Skip to Main Content (access key 1)
Skip to Search (access key 2)
Skip to Search GO (access key 3)
Skip to comments (access key 4)
Skip to navigation (access key 5)
Skip to top of page (access key 6)

Comments by phil rimmer


151. Only a Theory

Comment #193414 by phil rimmer on June 15, 2008 at 2:43 pm

I've found Ken Miller very useful indeed. I see it as all part of Sam Harris's "going under the radar" strategy. We need to do it more. I often concede a deist God, for instance, just to get in close.

152. Only a Theory

Comment #193413 by phil rimmer on June 15, 2008 at 2:38 pm

9 A.M.......Jesus walks on water.


11 A.M......Looking for Jesus.


HAAAA! Coffee, screen, damn!

153. Discussion between Richard Dawkins and Paula Kirby

Comment #193406 by phil rimmer on June 15, 2008 at 2:16 pm

You're absolutely right it is not proof of intervention at all, BUT

1) We'll never get there, so it doesn't matter here. (There will always be theories to test)

2) If science truly lay exhausted and not one person could conceive a theory of something un-explained then maybe we DESERVE an interventionist proposal. By that time so many gaps will have been closed that the spurious bronze-age anthropic tyrant will have been left well behind and some ghost of a deist ghost will be all thats possibly left.

EDIT PS I completely take your argument that no dialogue is possible, its just that it doesn't seek to dissuade them in any way....which I guess is a forlorn hope.

EDIT They will only find the nuggets to work with once the other stuff is "panned" away. They will still have work to do, though WTF that may be is their problem. I should have excluded the word "reliable" in front of "test".

154. Discussion between Richard Dawkins and Paula Kirby

Comment #193389 by phil rimmer on June 15, 2008 at 1:58 pm

Good stuff, Steve.

I had in mind something like-

"There is no discoverable scientific truth that may not be revealed by using the scientific method. Acts of miraculous or supernatural intervention in the formation of the universe and its life-forms may only be revealed when science lies exhausted of all attempted explanations and is still found wanting. Creation "Science" (in inverted commas) seeks to demonstrate the interventionist answer (e.g. God did it) , in a speedy fashion by anticipating that very answer. Sadly no reliable test of Intervention, other than the exclusion of all other possible explanations, has been formulated that may give confirmation of such a result. Those desiring an Interventionist answer would serve their own interests best if they spent their efforts on formulating and excluding alternative explanations, in other words, joining forces with the thorough and disinterested efforts of scientists everywhere."

Sadly it isn't thorough (one point only) or rigorous. (It needs better brains applied to it.) But, it doesn't invoke the authority of the majority, it doesn't imply exclusion from a process and it doesn't have the word epistemological in it.

Not it perhaps, but something absolute yet engaging?

155. Stephen Hawking: ministers' £80m error puts science at risk

Comment #193363 by phil rimmer on June 15, 2008 at 1:06 pm

scientists will make a more valuable contribution to the economic and social wellbeing of the world if their research is closely directed by politicians


Fine if they knew what they were doing but, when, in the UK, was the last time we had a scientist or former scientist in the cabinet?

Margret Thatcher! A chemist whose main contribution to the world of knowledge was how to get more air (and less cream) into ice cream.

(The Blessed Maggie, generally had a poor record with dairy products, later going on to steal milk off school kids.....Blessed are the Cheese-makers, indeed!)

156. Discussion between Richard Dawkins and Paula Kirby

Comment #193349 by phil rimmer on June 15, 2008 at 12:16 pm

Paula,

I thoroughly endorse your principled stand here in not engaging in an ill-conceived debate. (Bravo, other non-engagers.)

I think this approach deserves much wider application. We should not engage in any such events in future, where a science V. Creationism format exists.

The simple impossibility of "Creation Science" being science in any way is the universal point at issue. (There is no rational process. There is no rational conclusion to a process, etc.)

May I suggest, however, that whilst not engaging in such debates, a very short statement may be formulated stating simply the reasons for the impossibility of any rational dialogue. This would be offered as our single contribution to any event staged, that sought to address this imagined "conflict" of ideas. It would, in effect, be an apology for absence, on the grounds that there is no apparent work to be done...(or some such) and we would ask that it be read out near the start of the event.

The pithier the statement is, the better will be the effect. I imagine no more than five to ten short sentences, written in plain English.

Any merit?

157. Intelligent people 'less likely to believe in God'

Comment #192413 by phil rimmer on June 13, 2008 at 2:45 am

hungarianelephant

Looking on the bright side you also have Guinness and self-abuse, (as in, "Not tonight, dear, we can't risk it".)

EDIT Hurling? We scousers do that too, but generally after the Guinness.

158. Intelligent people 'less likely to believe in God'

Comment #192408 by phil rimmer on June 13, 2008 at 2:35 am

This "study" is barely out of the realm of anecdote, so carrying on in the same vein- Is it peoples' experience here that intelligent religites would generally fall into the category of "exploiters", i.e. shamans, popes, "clearthinker" etc.?

159. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #192386 by phil rimmer on June 13, 2008 at 12:21 am

keith-

There is nothing so irritating after an heroic but easy victory to be told, "'Tis but a scratch!"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2eMkth8FWno

Rest assured your adversary is now 'armless. *cloak*>

160. Intelligent people 'less likely to believe in God'

Comment #192287 by phil rimmer on June 12, 2008 at 4:59 pm

Does this mean that people living in the bible belt are stupider than those living in other geographical locations? (How does that work?)

And which came first the stupidity or the religion?

161. New British Petition: Stop the Nightmares

Comment #192005 by phil rimmer on June 12, 2008 at 9:47 am

This truly isn't a freedom of speech issue. It is about harassment and inflicting psychological abuse on children. One can imagine extreme situations where all could agree punishable abuse has happened. Parents cannot be allowed to inflict serious harm on their child, physical or psychological.

162. New British Petition: Stop the Nightmares

Comment #191954 by phil rimmer on June 12, 2008 at 7:13 am

Laurie

There are two things to prove. First, are kids abused by being told they are wicked and will go to hell unless they believe and behave? (My feeling is yes). Second, is the current law inadequate? (Not sure.)

The evidence for both will be got by bringing test cases.

Generally I am against overly prescriptive laws. Proving abuse only is more likely to be future proof and generally useful. Overly prescribing the nature of abuse may well provide unintended escape routes for sneaky lawyers. I wont ask for action that I may later regret just to register a concern.I can stand up and be counted here.

*stands*

Teaching children the "reality" of Hell is in my opinion abuse of the worst kind.

163. New British Petition: Stop the Nightmares

Comment #191939 by phil rimmer on June 12, 2008 at 6:44 am

Get over it, guys, and sign the fucking thing


I know its true, but I need to prove it to others. The moment I ask for political action that impacts others I must have evidence good enough for them (in my opinion). How the Hell can I complain about others' un-evidenced political actions otherwise?

Find the cases. Bring them to court. Prove the need. We can't change society merely because you and I think its a good idea.

164. New British Petition: Stop the Nightmares

Comment #191906 by phil rimmer on June 12, 2008 at 5:02 am

I won't say too much more as I'm in danger of giving out all of the cool, innovative and thoughtful (LOL) themes in the book


Damn, damn, damn. I was just going to post a whole list of differentiating factors about the Reason Party. But I'd better keep a lid on it, given my earlier record.

How about a two or three part TV? Get Russell T. Davies to produce. Use real people playing themselves where possible. RD, freethinking politicians tempted from other parties, Paxman etc. What fun! Ending in a clampdown of course...

Sorry. Schtum.....

165. New British Petition: Stop the Nightmares

Comment #191888 by phil rimmer on June 12, 2008 at 3:57 am

hungarianelephant

Just thought you ought to know.


v.kind and mutual. :-)

I'm enough of a realist to believe that a political party per se would probably not be successful but as a political pressure group it most likely would be. The aim here would be to have your ideas stolen and adopted by the main political parties just as green party and pressure groups have achieved.

166. New British Petition: Stop the Nightmares

Comment #191871 by phil rimmer on June 12, 2008 at 3:22 am

AllanW

I love books with happy endings. You've made your first sale! Now if only I could order it through RD.net.

PS. REASON. Great name for a party. Has a nice double edged meaning, with its implication of purpose. I can see the slogans now....

Reason is reason enough.

Get writing.

167. New British Petition: Stop the Nightmares

Comment #191829 by phil rimmer on June 12, 2008 at 12:19 am

I would dearly love to sign but, I repeat, this is not politically astute. It will backfire. A hellfire religite will demand a quid pro quo of not allowing kids be to be terrorised with stories about the meaninglessness of life or some such nonsense, and the thing will spiral into mush for lack of definitive evidence.

If we are to get political (and I wish we bloody would) we can do so much better than this.

THE place to start in the UK is education. We must rein back Faith Schools. We must improve the quality of education in the areas of critical thinking skills, morality, civic behaviour etc. The political rhetoric would be-

"RE and Philosophy, Education to heal a broken society."

Stop rearranging the deck-chairs.

EDIT I think our Political Wing (We need one!) should be called the Evidence Party lest we forget ourselves. Unless we can demonstrate fairly to others, with corroborated evidence, we get down in the mud with the rest of them.

Edited for spelling. Reign indeed!

168. New British Petition: Stop the Nightmares

Comment #191718 by phil rimmer on June 11, 2008 at 1:49 pm

This is politically dumb and may weaken otherwise good laws. First, and trivially the mention of damnation etc. is way too narrow. Examples related to harm by witchcraft would help here. Rather better than charging in like this, which smacks of grandstanding, it would be better to test the existing laws and see if a real case of such mental torture could be found. If one can, a test case could show if the law was deficient and needed any amendment. A sad failure might also demonstrate from the evidence collected that real harm is being done out there.

Politically more astute, and probably more effective in stopping the problem would be to petition for a more coherent RE & Philosophy program in schools. (As I understand it, RE is the only subject where the curriculum is decided locally by "Interested Parties"....) Terrorised kids may find more help from terror inoculating lessons at school.

"Dawkins fights for better RE lessons in school" has legs.

PS. Remember an Established (read Nationalised) Church is a crippled church. (You really don't want a free market in this instance.) Lets get a good RE and philosophy section in the National Curriculum.

Remember also that it may be very difficult to prove to the child herself that she has been damaged by such mental bullying. (Broken limbs are a lot easier here.) Any punishment of the parent will heap damage upon damage. The child may think its all her fault for being disobedient and wicked. It could be hell.

169. Fleabytes

Comment #191687 by phil rimmer on June 11, 2008 at 1:00 pm

Dork trolled again.
(twice in 5 mins)

170. Debating creationism in Louisiana schools

Comment #191684 by phil rimmer on June 11, 2008 at 12:57 pm

Dork trolled

171. Logical Proof of the Existence of a Divine Creator, Why Atheism is Not Logically Sound

Comment #191634 by phil rimmer on June 11, 2008 at 10:43 am

Fantastic job, hungarianelephant!

By knowing there was a "punchline" after every idiot idea, I was able to read through the whole of his article for the first time!

Hang on....I've been tricked! Bad Elephant!

172. Trailer for Religulous

Comment #191259 by phil rimmer on June 10, 2008 at 1:20 pm

Dork trolled.

173. Trailer for Religulous

Comment #191239 by phil rimmer on June 10, 2008 at 12:51 pm

Hi Volguus.

You and your views are most welcome here. Just a little correction on Hitchens. Many atheists here expressed distaste for Hitchens views on the war. Many here had their views modified (in both directions) by the discussions that ensued. I think most here do strive to judge things (ideas, books, movies) on their merit and not their personal views of the author.

on a site whose users tend to lean strongly towards the left


I think you will find this untrue. We've got 'em all. From Marxists to Libertarians. They do, I suspect, represent the most interesting and open minded of their species you are likely to find anywhere.

EDIT
hitchens thread with no mention of iraq anywhere, but in every single bill maher thread the man is crucified.


But for all his faults, Hitchens contribution to atheist thought and rhetoric is huge. I think he gets the column inches on this site because of this matchless achievement and despite his bellicose views.

174. Logical Proof of the Existence of a Divine Creator, Why Atheism is Not Logically Sound

Comment #191206 by phil rimmer on June 10, 2008 at 11:31 am

Max

"If you go looking for God you will find God, best just to go looking."


The original aphorism was the rather theist, "If you go looking for God you will find him". Seek and ye shall find as it were. I choose not to allow the prospect of success to the mono-minded, hence the subtle change-

If you go looking for God, you will find a god. Better to just go looking.

(A little bit of carrot and stick for the spiritually inclined and a suggestion that joining the A-team might actually help them in their quest.)

175. Logical Proof of the Existence of a Divine Creator, Why Atheism is Not Logically Sound

Comment #190937 by phil rimmer on June 10, 2008 at 12:49 am

Ascaphus said

Could it be that faith is not sufficient after all?

MaxD said
Faith cannot sustain itself.

Styrer said
I do not accept the notion - and it's a dangerously appeasing one - here that FAITH is in fact manifesting itself in some kind of expression of REASONABLE INQUIRY.


Ascaphus planted an excellent seed of an idea. Diacanu and SteveZ immediately saw the great value in it, and started playing with it. MaxD (and others) refined it.

The idea that the carapace faith for all or most religites "fixes on" somewhere is the discovery of the weak point in their armour. The experience we have all had that religites nearly always offer EVIDENCE for their faith suggests the veracity that "Faith [alone] cannot sustain itself."

PS Young Styrer must be very insecure in his beliefs that he should panic so.

176. Logical Proof of the Existence of a Divine Creator, Why Atheism is Not Logically Sound

Comment #190793 by phil rimmer on June 9, 2008 at 3:01 pm

Yomin yelped in an earlier article...

The world has seen many cultures rise and fall. The common thread among all, from the Ancient Romans and Greeks to others, is that prior to their fall they became selfish, gluttonous and apathetic. They adopted the feel good and do it now mentality that today's secularists feel is an invention of their own.


Its spooky. Its like he got hold of a copy of The Atheists Handbook somehow.

Fuck it, I need a drink.... Bahh! Can't be arsed.

177. Trailer for Religulous

Comment #190756 by phil rimmer on June 9, 2008 at 1:59 pm

Bill Mahers deception (using the talking snake jibe) led RD to have to apologize to Francis Collins.

What is clear from this...

http://richarddawkins.net/articleComments,2463,Richard-Dawkins-and-Bill-Maher,Real-Time-With-Bill-Maher,page7#comments

comment 312

...is that Dawkins seems to have a higher view of Collins' honesty than Maher's.

Maher makes me uncomfortable. He's too self serving.

178. John McCain: America a Christian nation, needs Christian president

Comment #190266 by phil rimmer on June 8, 2008 at 4:33 pm

Are these his real opinions i wonder, or just pandering to the masses?


If they weren't his real opinions then it doesn't matter. He wasn't brave enough to say them.

Down and out!

EDIT I'm presuming you're refering to McCain, of course.

179. John McCain: America a Christian nation, needs Christian president

Comment #190260 by phil rimmer on June 8, 2008 at 4:25 pm

Finally, before some of you get carried away on your "isnn't Obama so great so inspirational so wise" I have two words for you. Speech Writers


Doesn't matter. He was brave enough to say it.

Besides none of us, I don't think, are under any illusion that politicians are anything other than teams of people. Go team!

180. John McCain: America a Christian nation, needs Christian president

Comment #190255 by phil rimmer on June 8, 2008 at 4:17 pm

sent2null

Its me. With my eyes shut. (It makes it a little bit spookier.) The character I was playing at the time was an eighteenth century, spiritualist con artist going by the name of Count Alessandro di Cagliostro.

To take this further off topic I am reminded that Doc Benway observed a while back that the White House really needed a smart black dude in the Oval Office....sent2null.

(PS thanks. I'll be cashing the cheque tomorrow.)

181. John McCain: America a Christian nation, needs Christian president

Comment #190230 by phil rimmer on June 8, 2008 at 3:04 pm

Toad, Barry,

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jg8lCLumByw

Josh needs to put this up for its own discussion. Barry, will you do the honours?

182. Albinos, Long Shunned, Face Threat in Tanzania

Comment #190222 by phil rimmer on June 8, 2008 at 2:51 pm

Toad

this is where all superstition begins.


Yes but there is more to it. A specific superstition takes hold because someone lies about it for personal gain.

In Skinners experiment different pigeons developed different personal "superstitions" depending on the chance occerence of what they were doing when their brains made a causal connection.

To get a whole bunch of bird brains to believe the same nonsense requires exploitation from an individual. (Is it the shoe or the gourd? The winning proposition has a winning proposer.)

183. John McCain: America a Christian nation, needs Christian president

Comment #190211 by phil rimmer on June 8, 2008 at 2:31 pm

Wanna switch? I'd be happy to contribute to the Tory take-over of Britain =)


Well, they've sure got it in the bag.

I was going to add the caveat in 55 that you (Falcon) should be parachuted in to educate Obama about Capital Gains taxes, but then I thought you wouldn't thank me. ;-)

184. John McCain: America a Christian nation, needs Christian president

Comment #190205 by phil rimmer on June 8, 2008 at 2:22 pm

Well, from Barry's (and Toads reposted) link. It's Obama for me! (Damn! How can I achieve American citizenship by October?)

If this hasn't helped lift the political debate, I don't know what would. This was risky and noble stuff.

I don't buy that McCain HAS to get down in the gutter.

185. Albinos, Long Shunned, Face Threat in Tanzania

Comment #190190 by phil rimmer on June 8, 2008 at 1:57 pm

witch doctors are now marketing albino skin, bones and hair as ingredients in potions that are promised to make people rich


But, think about it, what could be even more efficacious than albino body parts?

Witch Doctor body parts! [/swiftian]

186. Faith no more as World Youth Day fans flames of disbelief

Comment #189927 by phil rimmer on June 7, 2008 at 5:43 pm

I'm with the Falcon on this.

We must never be, or seek to construct, the Thought Police.

We must demand the highest behaviour of all our citizens in the public space. Truth, corroborated evidence, is the only stable substrate of a pluralistic society.

We have to frame these two points together so that religites see the burden is with them. It is for them to discover the extent of their personal beliefs' transgression into society. When they discover that these entreaties in no way deny them their strength of moral feeling they may learn to keep the non-evidence of God rather more to themselves.

It seems to me that Reticent Atheists are drawn mainly from the social professions, doctors, social workers, teachers. It must be tough dealing with needy and deserving individuals who believe and express bollocks. I think mentally you might have to explain away such nonsense, by putting it into a low significance category. I think they are wrong to do this, but...

For Logicel.

My Roman Catholic friend believes all the stuff you and I believe, regarding a secular state regarding the absolute need that his children are educated as rational free-thinkers given all the evidence. He also professes to believe in God but regularly tells me to eff off if I try to discuss the topic. The fact of himself and his behaviour is the only endorsement he offers for his religion. Rare as he is, he exists.

187. 'In Our Time': Trofim Lysenko

Comment #189918 by phil rimmer on June 7, 2008 at 4:20 pm

I adored the two failures to prove the Lamarckian adaptive principle of evolution-

1) The British farmers wife, sorry, scientist who cut of the tails of mice to try and create a breed of tail-less mice.

2) The failed 2,000-plus year old Jewish experiment of a similar nature.

(Hitch is probably right to call time on this one.)

188. The Expelled Evolutionist

Comment #189188 by phil rimmer on June 5, 2008 at 5:09 pm

You seem to think I have some kind of divinely-inspired...

No. Thats the point.
I was brought up an Episcopalian and I...

The reason depends on a person's biography? Ah..
The reason is...

Is..?
actually I think I'll be a bit sadistic and let you hang there! Manana.

Please, let it be different this time!
If it is just about all these different forms of religion, struggling to express the same thing; if it is about the nature of consciousness; or about the the very existence of existence; if it is about purpose, please consider NOT telling us.
Considering there are so many "recovering" once-religious folk here, YOUR reason (whatever it is) is unlikely to be a surprise.
Consider also the possibility of keeping your faith in God always to yourself. You are fully rational enough to justify your own moral position on anything without recourse to spurious authority. You KNOW that free-will makes you alone responsible for your actions. Your duty is to truth and that must lead you to always strive to close those gaps with unsentimental fervor.

What if in proclaiming your faith on the basis of personal experience you lead another into a mistaken certainty?

Why not say, "My faith is my own. The rest of you can just fuck off." and just leave it at that? Carry on the intelligent and interesting discussion and don't imply that you have special insider knowledge that allows you a better view of of the problems at hand.

You don't think that do you?

G'night.

189. The Expelled Evolutionist

Comment #189173 by phil rimmer on June 5, 2008 at 4:05 pm

I do not believe a religious and a scientific view of the world are mutually exclusive. I do not say, either, that they are interchangeable, like Rosencrantz and Gildernstern. I'm just... aw, it's up to you if you want to engage. I'm to bed.


Damn. damn, DAMN! Now we'll never know. I really think (s)he was going to tell us too.

Its your fault, Steve Zara, asking for those falsifiable predicaments and corroborated whatsits. Nearly two years I've been here and not once have the nice Christians told us their secret. I know it has something to do with feelings and such, but they never tell us HOW THEY KNOW..... Not fair.

190. The Great Evangelical Decline

Comment #189029 by phil rimmer on June 5, 2008 at 8:31 am

Comment #188979 by Tyler Durden

Many here would agree with the greater truth embodied in your corrections and observations. But the piece was intended, I suspect, as a broadly non-offensive set of observations directed at a predominantly Christian audience. It pointed out the social logic of moving to a more tolerant, less dogmatic, religious stance.

Is there not merit in encouraging a move in the religious zeitgeist of this sort? Sure, we want the move to carry on so that all dogma is shunned but if we were to see commentary like this getting into the mainstream media this would be good, no?

191. The Great Evangelical Decline

Comment #188812 by phil rimmer on June 4, 2008 at 3:58 pm

Christine,

You are indeed very welcome here. I hope you get to stay and offer us more insights.

I suspect Amazon might be getting quite a few searches for this and other Wicker work.

Good stuff!

192. The Great Evangelical Decline

Comment #188802 by phil rimmer on June 4, 2008 at 3:15 pm

Quetz

Or it might be because there is now more resistance to creationism than before, which gives it a greater profile by default.

Indeed, its when firing your blasters that you get to see those "Monsters from the Id".

193. The Great Evangelical Decline

Comment #188797 by phil rimmer on June 4, 2008 at 2:53 pm

mordacious1

This lady is obvious a christian who is bemoaning the decline of the the evanges.
I just hope some of these people come over to the dark side.

From her own website she says-
He wanted me to come to one of his conferences and be interviewed about why I was no longer a Christian.

I'm not sure I want to do anything that will cause there to be more Christians.

However she is also inclined to throw in
Who are you to say that Jesus and I have parted ways?

Though it seems she "never can say goodbye", that doesn't put her a million miles from the Hitch and "I'd miss religion if it were to go completely."

Because she HAS come over to the Dark Side, I'll allow her a couple of flashbacks.

194. Storm erupts over 'virginity' divorce

Comment #188429 by phil rimmer on June 4, 2008 at 5:15 am

Appleby's patently obnoxious nature to one side for a moment, I would be fascinated to listen in on the deliberations at the adoption agency or the fertility clinic were the kid to find he was shooting blanks and needed their help parenting wise.

His point about suitability of people for parenthood is, of course, valid if the right metric is chosen to establish suitability. I think the cautious and wise people deciding on issues of suitability would soon get the measure of the lad if they could see his fevered "ejaculations" here.

No cup for you, I would suspect, Sonny Jim.

EDITED Quote marks lest Appleby isn't familiar with the meaning of the term ejaculation.

195. Storm erupts over 'virginity' divorce

Comment #188339 by phil rimmer on June 4, 2008 at 1:05 am


Come on Appleby - tell us why your relationship with your girlfriend is different from...


Sadly it is a relationship which will be changing rather rapidly. The poor woman (?) will already be "used goods". Probably starting to get a little judgmental too as Appleby's interest inevitably wanes.

I have to admit to once arrogantly feeling like the following-
And I enjoy teaching them to make up for their lack of experience.


My first girlfriend did me a great kindness by dumping me for having such a crapulent attitude and knowing nothing. My second was a revelation. By her patient education of me, it transformed my attitude to sex, to women, love, mutuality, and the value of sustained, spontaneous acts of kindness.

Maybe Appleby is young after all. Maybe he just needs taking in hand by a mature women....

196. We happy hooligans

Comment #187768 by phil rimmer on June 2, 2008 at 3:24 pm

EB

It's easy enough to say the only purpose life has is what we give it. But I'm not sure that's any better an answer than the vague notion of God many of these theologians present. (No worse, perhaps, either.)


No. It is the most wonderful answer there could be. Fucking scary, but... I love what I "make". I adore what other people "make". It genuinely seems that you can make something out of nothing.

PS Catch me on a bad day, and I'd agree with you.

197. Physicist Claims First Real Demonstration of Cold Fusion

Comment #187765 by phil rimmer on June 2, 2008 at 3:08 pm

If anybody wants to check out the background to this, here is what they were up to in 2005-

http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/ArataYdevelopmenb.pdf

1) Energy gain inferred only.
2) No account of sustainability or consumption of Palladium.
3) Arata is something of a Japanese nationalist.

Having been warned elsewhere about ad homs, I nervously include 3 as a bit of peripheral evidence regarding a motivation for wish-thinking on Arata's part. (Glorious Japan will prevail against its enemies!)

198. Storm erupts over 'virginity' divorce

Comment #187738 by phil rimmer on June 2, 2008 at 1:47 pm

I'm afraid you still don't understand my position on the matter.


Stunningly, nor does anyone here. Despite all the posts, despite the simplicity of your arguments. Despite some genuine help offered to get a more logical framing of your arguments. No wonder we're pissed off with you.

The worst though is the lack of interest you express in examining your own repugnant feelings. I hope you'll be very happy together.

199. Physicist Claims First Real Demonstration of Cold Fusion

Comment #187724 by phil rimmer on June 2, 2008 at 1:31 pm

With the stranglehold that oil companies have on the world economy, you really think they would let cheap, easy energy leak onto the market?


Most of them (with the exception of EXXON *spits*) would rush to fund it.

EDIT: Most are genuinely, if slowly, repositioning themselves as energy companies. They will control its rate of release, subject to the driver of competition.

200. Physicist Claims First Real Demonstration of Cold Fusion

Comment #187715 by phil rimmer on June 2, 2008 at 1:24 pm

but it looks like the palladium/zirconium oxide was a catalyst


Thats as maybe, but does it get "clogged up" with the stable He4? Remember this is generated within the matrix of the material. Can the He4 ALL successfully escape? If not the process is possibly useless.

(Iron Man suddenly clutches chest...)

More Pages: Previous | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 | Next