"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 always goes back to that. He rants and raves, and always comes back to
his obsession. Abd hates anyone who points out that his obsession is false,
and it is obvious that Abd has an agenda to make money off of his obsession.
Wonderful guy.
On Mon, Dec 23, 2013 at 12:56 AM, Abd ulRahman Lomax <abdlomax(a)yahoo.com>wrote;wrote:
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…
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(a)cardinalmail.cua.edu>
*To:* Mailing list for Wikiversity <wikiversity-l(a)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.
_______________________________________________
Wikiversity-l mailing list
Wikiversity-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikiversity-l