Whores and Nuclear Science and Work Force Reducition

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the controversial topic of cold fusion, its perception within the scientific community, and the implications of labeling and categorization in scientific discourse. Participants explore the historical context of cold fusion, its dismissal by mainstream science, and the challenges faced by those advocating for its study. The conversation also touches on broader themes of workforce reduction and societal labeling.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Meta-discussion

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants express concern over the negative labeling and categorization of cold fusion, suggesting that it has been unfairly dismissed and that advocates are driven into hiding.
  • Others argue that there are valid reasons for the dismissal of cold fusion as nonsense, implying that it does not meet the standards of mainstream science.
  • A participant questions the rationale behind the dismissal of cold fusion, seeking clarification on the reasons for its rejection by the scientific community.
  • One participant notes that discussions about cold fusion are generally not welcome in most forums due to its classification as non-mainstream science.
  • Another participant humorously suggests that if cold fusion were viable, one could become extremely wealthy by commercializing it.
  • A later reply mentions that the thread was previously deleted and expresses uncertainty about its future availability, indicating a lack of resolution on the topic.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on the validity of cold fusion, with some defending its exploration while others firmly reject it as unscientific. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the appropriateness of discussing cold fusion within the forum.

Contextual Notes

There are references to the historical context of cold fusion and its categorization, but the discussion does not resolve the underlying assumptions about its scientific validity or the implications of labeling in scientific inquiry.

Phrak
Messages
4,266
Reaction score
7
A peer reviewed article appears.

Evaluations, ideas and proposal upon new energy sources

by Prof. Christos Stremmenos*

BACKGROUND
The hostile attitude which cold fusion has been confronted with since 1989, but even long before, shown also by the bibliography related to the scientific papers of Focardi and Rossi, eventually led to general disinterest and oblivion of this subject. After several years of apparent inaction, the [...]
​

If I lose my job I am Fired. There is a need among those that do the firing to obscure what they do. Those who have been fired were told that they were Layed Off. Then it was renamed to Downsizing, disassociating the action from the victim. Very clever, and giving the Firee some time to operate under a cloak of confusion. This became too well understood. So then it was called Work Force Reduction. Now, by all the cutting edge departments of human resources[sic], it is called ---bleh, something else that skips my mind, but still very clever. Did I get all this right, or leave any out?

Hookers have their tag changed every few score years or so, apparently after each resurgent attack, replacing the previous euphemism with the next.

In no particular sequence: Paramor, Whore, Lady of the night... I'm sure you could all add to the long historical list. That's the best I could come up with at the spur of the moment without an internet search.

The witch hunters among us seem to obtain a special thrill in hunting them down. (Why?) In general, by those that are "hunted" I mean any category of folks who feel the need to change their categorical tag to avoid torches and pitchforks.

In particular, I refer to the locked Cold Fusion Thread on PF forum.

The Whores of Cold Fusion have renamed themselves. They now experiment with "LENR" (Low Energy Nuclear Reactions). They hide behind 4 letters and are easily spooked and driven into hiding.

I think the Torches and Pitchforks on PF need better supervision, seemingly as happy, given the opportunity, to kill off honest inquiry as dishonest, only motivated to make the next kill or castrate the next student that walks through the PF doors with misconceptions.

Comments, corrections, or attacks?
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
The witch hunters among us seem to obtain a special thrill in hunting them down. (Why?) In general, by those that are "hunted" I mean any category of folks who feel the need to change their categorical tag to avoid torches and pitchforks.

Because usually there is a reason they are dismissed as nonsense. And more stuff based on that is not welcome, so many people want to keep them out of serious discussion in science.
 
Drakkith said:
Because usually there is a reason they are dismissed as nonsense. And more stuff based on that is not welcome, so many people want to keep them out of serious discussion in science.

Good. What is the reason in this case?
 
Phrak said:
Good. What is the reason in this case?

The case with Cold Fusion is that it isn't mainstream science and therefore is against PF rules to discuss on most of the forum. That and the fact that Cold Fusion has already been looked into and proven false, so it's not real physics. That's all. You could try posting under Debunking and Skeptecism instead of the main forums.
 
Drakkith said:
You could try posting under Debunking and Skeptecism instead of the main forums.

No, please don't do that.
 
berkeman said:
No, please don't do that.

Or not. :smile:

If you already had one thread locked, I don't advice opening another one. I'm sure there are other threads about that subject already.
 
If you really believe cold fusion works, please go build a reactor and start selling it. You will become richer than Bill Gates in no time, as well as doing the world a huge service.
 
This thread was originally deleted and somehow got accidently restored. I'm locking for now as notice that it may disappear shortly and didn't want members to be confused.