Tiresome accusations like this ought to be banned from this list. Have you ever once seen a paycheck cut for the job of Internet trolling? Really? Really? Because it sounds like an awesome part time job, frankly.
On Dec 19, 2011, at 8:10, Aussie Guy E-Cat <aussieguy.e...@gmail.com> wrote: > Cude what does this have to do with F&P having been replicated in many labs > all over the world? You need to accept that the FPE is real and move on to > working out why it happens. Oh BTW you just might apologize to F&P for the > treatment they received by you and your mates. > > Would you please disclose if your income / pay check depends on you not > believing the FPE is real and / or working to trash anyone who does? I ask > because all you apparently contribute to this list is trashing the FPE. > > > On 12/19/2011 11:23 PM, Joshua Cude wrote: >> >> >> On Sun, Dec 18, 2011 at 8:38 PM, Jed Rothwell <jedrothw...@gmail.com >> <mailto:jedrothw...@gmail.com>> wrote: >> >> He sure knew what he was getting into. Fleischmann wrote a >> lighthearted account of this, quoted in Beaudette's book. It >> starts off with Arrhenius in 1883. He was one of the most >> important electrochemists in history, like Faraday. He made a >> revolutionary discovery. As any student of history would predict, >> this led the academic authorities to kick him out of the >> university. He was vilified and ridiculed for years and years. >> Finally, long after, he won a Nobel prize. >> >> >> You mean like Einstein got kicked out of university? No, because his >> revolutionary ideas got him kicked *into* university. >> >> >> You mean like Planck's ideas got him kicked out of university? No, because >> they named one after him. >> >> >> etc. >> >> >> You can't just make shit up to please your audience. >> >> >> I'd like to know of a professor who got kicked out of university for a >> revolutionary idea. At least one that turned out to be right, and didn't >> have religious objectors. >> >> >> Because, contrary to your claim, Arrhenius does not provide an example. I >> admit, my source does not go beyond wikipedia, but according to it, his >> controversial ideas were presented in his doctoral thesis, so he didn't have >> a position to be kicked out of. And while there were local skeptics, his >> degree was granted, if only as 3rd class. Nevertheless, when the >> dissertation was sent to other European scholars, they came to Sweden trying >> to recruit him. Doesn't really sound much like cold fusion, does it? >> >> >> The Swedish Academy then awarded him a grant to study with the likes of >> Boltzmann and van 't Hoff. That doesn't sound like years and years of >> vilification does it? A few years after his graduation, he was *given* an >> appointment at the Stockholm university, and was a full professor/chair >> (rector) about a decade after his PhD. That doesn't sound much like >> ridicule, does it? >> >> >> It did take almost 20 years to recognize his work with a Nobel prize, but >> maybe the fact that the prize was not initiated until about 17 years after >> had something to do with that. He got the 3rd one in chemistry. He was on >> the Nobel committee from the beginning until his death, and it seems he was >> not a particularly nice guy himself, arranging awards for his friends, and >> attempting to deny them to his enemies. He also got involved in racial >> biology (eugenics) later in his life. >> >> That happens so often I am astounded anyone believes the myth that >> scientists welcome new ideas. >> >> >> Well, you would not be astounded if you actually paid attention to history, >> instead of twisting it to rationalize your fervent belief in cold fusion. >> Right about the same time as the CF announcement, high temperature >> superconductivity was discovered, and the Nobel prize was awarded -- now get >> this -- one year later. The discovery had no theory to support it, was >> unexpected, and yet the discoverers were not dismissed from their positions. >> Amazing, isn't it. Of course, most Nobel prizes (including Einstein's) take >> much longer, because it usually takes time for the importance to become >> manifest, but new discoveries are always celebrated in science, by >> scientists. >> >> >> As I've said before, the most revolutionary ideas in science in centuries, >> relativity and QM, were accepted almost as quickly as they could be >> developed. Because they fit the evidence so perfectly. >> >> >> Just about every evaluation of merit in science, from granting of degrees, >> to awarding academic or industrial positions, to granting awards, to giving >> funding, to accepting manuscripts for publication, to any degree of fame and >> glory, has as its first criterion: >> >> >> *** novelty ***. >> >> >> >> What scientists fear is not new ideas (they crave them), but wrong ideas. >> Scientists are skeptical; they have to be. Skepticism is a critical filter >> in guiding research. Without it, they would simply flounder around, like, >> well, like cold fusion researchers. >> >> >> Of course, that sometimes leads to rejecting good ideas, and finding the >> right balance is the most important quality a scientist can strive for. >> Linus Pauling was clever enough to win 2 Nobel prizes, and yet he ridiculed >> quasi-crystals. At the other end is perhaps Josephson, who got a Nobel prize >> for work done as a graduate student, when skeptical guidance was still >> provided by others. On his own, his lack of skepticism has led him to dabble >> in the paranormal, and to a life's work wholly unworthy of his brilliant >> beginning. >> >> >> >> >> After the press conference, Dr. Caldwell came up to us and said, >> "Well, when my grandfather proposed electrolytic disassociation, >> he was dismissed from the University. At least that won’t happen >> to you." I said to her, “But you are entirely mistaken. We shall >> be dismissed as well." >> >> >> >> Their ideas were dismissed, but they were not fired from academic positions. >> Fleischmann was already retired, and continued to list his affiliation with >> Southampton until at least 1994. Pons was tenured, and left voluntarily for >> greener pastures and more money in France. Even so, he also listed his >> affiliation with Utah for several years after he left. >> >> >
