[ExI] Cold fusion: some new results.

[John K Clark]

Benjamin Goertzel

> your bet pertains to has more to do with
> sociology as with physics.

Yes I know, ALL the editors at ALL the top Physics journals on planet Earth
are ALL corrupt and ALL refuse to publish a wonderful and historic
scientific paper that will live for eternity. Every fucking single one of
them! If you believe that then there's this bridge I'd like to sell you.

> I don't accept those journals as ultimate arbiters of truth.

I don't accept them are the ULTIMATE arbiters of truth either, but I do
maintain they are FAR better arbiters of the truth than some jackass posting
crap on the net, or a nincompoop publishing some nonsense in a journal
nobody ever heard of.

> I will bet you $100 that one of those three journals publishes an article
> favorable to cold fusion

I made a real bet, I actually expected to get paid or have to pay up, you
did not. I actually considered my finances and thought about how to cover my
bet if more than expected expect took my bet and I was proven unrepentantly
to be wrong. In my mind I was (and still am) willing to pay up regardless of
what it costs if I am proven wrong. I don't believe that thought ever
crossed your brain.

And In 15 years it is likely that one or both of us will be dead, certainly
we will have lost track of each other and will not know how to collect. And
15 years is one hell of a long time, even assuming no breakthroughs are made
computers will be at least 2000 times as powerful as they are now; why is
cold fusion such a retard?

It's obvious you don't really want to make a real bet. I DO! If you want to
call in the lawyers and make it legally binding that's fine by me. And why
the hell should it take 15 years?! They said the results were "easily
reproduced.

 John K Clark