EPTRossi's energy catalyzer - Page 19
| Forum Index > General Forum |
|
FallDownMarigold
United States3710 Posts
| ||
|
radscorpion9
Canada2252 Posts
On October 30 2011 02:06 FallDownMarigold wrote: Right, which I addressed by noting the issue where he isn't able to show his methods (yet) due to patent concerns. Certain people in this thread have brought up arguments against the very idea of "free energy" in a dogmatic way, thus my story and the subsequent examples provided by the next poster are perfectly fitting in this thread, directed at specific people. I'm actually quite thankful you posted that...I always wondered whether the cherished peer-reviewed scientific method worked as simply and elegantly as some scientists like Richard Dawkins led me to believe, and that things are as black and white as either having evidence or not - where those that are deemed crackpots are the ones who simply don't have the evidence. I was always concerned that scientists could actually be fallible to the same dogmatic beliefs as everyone else, even with all the safeguards they work with, and that this real issue of elitism was being ignored. Its kind of a relief to learn that there are lots of incidents like what you described, that can clearly show that it is an issue people should watch out for. | ||
|
NicolBolas
United States1388 Posts
On October 29 2011 23:22 FallDownMarigold wrote: Well known to science-enthusiasts, but not to others :-D Also, the point is not quite "sometimes scientists have hard times 'accepting' new theories". It's a little bit more severe than that -- it's that sometimes an entire field is vastly fettered by old-standing dogma. You say that like it's a bad thing. You can cite many circumstances where inaccurate science was able to prevail for some time against newer accurate science that contradicted it. But what about all those times where dogma protected the establishment from nonsense? Oh, nobody records that, because there's no point to it. It makes science look good, and nobody want to do that. Plus, science does eventually get it right. Scientists are conservative by nature and by training; it is what allows them to keep nonsense out. But if some idea is right, it will eventually become accepted. It may take a few decades, but they do get it right eventually; that's the scientific method in practice by human beings. I would much rather have overly skeptical scientists than overly accepting ones. | ||
|
BottleAbuser
Korea (South)1888 Posts
Look at this guy. "Hey I have a black box that makes energy but I won't let you see it and I'll throw in big words like 'cold fusion' and 'mystery catalyst.'" Compare with these guys: "Hey we think we measured FTL particles, and here's why we're sure our measurement wasn't wrong, can anyone else figure out what the error is? Would be cool if we're not, but we'd have to reasonably explain the results and we can't seem to." Oh, and for the reason I'm checking in... what happened? The 1MW plant demonstrated .5MW? Who was looking? I'm hearing stuff like "journalists" but never get any names and never see any published newspaper articles from people who actually attended the event. I will admit I haven't been looking particularly hard, but hey it's up to them to get my attention if they got something this big. | ||
|
Integra
Sweden5626 Posts
On October 30 2011 02:35 BottleAbuser wrote: Oh, shut up already about whether or not its okay to be so skeptical. Look at this guy. "Hey I have a black box that makes energy but I won't let you see it and I'll throw in big words like 'cold fusion' and 'mystery catalyst.'" Compare with these guys: "Hey we think we measured FTL particles, and here's why we're sure our measurement wasn't wrong, can anyone else figure out what the error is? Would be cool if we're not, but we'd have to reasonably explain the results and we can't seem to." Oh, and for the reason I'm checking in... what happened? The 1MW plant demonstrated .5MW? Who was looking? I'm hearing stuff like "journalists" but never get any names and never see any published newspaper articles from people who actually attended the event. I will admit I haven't been looking particularly hard, but hey it's up to them to get my attention if they got something this big. This entire thread actually reminds of the web site http://theflatearthsociety.org/ | ||
|
hypercube
Hungary2735 Posts
On October 30 2011 02:06 FallDownMarigold wrote: Right, which I addressed by noting the issue where he isn't able to show his methods (yet) due to patent concerns. Certain people in this thread have brought up arguments against the very idea of "free energy" in a dogmatic way, thus my story and the subsequent examples provided by the next poster are perfectly fitting in this thread, directed at specific people. His reasons are irrelevant, the lack of any solid verifiable evidence makes it impossible to rule out both a scam and a real, working device. Sure, if I say I have a big black box that produces energy in an unspecified way then it's dogmatic to say that's impossible. Worse: it's probably outright wrong. But the fact that some people will make this mistake doesn't make it any more likely that I'm telling the truth. BTW, supporters commit the same error when they say it's impossible he's somehow cheating. Or that the fact that no one managed to tell exactly how he's cheating proves that the device works. | ||
|
ThaZenith
Canada3116 Posts
On October 30 2011 02:35 BottleAbuser wrote: Oh, shut up already about whether or not its okay to be so skeptical. Look at this guy. "Hey I have a black box that makes energy but I won't let you see it and I'll throw in big words like 'cold fusion' and 'mystery catalyst.'" Compare with these guys: "Hey we think we measured FTL particles, and here's why we're sure our measurement wasn't wrong, can anyone else figure out what the error is? Would be cool if we're not, but we'd have to reasonably explain the results and we can't seem to." Oh, and for the reason I'm checking in... what happened? The 1MW plant demonstrated .5MW? Who was looking? I'm hearing stuff like "journalists" but never get any names and never see any published newspaper articles from people who actually attended the event. I will admit I haven't been looking particularly hard, but hey it's up to them to get my attention if they got something this big. Compare with who? People who's research can't result in massive financial gain? Rossi isn't acting as a scientist, he's acting as an entrepreneur, so none of that matters at all. And I've seen 4-5 articles about the test on different new sites already. If you aren't looking for articles, don't whine about not seeing any. | ||
|
Traeon
Austria366 Posts
The 1MW plant demonstrated .5MW? If real, you're like a guy saying that the moon landing was disappointing because only one instead of two astronauts actually walked on the surface... | ||
|
Soleron
United Kingdom1324 Posts
And I've seen 4-5 articles about the test on different new sites already. If you aren't looking for articles, don't whine about not seeing any. Any news sites that existed before this year? How about ones that also have a paper circulation? | ||
|
HwangjaeTerran
Finland5967 Posts
On October 30 2011 06:14 Traeon wrote: If real, you're like a guy saying that the moon landing was disappointing because only one instead of two astronauts actually walked on the surface... Put in context of his post I don't think that's what he meant. However, if he really meant it like that then it should be made clear that from the customers request the plant was run without any input power after the startup which is more unstable so they "scaled" it down to keep components from overheating uncontrollably. Don't ask me why the customer wanted the test to be run without any input power. | ||
|
HwangjaeTerran
Finland5967 Posts
On October 30 2011 06:23 Soleron wrote: Any news sites that existed before this year? How about ones that also have a paper circulation? NyTeknik is Swedens biggest technology focused newspaper. | ||
|
koreasilver
9109 Posts
| ||
|
jdseemoreglass
United States3773 Posts
On October 30 2011 06:43 koreasilver wrote: Man, this has dragged on for so long without any evidence. lol I was just thinking.... I've been popping into this thread periodically for months now and I feel like not a fucking thing has changed. I'm still sitting here waiting for answers. I least I don't have my hopes up like these people ^ | ||
|
Integra
Sweden5626 Posts
On October 30 2011 06:35 HwangjaeTerran wrote: NyTeknik is Swedens biggest technology focused newspaper. It is also a tabloid that writes about anything, even rumors. They report whatever is deemed as sensational or that attracts the most hits. They are in no way qualified to determine if Cold fusion is real or not. On October 30 2011 06:09 ThaZenith wrote: And I've seen 4-5 articles about the test on different new sites already. If you aren't looking for articles, don't whine about not seeing any. Doesn't that make you just a little curious? Some guy just created cold fusion and the only people that reports it are tabloids and general media who has no fucking clue about this. | ||
|
Mortality
United States4790 Posts
| ||
|
koreasilver
9109 Posts
On October 30 2011 07:36 jdseemoreglass wrote: lol I was just thinking.... I've been popping into this thread periodically for months now and I feel like not a fucking thing has changed. I'm still sitting here waiting for answers. I least I don't have my hopes up like these people ^ It just seems like the prudent thing to do is just to assume it's a hoax, since there has been nothing to make us feel otherwise, until some real evidence is given. | ||
|
strongandbig
United States4858 Posts
| ||
|
This is Aru
United States91 Posts
| ||
|
ThaZenith
Canada3116 Posts
On October 30 2011 08:09 Integra wrote: Doesn't that make you just a little curious? Some guy just created cold fusion and the only people that reports it are tabloids and general media who has no fucking clue about this. Not really. Until it's been proven no big media sources will report about it. And that won't happen until he's sure he'll get his money's worth. I'm waiting for proof like anyone else. I don't lose anything from following the story, so I don't see why everyone cares so much about who's willing to be optimistic or not. | ||
|
Integra
Sweden5626 Posts
On October 30 2011 10:18 ThaZenith wrote: Not really. Until it's been proven no big media sources will report about it. And that won't happen until he's sure he'll get his money's worth. I'm waiting for proof like anyone else. I don't lose anything from following the story, so I don't see why everyone cares so much about who's willing to be optimistic or not. yea, I'm in the same boat, have a cold fusion reactor myself but to afraid to show it off since someone might steal it. People will have to pay me THEN I'll prove it actually works. | ||
| ||
