Quote:
Originally Posted by David Bailey  Chris,
Have you ever wondered why Brian Josephson is so deeply interested in these questions?
Also, people feel intense reluctance to admit their enterest/belief in ? because that can damage their careers. In just the same way, for several years after the cold fusion announcement, scientists were very reluctant to work in that area, even though it now seems that some nuclear reactions do go on in those palladium electrodes.
David |
Pons and Fleischmann illustrate my point perfectly. They are typical examples of scientists that have a strong desire to make ground breaking discoveries that will revolutionise the world. This is the norm. Scientists don't want to be sheeple.
For the most part scientsist are very careful to avoid self delusion. Before announcing a radical discovery they will spend a lot of time checking every possible source of error. With any luck colleagues will help. In the normal course of science peer-reviewers will point out any shortcomings when the paper is submitted to a journal. Pons and Fleischmann were foolish enough to announce their discovery at a press conference.
I don't think there are any scientists in the skeptic or believer camps who is still claiming that Pons and Fleischmann's experiments were anything other than fatally flawed.
Ther might be a few people still chasing anomalies in electrochemical experiments but the case for cold-fusion is still essentially non-existent.
The strength of some people's belief in cold-fusion is completely out of proportion to the evidence. Some of them like Brian Josephson seem to be contrary for the sake of being contrary. He defends homeopathy!
Kary Mullis, another Nobel prize winner contrarian, believes in astrology, the Urantia book and talking glow in the dark racoons, doesnt believe that HIV causes AIDS or that CFCs cuased ozone depletion.