The history of science is littered with ideas considered crazy.
The problem is that something is considered crazy until it isn't, and there's no way a priori to tell if something considered crazy will pan out. That doesn't stop people from having an opinion about it.
Of course, it's difficult for a reporter to actually quote someone saying "well, I really have no idea." Reportage is biased towards certainty, and the reporter can always find someone willing to say something.
This sounds similar to the cranks who yell "well they laughed at Einstein too!" They didn't.
The last part (about hot fusion, residential-grade fission) implies that none of them work and then states that their level of non-working is more than cold fusion will ever have.
No, it is stating facts. Hot fusion and residential-grade fission are certainly not working at the moment. It is certainly intended that hot fusion will work (practically and commercially) in the future. There is simply no evidence that cold fusion is even theoretically possible.
It's not so much that it's anti-science as that it's pro-religion.
People like Richard Dawkins don't like it. I suppose it depends on your view of Dawkins (and atheism generally) whether you think that is a serious criticism or a backhanded compliment.
So until a project succeeds in producing a working physical device, it's pseudoscience?
In Rossi's case he has produced a "working physical device" but is unable to explain how it works. This is not so much pseudoscience as a conjuring trick.
And note the Slashdot clickbait for the denialists, who have, in fine moonlanding conspiracy dudgeon, have now connected the cold fusion debacle with AGW.
But, amusingly, the denialists here seem to have chosen to ally themselves with the cold fusion fraudsters, as fellow 'outsiders'.
Bearing in mind the stupid things that venture capitalists invest in, I'm sure the cold fusion guys just need to promise to disrupt the power industry and deliver electricity through the cloud to get a good few hundred million.
It's widely believed he died a virgin. I'm not going to claim it as definitely true that he never had sex, it's one of those historical claims that's basically impossible to verify, but there you go. He did have issues with women, though.
I think it's safe to say that, if Isaac Newton were alive today, he'd be posting to slashdot.
Well said, however, I disagree regarding cold fusion in particular. It should be shunned because it flies in the face of physical laws. Creating sustained energy from room temperature fusion is as laughable as someone levitating with the power of their mind.
Wow, if you weren't actually being serious, I would say that was an excellent impression of every arrogant twat who has ever loudly declared something to be impossible only to be soundly proven wrong.
Also, I can think of several ways someone could levitate with the power of their mind. For example, one could argue that a helicopter, being an invention, is a way that people levitate using mind power. Or, you could simply capture electrical power generated by someone's brain and store it until you have enough power to levitate them using any of a number of methods
Wow, if you weren't actually being serious, I would say that was an excellent impression of every arrogant twat who has ever loudly declared something to be possible by playing with words.
Creating sustained energy from room temperature fusion is as laughable as someone levitating with the power of their mind.
You insensitive clod, I levitate myself from my bed every day with the power of my mind! If you shot me in the head, I wouldn't get up tomorrow morning.
"However it is reasonable to assume anyone working on cold fusion research should be prepared to go beyond some simple papers claiming relevant results in one lab." How to go beyond that when you can't even get your simple papers published, that's the problem.
Publish them yourself on the internet, work as a prostitute to fund your evening research efforts. It will pay off, as pretty soon you're going to be the richest guy in the history of the planet.
Wasn't there a study which suggested that people born at different times of the year (ie different star signs) favoured different professions?
The only one I remember that was plausible was that professional sports people tended to be born early in the school year.
This is for a perfectly obvious reason. If A is born on 1st September , B is born on 31st August and the school year starts on 1st September, then B is going to be 364 days younger than A in the same school year. So A will be practically a year more physically developed, and that can make a big difference as they're growing up and competing against slightly smaller and weaker opponents all the time.
The problem with climate change is we don't have a control group.
We know that Earth has gone through hot and cold cycles before (the Sahara was once a rainforest) so establishing a clear cause-effect relationship is impossible since we don't have another depopulated Earth to use as a control.
So since we can't do pure science we should do nothing?
Cut back on American style conspicuous consumption.
That's the whole point. Climate change denial is based on the assumption that any change to the consumer lifestyle is evil communism, and that therefore climate change must be incorrect somehow.
"My objections to the global warming propaganda are not so much over the technical facts, about which I do not know much, but it’s rather against the way those people behave and the kind of intolerance to criticism that a lot of them have. I think that’s what upsets me."
Unfortunately, the truth has nothing to do with how nice you are.
When reached for comments NASA said "We wanted to fix the problem, but every time we called France they were on a mandatory work break and they had gone over there 5 hour a week work week schedule already!"
If you have a 35 hour working week, it just means that if you need 70 hours work on a project you have to employ two people. Big deal.
Not everyone shares the US obsession with working as much unpaid overtime as possible to show how non-socialist you are.
Slashdot Mirror
the laws of physics can go to hell if these are the things that are preventing us from living in a better, safer, cleaner world
The laws of physics are not like the laws in government statute books. You can't just tear them up and write new ones that you find more useful.
Am I the only one here to think that the E-cat might not be bogus, after all?
Yes.
The history of science is littered with ideas considered crazy.
The problem is that something is considered crazy until it isn't, and there's no way a priori to tell if something considered crazy will pan out. That doesn't stop people from having an opinion about it.
Of course, it's difficult for a reporter to actually quote someone saying "well, I really have no idea." Reportage is biased towards certainty, and the reporter can always find someone willing to say something.
This sounds similar to the cranks who yell "well they laughed at Einstein too!" They didn't.
;D
You smilie-face fucking retard.
Go to IamAtwelveYearOld.com and post if you're going to be this much of a moron.
Yeah, that was an elegant rebuttal of his points.
Residential fission is a pipe dream.
The average person is a moron and you don't want the average person near a fission device.
Agreed. You don't even really want the average person near a ladder or power tool.
The last part (about hot fusion, residential-grade fission) implies that none of them work and then states that their level of non-working is more than cold fusion will ever have.
No, it is stating facts. Hot fusion and residential-grade fission are certainly not working at the moment. It is certainly intended that hot fusion will work (practically and commercially) in the future. There is simply no evidence that cold fusion is even theoretically possible.
People like Richard Dawkins don't like it. I suppose it depends on your view of Dawkins (and atheism generally) whether you think that is a serious criticism or a backhanded compliment.
So until a project succeeds in producing a working physical device, it's pseudoscience?
In Rossi's case he has produced a "working physical device" but is unable to explain how it works. This is not so much pseudoscience as a conjuring trick.
And note the Slashdot clickbait for the denialists, who have, in fine moonlanding conspiracy dudgeon, have now connected the cold fusion debacle with AGW.
But, amusingly, the denialists here seem to have chosen to ally themselves with the cold fusion fraudsters, as fellow 'outsiders'.
And investors
Bearing in mind the stupid things that venture capitalists invest in, I'm sure the cold fusion guys just need to promise to disrupt the power industry and deliver electricity through the cloud to get a good few hundred million.
If so, could you tell us whether they have flying cars yet?
It's widely believed he died a virgin. I'm not going to claim it as definitely true that he never had sex, it's one of those historical claims that's basically impossible to verify, but there you go. He did have issues with women, though.
I think it's safe to say that, if Isaac Newton were alive today, he'd be posting to slashdot.
Hell if we can allow the nutritionist to tell us that a little bit of salt will cause us to die right away
No one says that.
But if you think that what you eat or drink is irrelevant to your health, try living on a diet of PVC and vodka for a few months.
Well said, however, I disagree regarding cold fusion in particular. It should be shunned because it flies in the face of physical laws. Creating sustained energy from room temperature fusion is as laughable as someone levitating with the power of their mind.
Wow, if you weren't actually being serious, I would say that was an excellent impression of every arrogant twat who has ever loudly declared something to be impossible only to be soundly proven wrong.
Also, I can think of several ways someone could levitate with the power of their mind. For example, one could argue that a helicopter, being an invention, is a way that people levitate using mind power. Or, you could simply capture electrical power generated by someone's brain and store it until you have enough power to levitate them using any of a number of methods
Wow, if you weren't actually being serious, I would say that was an excellent impression of every arrogant twat who has ever loudly declared something to be possible by playing with words.
Creating sustained energy from room temperature fusion is as laughable as someone levitating with the power of their mind.
You insensitive clod, I levitate myself from my bed every day with the power of my mind! If you shot me in the head, I wouldn't get up tomorrow morning.
"However it is reasonable to assume anyone working on cold fusion research should be prepared to go beyond some simple papers claiming relevant results in one lab." How to go beyond that when you can't even get your simple papers published, that's the problem.
Publish them yourself on the internet, work as a prostitute to fund your evening research efforts. It will pay off, as pretty soon you're going to be the richest guy in the history of the planet.
Wasn't there a study which suggested that people born at different times of the year (ie different star signs) favoured different professions?
The only one I remember that was plausible was that professional sports people tended to be born early in the school year.
This is for a perfectly obvious reason. If A is born on 1st September , B is born on 31st August and the school year starts on 1st September, then B is going to be 364 days younger than A in the same school year. So A will be practically a year more physically developed, and that can make a big difference as they're growing up and competing against slightly smaller and weaker opponents all the time.
The problem with climate change is we don't have a control group.
We know that Earth has gone through hot and cold cycles before (the Sahara was once a rainforest) so establishing a clear cause-effect relationship is impossible since we don't have another depopulated Earth to use as a control.
So since we can't do pure science we should do nothing?
Cut back on American style conspicuous consumption.
That's the whole point. Climate change denial is based on the assumption that any change to the consumer lifestyle is evil communism, and that therefore climate change must be incorrect somehow.
Those who doubt that climate change is caused by man, and isn't an unmitigated disaster face the same condemnation, don't they?
"Look! They laugh at us CC deniers just like they laugh at the Time Cube guy!"
Leftist Caused Climate Hysteria is a HOAX to Control and Steal from YOU. That is all it has ever been.
I think you need to renew your medication, you're talking bollocks out loud in public again.
Thanks, your rant proves that climate change deniers are driven by extreme right wing paranoia, not science.
"My objections to the global warming propaganda are not so much over the technical facts, about which I do not know much, but it’s rather against the way those people behave and the kind of intolerance to criticism that a lot of them have. I think that’s what upsets me."
Unfortunately, the truth has nothing to do with how nice you are.
Nevermind that the unintended consequences are not considered?
By definition, you can't consider unintended consequences.
The point is not just that you didn't mean them to happen, but that you had no idea they would happen at all.
When reached for comments NASA said "We wanted to fix the problem, but every time we called France they were on a mandatory work break and they had gone over there 5 hour a week work week schedule already!"
If you have a 35 hour working week, it just means that if you need 70 hours work on a project you have to employ two people. Big deal.
Not everyone shares the US obsession with working as much unpaid overtime as possible to show how non-socialist you are.