Essentially, if we assume that he is sane, the man lies.
Shortly before he sent this mail, he deleted a comment of mine from his talk page, in which I pointed out that what he told another Wikiversity user about me. https://en.wikiversity.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Ottava_Rima&diff=next&oldid=1128082
In that comment, I pointed to the actual Wikipedia ban discussion, the close of which does not mention pushing fringe beliefs. Nor was that mentioned in the close of my previous cold fusion topic ban. The cause stated there was my request for a removal of a web site that hosts legal preprints of cold fusion research papers from the global blacklist. That request had began very simply, but when the WP admin who had originally requested the blacklisting raised all the old, rejected arguments (he had been reprimanded by ArbComm for his admin actions around this), I then explained, and that was considered a "wall
of text." I was topic banned on Wikipedia as a result. And then, because what I'd written was convincing, the blacklisting was lifted.
But all the old charges came out in the ban discussion, as if they had all been confirmed, they were simply stated as fact, and Wikipedians do not research disputes, they simply react. It was claimed that I'd violated an ArbComm sanction by socking. No, I was under no ArbComm sanction, the topic ban was a "community ban," resulting from that meta action. "Violating an ArbComm sanction" was then repeated by many
!voting for ban as cause.
Wikipedia does dumb stuff like this all the time! I found that when I took the place seriously, I'd quickly become "obsessed." I concluded the place was utterly unreliable, not a place to do any serious work with anything remotely controversial.
As to "trying to profit" by selling "information packages" to people,. I have a COI notice on the Wikiversity Cold fusion resource page. I'm not selling information or information packages, I'm selling physical materials that can be used to replicate certain interesting experiments, in particular one that appears, from peer reviewed journal publications, to produce a few neutrons. I've sold one set of materials to a teenager who did run the experiment. Great kid. He's in a documentary on cold fusion as a result. http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2265577/ even mentions him. This kid is having serious fun.
Not a great movie, unfortunately.
I do not sell any information or information packages, just a vial of heavy water electrolyte with palladium and lithium chloride in it, and a plastic cell with gold and platinum wire electrodes, plus some solid state nuclear track detectors.
I've invested about $5000 in materials and equipment (to do my own experiments at some point), and I've collected about $400 from that sale and sales of the radiation detectors. I did not do this to profit.
I don't recruit people on the wiki to cold fusion, rather I recruit people interested in cold fusion to study and work on the related Wikiversity resource, and that
resource is being used to collect materials and study the topic. I invite skeptics, *especially*.
I just incorporated Infusion Institute, Inc., in Massachusetts, to facilitate replication, under the strictest of protocols designed to address all skeptical objections, of work that is already generally confirmed and accepted in the peer reviewed literature, for up to twenty years. the goal is increased precision. I have an excellent Board of Directors, and the support of many scientists. This is real science, and we'll be raising some real money,
to make happen what should have happened twenty years ago: definitive testing instead of argument from theory.
The rejection of cold fusion is what is known to sociologists as a "cascade," a phenomenon that has nothing to do with science and everything to do with social process. Both U.S. Department of Energy reviews recommended further research, and funding under existing programs, which never happened through the DoE. The 2004 review came close to concluding that evidence for the effect was conclusive. They essentially wanted to see more
research.
I never challenged the designation of cold fusion on Wikipedia as "fringe science," but it did, in fact, pass on to "emerging science" roughly ten years ago.
What I did do on Wikipedia was to challenge administrative abuse. And I was sustained, my major sin there. That and my habit of detailed discussion. Wikipedia's design requires consensus, because that is the only objective standard for neutrality, but then the actual community is intolerant of what consensus requires: lots of discussion, often facilitation is required, because most people don't know how to actually resolve disagreements.
My stand on cold fusion is not a "belief." Science is not
based on belief, but on experimental evidence and the scientific method.
Cold fusion is a mystery, as to how it works, but we know what it does, the original discovered effect converts deuterium to helium, the evidence for this is already overwhelming. I know the experimental evidence, and I know the scientists who did that published work, and it has some obvious implications, but .. that's not a "belief."
It's a conclusion from *direct evidence,* widely confirmed, with no contrary evidence. And the conclusion could still be wrong. I'd set the odds, though, at more than a million to one.
And none of this has to do with what Ottava did here, attempt to drive away someone
interested in contributing to Wikiversity, because of his personal opinions and reactions and beliefs about what is Right. His effect on Wikiversity was highly disruptive and destructive. He attempted to have every bureaucrat removed, and much, much more.
This is what he's always done: attack anyone who interferes with his attempt to rule the wikis, with a farrago of lies.
Ottava Rex, give it up. You lost it. You've long been encouraged to focus on your field, complete your doctorate. Did you?
Abd ul-Rahman Lomax (413) 584-3151 business (413) 695-7114 cell
I'm so excited I can't wait for Now.
From: Jeffrey Peters <17peters@cardinalmail.cua.edu>
To: Mailing list for Wikiversity <wikiversity-l@lists.wikimedia.org>
Sent: Sunday, December 22, 2013 9:58 PM
Subject: Re: [Wikiversity-l] Wikiversity-l Digest, Vol 67, Issue 2
Abd, you are one to talk. You were banned from en.wikipedia for pushing fringe beliefs on Cold Fusion and it turns out that you are trying to profit by selling your "information packages" to people.
Why do you people insist on using Wikiversity to profit? It is not your personal play ground to use to recruit people to your outside groups.