a subject defies your belief system. > > I think that his behavior is consistent with many peoples reactions. I am > not confident that he would have accepted any amount of excess power as > beyond trickery. It would have helped had the excess been 100%, but that > might still have not been sufficient for him. > > Dave > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Jed Rothwell <jedrothw...@gmail.com> > To: vortex-l <vortex-l@eskimo.com> > Sent: Thu, Jan 2, 2014 3:13 pm > Subject: Re: [Vo]:McKubre visitors who peer-reviewed his lab, then get > (unethically) silent > > David Roberson <dlrober...@aol.com> wrote: > > I just read the paper again and believe that the author is not confident >> that excess heat is being generated. > > > He should be, though. Because as he himself says: > > "The uncertainty in excess power measurement is about 50 mW, but the > excess power appears to be on the order of 500 mW or even 1 W peak." > > If he agrees that is true then there is no doubt the effect is real. He > does not give any reason to doubt this. He gives disingenuous reasons to > ignore this fact, starting with: > > "We also had extensive discussions of data from one of these cells, which > according to a summary chart has provided about 3% excess heat." > > - Jed > > >
