I have started this journal of LENR’s confrontations external but internal too.
It is a first issue and today I was under a continuous bombardment of information, evaluation and selection were difficult. Some points anyway:
I have closed my paper of yesterday with the word enemy. For those who believe in the value of the Rossi Report- it is good to know who is the smartest enemy- a good professional, not illiterate in technology- not only perfidious. My Aussie-NZ friend Doug Marker has found him:
It seems to me that the newest Pied Piper is now the blogger who posts as 'popeye' (Independent ecat news) who seems to be able to logically argue against anyone who shows interest in the possibility of LENR or HENI. Popeye is incredibly seductive with his endless posts of logical argument and his brilliant technique for insulting anyone who disagrees with any POV he posts. He annihilates most pro LENR / HENi folk, very well. He captures loads of followers. I have found that “popeye ‘is actually our old Joshua Cude. Class over all the other paper tigers, he has a very long list of the potential weaknesses of the Report on that blog...
The number and intensity of negative opinions about the report is still increasing, I think it is time for a good comprehensive FAQ;
Mike McKubre’s bright Infinite Energy paper is excellent, scientifically, technologically and diplomatically- http://www.e-catworld.com/2014/10/13/michael-mckubre-reviews-the-e-cat-report/
Mike was faster than me to call the attention of the testers to a basic error of the Report: "One experimental result equates to zero experimental results. Nothing in science can be known without repetition."
It was a shock for me to see how the testers were forced to put all their nickel eggs in a single alumina basket. It is obvious the Professors are not reading my blog, so they and their supporters have ignored the vital ‘1 = 0 Rule”. See please http://egooutpeters.blogspot.ro/2013/05/the-1-0-rule-generalized.html skip the cultural ballast- without applying this rule you will not survive in any serious research activity.
I have learned it from blunders and failures (preponderantly my own) in actual technological research.
I think that performing three consecutive & parallel experiments in different conditions - according to some logic and plan would have been increased the performance three times, at only 10% increased effort, 60% increased expenses and 10 times more muzzles put to the Rossi’s detractors.
Consider please this a pilot issue of the LENR Confront Journal.