Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 13:37, 16 April 2004

This article is a selected entry at MediaWiki:March 23 selected anniversaries (may be in HTML comment)

phenomenon

Cold fusion happens. It's actually a rather common phenomenon. The U.S. Department of energy 'debunks' claims of cold fusion because they're lobbied (well, more like controlled) by corrupt corporations like Halliburton and Enron that are terrified of the prospect of free energy, as it would destroy their businesses. Asshole corporations like this are behind our current (completely illegitimate) 'energy crisis', and the subsequent wars that have occured in the Middle East. These wars continue because of a pact between the corrupt monarchies of Great Britain and Saudi Arabia, who just so happen to be the wealthiest Royal Families on Earth, if not the wealthiest people on Earth, period... Khranus

That's nice. Can you cite a source for this information? -- Pakaran 02:14, 11 Nov 2003 (UTC)

I'd like to know why the obsession with 'cited sources' continues despite the fact that you have the most extensive and instantaneously accessible library in existence right at your fingertips. I prefer to let the individual find their own answers. Search: Google Khranus

Um, Khranus, do you happen to have any connections to Lyndon LaRouche? RickK 03:07, 11 Nov 2003 (UTC)

Actually, I have no idea who that is... Khranus

Khranus - I wonder how you think the burden is on ME to justify questioning YOUR views that the British royal family is covering up cold fusion? Wasn't it Sagen who said that extraordinary claims demand extraordinary evidence? -- Pakaran 03:16, 11 Nov 2003 (UTC)

Did I ever say it was the British Royal Family directly? It seems to me that you're the one oversimplifying. It's the U.S. Department of Energy that's covering up Cold Fusion, under the direction of oil companies that just so happen to have financial ties to the Royal Family. I'm not seeing how this is in any way 'extraordinary'... Khranus

Shouldn't it be rather obvious that, in the world today, money is power? Therefore how is it in any way inconceivable that the wealthiest people on earth are capable of manipulating a government organisation? They certainly manipulate the media, so why not scientific 'data'? Khranus

There ar far too many scientists in far too many different universities and research institutes, to be manipulated in this way. If cold fusion were to work why should a scientist shut up about it because Eron want's them too ? The experiments concerned are not difficult,when the claims first came out lots of scientist tried to replicate the experiments and couldn't. How could they all be "got to" in the way you imply ? Theresa knott 09:58, 11 Nov 2003 (UTC)

It's very simple. For the vast majority, simple indoctrination and shame are used to prevent them from making any 'insane' claims, or even investigations into what is outside the realm of accepted 'science'. For those few that remain independant in thought, more brutal measures are used--such as literal threats. Drug companies are somewhat notorious for doing this among doctors who have experienced this barbaric treatment. For instance, my father was developing a cure for diabetes during the 1980's, and received an anonymous call threatening his life if he continued his research. The reason for such threats is obvious: to prevent any new technologies from spoiling the business of old, monopolistic corporations. Dr. Timothy Leary experienced such threats on several occasions, as did many other psychiatrists studying the positive effects of LSD, as it, being a cure rather than a treatment, was dangerous to the established market of less effective psychoactives... To quote Robert Anton Wilson:

"A lot of psychologists I have known over the years agreed with Leary - they acknowledged in private that LSD was an incredibly valuable tool. But these same psychologists backed off as the heat from the government increased, until they all became as silent as moonlight on a tombstone. And Tim was still out there with his angry Irish temper, denouncing the government and fighting on alone.

"I don't want to discount that there are people whose lives have been destroyed by drugs, but are they the result of Timothy's research or or the result of government policies? Leary's research was dosed down, and the media stopped quoting him a long time ago. Most people don't even understand what Leary's opinions were or what it was he was trying to communicate. By contrast, the government's policies have been carried out for 30 years, and now we have a major drug disaster in this country. Nobody, of course, thinks it's the government's fault - they think it's Leary's for trying to prevent it, for trying to have scientific controls over the thing. He deserves a better legacy than that."

- Robert Anton Wilson

Honestly, if you can't conceive how such manipulation is possible, especially today, you have some serious research to do. Please, don't be silly--don't deny the obvious merely because you haven't been force-fed it by some offical 'source'. Khranus

So let me get this straight- your father recieving an alleged death threat from drug companies, means that you can say whatever rubbish you like on this encylopedia? You don't need to cite any sources because a worldwide government conspiricy covers everything up. Wow can anyone play that game? I quite fancy writing that dolphins are aliens from outerspace sent here by the the dolphaniorons to study humans. The royal family knows about this but covers it up because they love tuna.

Let's get real. If you can't back up what you're saying with hard evidence it has no place here. Try Usenet instead. Theresa knott 11:01, 11 Nov 2003 (UTC)

external links

I added external links from the website of a recent CBC radio program on cold fusion. The program itself is available in MP3 and OGG at http://www.radio.cbc.ca/programs/quirks/archives/03-04/dec13.html Edmilne 21:05, Dec 15, 2003 (UTC)

cuts?

I cut the extra links to infinite energy, the wired article - what if cold fusion is real, cold fusion magazine, and the cbc program. This list of links should remain NPOV and be closer to what mainstream science believes to be an encyclopedia article - rather than copious links to what if media coverage. The lenr link represents infinite energy and cold fusion times well (it is written by some of the same people). The included media link is in reference to bubble fusion which is also mentioned in the article. Let's refrain from linking to every person who thinks cold fusion would be cool, and keep the links more authoritative. Trelvis 22:32, Dec 18, 2003 (UTC)

The links are there to provide balance . Reinserted. JDR 03:36, 6 Apr 2004 (UTC)

I took out the line claiming that the Farnsworth-Hirsch Fusor is a working yet unpractical cold fusion device. The fusor may not require thermodynamic equilibrium, but it still requires ions with several keV of energy, and should not qualify as cold fusion - this also goes against normal usage of the term cold fusion. Furthermore the term cold fusion carries negative connotations, so you probably do not want to associate your pet low cost table top fusion device with a catastrophic scientific failure - but that is just my opinion. Trelvis 16:16, Apr 5, 2004 (UTC)

I put in the Farnsworth-Hirsch Fusor link into the See also aection. JDR

I undid a drastic changed that reversed the sense of the book summaries. If whoever wrote it has evidence to back up his allegations then please put them here. DJ Clayworth 18:28, 6 Apr 2004 (UTC)

• What - you don't think "slanted and dangerously slanderous" is a NPOV description of a book? Boy, what a nit-picker! DavidWBrooks 18:48, 6 Apr 2004 (UTC) (I'm joking, by the way; in edit wars like this, it's sometimes hard to tell.)

• I say always be polite to an editor the first time. They might be a newbie who thinks this is acceptable behaviour. DJ Clayworth 18:58, 6 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Page summaries

Request to sysop: Can you please add these notations to previous edits?

• 3:50 added better descriptors
• 2:54 typo correction
• 2:53 added more accurate descriptor
• 2:52 added more accurate descriptor
• 2:49 differentiated between 1989 and 2004 D.O.E CF review
• 2:48 removed biased descriptor
• 2:47 use neutral label
• 2:46 typo correction
• 2:44 html correction
• 2:42 Misc edits, Detailed current worldwide cold fusion research, first attempt to write more accurate descriptor of Park's book, added Beaudette's book, added Krivit/Winocur Report, corrected detail of DOE non-announcement
• 2:30 Minor edit to Muon Catalyzed Fusion description
• 2:20 Contributed cold fusion description from "The 2004 Cold Fusion Report"

I'm a sysop, but I can't do this. Is it ok just posted here? What are you trying to accomplish? moink 05:35, 16 Apr 2004 (UTC)

As far as I know, you can't add notes to edits after the fact - certainly plain old sysops can't. Just think of the edit wars that would ensure, with people changing the "reason" for an enemy's last edit to, say, "demonstrate misunderstanding of entire issue" or "sprinkle twisted POV throughout article"! DavidWBrooks 13:37, 16 Apr 2004 (UTC)