This is good - but those of us who follow the field closely should be aware that LENR advocates and practitioners can themselves be blindly skeptical within the niche, such as when confronted with an explanation or theory which they do not espouse, or an experimenter who has been rude to them (i.e. Rossi and Krivit) - or confronted with evidence that has not turned up in their own experiment.
From: Alain Sepeda
it remind me the book of Beaudette about what he call
skeptic:
Characteristics of the Scientific Skeptic
In general, skeptics display the following habits.
1. They do not express their criticism in those venues where
it will be subject to peer review.
2. They do not go into the laboratory and practice the
experiment along side the practitioner (as does the critic).
3. Assertions are offered as though they were scientifically
based when they are merely guesses.
4. Questions are raised that concern matters outside of the
boundaries of the claimed observation.
5. Satire, dismissal, and slander are freely employed.
6. When explanations are advanced for a possible source, ad
hoc reasons are instantly presented for their rejection. These rejections
often assert offhand that the explanation violates some physical
conservation law.
7. Evidence raised in support of the claims is rejected
outright if it does not answer every possible question. No intermediate
steps to find a source are acceptable.
<<attachment: winmail.dat>>
