Alain Sepeda <[email protected]> wrote: Ok, so nothing official . . . >
It is official. All of the major journals have a clear policy of rejecting cold fusion papers out of hand. All mass media newspapers and magazines, except CBS and Forbes, have made it their policy to publish attacks on cold fusion researchers without allowing a defense by the accused. > . . . but clear behavioral evidence of a short clear policy. > The policy was stated by the editors of Nature and others. In 1990 they called for "unrestrained mockery, even a little unqualified vituperation." They could not have said it more clearly than that! > A conspiracy ? > No, just a consensus of opinion. It is not as if the editors from the Scientific American, Nature and the Washington Post secretly met together and planned this. That would be a conspiracy. > by the way, remind me to call for a Nuremberg trial on Cold Fusion. Some > people have to be fired. > No laws have been broken, so there can be no trial. If cold fusion ever succeeds I expect the people who led the attacks will say they were for it all along. They will take credit, and they will be rewarded. That is the usual pattern of history. After the Three Mile Island disaster, the NRL engineer who repeated warned it would happened was forced out. The upper managers who first ignored him and then ordered him to shut up were promoted and given a cash reward. - Jed
