I plead guilty to not looking at the article. But the phrase
"mimicking science" so turned me off that I couldn't resist the cheap
shot. My perhaps misdirected arrows at Martin's article aside, I
still think that my assessment of the cold fusion scenario is
accurate. That had nothing to do with Martin's article. I see CF as
classic pathological science, as described by Langmuir (reprinted in
Physics Today, October 1939, p. 36). I cannot say for certain that CF
isn't real. I suspect nobody can. But I would guess, based on the
number of the characteristics of pathological science it has
exhibited, the odds against it are pretty long, and that was the main
thrust of my rant. The quotation from martin's article that Ludwik
posted seemed cut directly from that mold. Yes, I probably should
have looked at the article, but I was using a few spare minutes I had
while waiting for a long printing job to complete, and didn't feel
like taking on a major research operation, just in venting some
spleen. If I have spattered some unjustified blood on Martin, I
apologize.
Never ask someone what computer they use. If they use a Mac, they
will tell you. If not, why embarrass them?
--Douglas Adams
******************************************************