Alain, Facebook took off a the black hole of social media, not because it was the first or the best but because its core was Harvard's social network.
QED On Thu, Jan 16, 2014 at 1:45 AM, Alain Sepeda <[email protected]>wrote: > Just a question to people who watched the controversy, especially with > lewis. > > Beaudette says that there was only 4 critics, all rebutted, especially > lewis critics which was just of his incompetence in calorimetry, added to > huge ego and lack of ethic. > > being attorney of the devil, do you confirm that position really? > is there any solid critic on some calorimetry that is still open? was > there at least one that survived some time ? that appeared recently (CCS > for example - is it closed) > > what is shocking me is that i see no serious critics reported by skeptics, > and for example the Pomp&Eriksson critics agains Levi&al/Enforsk/E-cat, was > really pathetic for professional scientists... > I'm shocked to see that official critics ignore many cross checking done, > and ignore even the error value they claim, compared to the observation. > > On Levi&al even critics on blog were better informed and more realist than > this pretended Wikipedia-stamped paper. > > Beaudette says that no critics was really published, or else was quickly > rebutted? > > It seems skeptics pretend to be "rigorous" but they looks less strict on > reasoning and evidences than some conspiracy theory fans. amazing. > > I'm just trying to find opposite vision, because it looks so weird. > > if confirmed this is more generally a question on how science can call in > delusion and groupthink, incompetent, dishonest, anti-scientific, loose and > unaware of it. > > > > 2014/1/16 Foks0904 . <[email protected]> > > Not really because I would be rich, old, and living in an academic bubble >> where I would be shielded from accountability by other like-minded ladder >> climbers. Also, most people in the United States of Amnesia don't even >> remember who the hell I am; they just remember the residual superficial >> mythology that Cold Fusion is "pathological science". That's why its on >> those of us who are aware to constantly point out the jack-assery of >> two-faced opportunists like Lewis. >> >> Regards, >> John >> >> >> On Wed, Jan 15, 2014 at 9:12 PM, James Bowery <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> Wouldn't you be getting nervous about now if you were Nathan Lewis? >>> >>> >>> On Wed, Jan 15, 2014 at 7:38 PM, Foks0904 . <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> Wow the producers of BigThink are really scraping the bottom of the >>>> barrel. I remember him being much more articulate and less nervous looking. >>>> >>>> >>>> On Wed, Jan 15, 2014 at 8:19 PM, James Bowery <[email protected]>wrote: >>>> >>>>> Erratum: He said "hundred" not "thousand". I guess the 900 he left >>>>> off were cold fusion. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Wed, Jan 15, 2014 at 7:15 PM, James Bowery <[email protected]>wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=55KoDmTxaUI#t=1176 >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> >> >
