Comment all you like. Your comments are simply uninformed.
"It was YOUR choice to bring the insulting, flame-baiting, editorializing source, which was sure to rile many, due to past FRAUDS like Rossi being previously held up as some sort of cutting-edge leader, with those who doubted sneered at. Tone down the sneer component, and things will flow smoother.
Sorry, but there is NO EVIDENCE that Rossi's work in LENR is fraudulent. As to any other activities, the information from different sources is contradictory. That is the state of the facts on Rossi.
"Though you, yourself have taken effort towards reasonableness all along, there has always been the sneer, also, with much of it not fully justified. How many were insulted for insulting Rossi? Think that one over.
In every case, the insults were begun by others. I am simply responding in kind.
"The whole field hasn't quite gotten over Fleischmann and Pons, in the public eye. A history of almost ran claims, not quite cutting the mustard, has obscured efforts which have made progress in the field, such as the Mitsubishi work will or could, as soon as it is more widely duplicated."
No, the whole field hasn't gotten over the FRAUD perpetrated by the pathological skeptics (virtually all physicists) who are entrenched in the "science heirarchy", and have and have used their political clout to stifle LERN research. This interference is WELL documented.
Pons and Fleischman's work has been duplicated repeatedly by qualified researchers at qualified institutions. That you believe otherwise simply shows you haven't studied the facts sufficiently. In the peer-reviewed literature, their work has NOT been "falsified" by their critics. Said critics "have" succeeded in the political world.
"I'm asking you to take the starch out of the self-justifying sneer, the oft repeated "you haven't looked into it"."
Unfortunately, that happens to be the state of things.
"Bring the good information. Stick with that. Perhaps logically explain it, or break it down in ways that can be recognized beyond the possibly dubious."
I've done that REPEATEDLY, and in fact in every thread, I have recommended things to study. I started out recommending the LENR/CANR database, but evidently that is just "too much information" for a lot of people, so I have recommended Ed Storms book as well as his summaries (which are available on-line, FOR FREE). Apparently, even THAT is too much information, so I have recommended Beaudette's book. If you can't handle that level of information the Beaudette presents, then there is no use of my trying further.
"Sending others off on expeditions is ridiculous."
Sorry, but I don't have the time to hold the hands of the ignorant and spoon-feed them tid-bits of information. I'm much too busy doing real hard science, and have very limited time for commentary on FR. I spend too much time here as it is. If that upsets you, then I'm very sorry, but "ich kann nichts anders".
Drop the personal attack approach, quit taking it personal yourself if somebody comments negatively, and much conflict will be avoided. But what do you do? You brought insult, right out of the gate...for what reason...to cover the embarrassment that is Rossi? LOL right at you Mr. scientist. ROTFLMAO.
Simply solution. Go with what some of your own sources say concerning Rossi (sorry, lost the link) and distance yourself from that guy, even if it may take admitting to yourself the possibility of having had otherwise justifiable hopes misplaced in that person's work.
baloney. from the article YOU bring, is the insulting;
With the article still touting Rossi. Appearing to many here as some kind of getting back at, some self-justification pay-back towards previous critics you've crossed swords with. Deliberate insult, stirring the pot, while you act innocent. Pretend all you like. I know what I see. It's plain as day.