Propeller Head Plaza

Technical and scientific discussion of amps, cables and other topics.

Use this form to submit comments directly to the Asylum moderators for this forum. We're particularly interested in truly outstanding posts that might be added to our FAQs.
You may also use this form to provide feedback or to call attention to messages that may be in violation of our content rules.

You must login to use this feature.

Inmate Login

By default, logging in will set a session cookie that disappears when you close your browser. Clicking on the 'Remember my Moniker & Password' below will cause a permanent 'Login Cookie' to be set.

Moniker/Username: The Name that you picked or by default, your email. Forgot Moniker?	Examples "Rapper", "Bob W", "joe@aol.com".
Password:	Forgot Password?
	Remember my Moniker & Password ( What's this?)

If you don't have an Asylum Account, you can create one by clicking Here.

Our privacy policy can be reviewed by clicking Here.

Inmate Comments

From:
Your Email:
Subject:

Message Comments

Original Message

Re: Hi John

Posted by jneutron on August 25, 2003 at 21:34:29:
""Fleishman and Pons are still working scientists""JC
Ah, yes...but would you buy a used car from them...especially if they claimed it got 54 million miles to the gallon (of water?).
Imagine the response from the rest of the scientific community if they said "gee, now we really have cold fusion...trust us"
How many centuries do you think it would take before another paper they write on cold fusion would even get looked at, nevermind published??
John...you forgot Politnekov...he claims that he has discovered antigravity. Something called a politnekov gravity shield..a spinning disk of superconducting material that seems to reduce the weight of any object suspended above the spinning disk by two percent..Of course, in the five or ten years since he claimed it, scientists from around the world have been unable to produce even a hint of the effect he said he measured..So, who do we believe...All the other scientists from around the world, with their millions of dollars of re-testing the setup politnekov published(NASA included, with 1.5 million)....or politnekov??? Why don't you invest some money in the scheme, John???Surely you trust he has discovered antigravity??
How much money do you have invested in cold fusion there John???
What about free energy John...That guy had a PhD...Did you get in on the ground floor???
""Anyone see a pattern here""JC
They should, John...
The pattern is: it is not very smart to believe everything that is told to you by someone who is, or claims to be a scientist, physicist, engineer, designer, doctor, professor, lawyer, used car salesman, (name the profession there John) without so much as a questioning glance???
More of the pattern: anyone who claims that e/m field theory is as they say in an article printed for a select readership, with the intent of that article clearly stated within (let's play for the gallery), when half the theory and premises and conclusions are incorrectly pulled from various subsections of e/m theory...should be looked on with reservation...as some of the worlds smartest e/m field theorists laugh at the mis-steps. I notice you have never answered any of the questions I posed of the article..of course, you can't, can you..
And even more of the pattern: Anyone who claims that they have 30 years of experience, so their word is gospel....regardless of the foolishness of their attitude, or the ridiculous dismissal of nobel prize winning theory....should be considered suspect. The fact that you swerve the dialogue to "you're being mean to me" every time it gets too technical is not lost to all here.
And more: When someone claims to have measured an effect, then makes money selling you something that avoids that effect, and yet nobody in the entire friggen world has been able to either duplicate or scientifically support their claims....they should be considered suspect.
Let's talk pattern here John...
Every time, without exception, that I have raised a technical point or discussion of a technical nature with you, you run and hide, yelling over your back "Boo hoo, you are being mean to me, to hawksford, to van de hull, to Jon," That's the third time you've invoked that in this thread alone..
Be a grownup, John..Either discuss the technical issues, or state the obvious fact that you don't understand them. Cmon, now, John..You can do it...everybody sees what's going on here..
It's not a crime to not know there, John..Everybody does it at one time or another..
At least Peter is engaging the technical side of what I talk about..I'm not sure if he is correct that the energy levels are significant for what I've been saying, but he's not running away like you are.. He may prove me wrong..and that's OK. But he's certainly discussing it, which is what I was hoping for.
You...You seem to be a waste of a moniker..I have remained open to the possibility that what people tell me about you is simply slanted and biased...but you do nothing to prove them wrong.
Hope you re-discover the technical side of the world, John. It would be nice to see you not turn tail and hide when technical details show up.
Cheers, John