Re: Cold fusion is back!
- From: Citizen Jimserac <Jimserac@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 29 Mar 2009 05:42:44 -0700 (PDT)
On Mar 25, 5:08 pm, schu...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (Richard Schultz) wrote:
In article <b1db1a2e-5aab-4985-a699-e7af1032f...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, dlzc <dl...@xxxxxxx> wrote:
:> : Until you can rise well above the detection limits,
:> : don't expect to be able to convince many reliable
:> : scientists.
:> In the case of these particular researchers, I'd be
:> more inclined to say (based on their 1996 paper)
:> that until you can tell a signal from a ground loop,
:> don't expect to able to convince many competent
:> scientists.
: Its not the same people, but it is the same place.
The woman who was quoted in the press release appears as an author on
the paper to which I was referring.
-----
Richard Schultz schu...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Say what you want about old Schultz, he is at least consistent -
I inquired of his opinion of this Naval Research lab summary report on
"cold fusion" or whatever it is (or is not) that is happening:
"Could you enlighten us with your comments on the following:
13. Stanislaw Szpak, Pamela A. Mosier-Boss. Thermal and Nuclear
Aspects of the Pd/D20 System, Volume 1: A Decade of Research at Navy
Laboratories. "
www.spawar.navy.mil/sti/publications/pubs/tr/1862/tr1862-vol1.pdf.
"This 132 page document is one of the best detailed overviews of cold
fusion (for androids anyway!)
that I've come across covering everything from F&Pons up to
the date of their article.
and got this back from the Doc:
"I posted detailed comments about one of Szpak's
earlier papers to s.p.f., where they are on-topic, and explained why
one can only conclude that he is either incompetent or deluded or
both. Please read those comments,
and when you are done, you can ask any followup questions in s.p.f. I
warn you, however, that I am not going to explain to you what a ground
loop
is. "
If the Naval researchers can't tell the difference between a ground
loop and a signal then I would have to wonder what my tax dollars are
being expended on - but hey, what the heck, right now they're being
used to payout some bonuses and "rescue" some insurance companies and
banks -> so this rather pales in comparison.
(Boo hoo! I don't like funding "incompetent" or "deluded" or both
scientists but, ah!
..... we have not heard from Szpak's response this, have we Schultz,
and.... HE is the scientist at the Naval Research lab while YOU are
at...... where???)
Citizen Jimserac
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Cold fusion is back!
- From: Richard Schultz
- Re: Cold fusion is back!
- References:
- Re: Cold fusion is back!
- From: Yevgen Barsukov
- Re: Cold fusion is back!
- From: Mark Thorson
- Re: Cold fusion is back!
- From: Richard Schultz
- Re: Cold fusion is back!
- From: dlzc
- Re: Cold fusion is back!
- From: Richard Schultz
- Re: Cold fusion is back!
- Prev by Date: Re: Does sodium hydroxide break down over time?
- Next by Date: Re: Cold fusion is back!
- Previous by thread: Re: Cold fusion is back!
- Next by thread: Re: Cold fusion is back!
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
Loading