The Surprisingly Strong Case for Colonizing Venus

http://www.citylab.com/tech/2014/07/the-surprisingly-strong-case-for-colonizing-venus/373560/

 

Men are from Mars, women from Venus. So you have to like those odds.

 

The article states that the idea is to do one of two things: manhattan project for nuclear fusion or colonize venus.

http://www.wired.com/2014/02/fusion-power-not-yet/

When NIF was first being built, researchers were confident that it would produce fusion reactions fairly quickly. The point when fusion becomes self-sustaining is known as ignition. The fusing hydrogen atoms at the fuel center send out helium nuclei, which knock into other hydrogen atoms, setting off a cascading chain-reaction of expansion fusion that should produce more energy than the entire experiment consumes. While ignition requires extremely high temperatures and pressures, computer simulations in 2009 predicted that NIF would achieve the energies to generate it by 2012. Of course, reality doesn’t work as well as a digital model, and the deadline passed without achieving ignition.

...

If they could make working cold fusion (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cold_fusion), we would have no need for any other kind of energy for anything. A device the size of a AA battery would power an electric car with near infinite range. You'd have something like that to run all the electrical items in your house as well.

 

Right. There is research going on into cold fusion but the peer reviewed publications refuse to print any submissions about it.

Score one for peer review!

 

Probably because they want to protect their belief the earth is flat.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cold_fusion#cite_note-small_community-11

 

I'm secretly running my home off of cold fusion. I live under constant fear that Big Oil will find out and kill me.

 

I don't think they made it work. There was one report a long time ago (1980s?) that someone had it working and that a second team had repeated it, but nobody else was able to.

The government was supposed to invest a paltry few $billion into research, because the obvious benefits of the technology would be so huge. But the funding never came. As WikiPedia says, the scientific community has damaged the careers of between 100 and 200 researchers.

 

What does government health care failure have to do with cold fusion?

 

An HIV positive man apparently bombed the department of health on Wednesday afternoon after he did not receive his anti-retroviral medication.

According to a reliable source the man is allegedly an HIV positive and had not received his anti-retroviral medication and was set out on getting revenge for the lack of medication.

 

I remember when the Pons and Fleischmann paper came out. Everyone in science was excited about it. Lots and lots of labs dropped whatever they were doing and started working on cold fusion. An awful lot of people were disappointed when it turned out not to be true. It's not a conspiracy Denny. It was just a not very carefully done experiment that couldn't be replicated.

barfo

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cold_fusion

By late 1989, most scientists considered cold fusion claims dead,[6][7] and cold fusion subsequently gained a reputation as pathological science.[8][9] In 1989, a review panel organized by the United States Department of Energy (DOE) found that the evidence for the discovery of a new nuclear process was not persuasive enough to start a special program, but was "sympathetic toward modest support" for experiments "within the present funding system." A second DOE review, convened in 2004 to look at new research, reached conclusions similar to the first.[10] Support within the then-present funding system did not occur.

A small community of researchers continues to investigate cold fusion,[6][11] now often preferring the designation low-energy nuclear reactions (LENR).[12][13] Since cold fusion articles are rarely published in peer-reviewed scientific journals, the results do not receive as much scrutiny as more mainstream topics.[14]

...

Cold fusion research continues today in a few specific venues, but the wider scientific community has generally marginalized the research being done and researchers have had difficulty publishing in mainstream journals.[6][7][11] The remaining researchers often term their field Low Energy Nuclear Reactions (LENR) or Chemically Assisted Nuclear Reactions (CANR),[71] also Lattice Assisted Nuclear Reactions (LANR), Condensed Matter Nuclear Science (CMNS) and Lattice Enabled Nuclear Reactions; one of the reasons being to avoid the negative connotations associated with "cold fusion".[72][73] The new names avoid making bold implications, like implying that fusion is actually occurring.[74] Proponents see the new terms as a more accurate description of the theories they put forward.[75]

The researchers who continue acknowledge that the flaws in the original announcement are the main cause of the subject's marginalization, and they complain of a chronic lack of funding[76] and no possibilities of getting their work published in the highest impact journals.[77] University researchers are often unwilling to investigate cold fusion because they would be ridiculed by their colleagues and their professional careers would be at risk.[78] In 1994, David Goodstein, a professor of physics at Caltech, advocated for increased attention from mainstream researchers and described cold fusion as:

a pariah field, cast out by the scientific establishment. Between cold fusion and respectable science there is virtually no communication at all. Cold fusion papers are almost never published in refereed scientific journals, with the result that those works don't receive the normal critical scrutiny that science requires. On the other hand, because the Cold-Fusioners see themselves as a community under siege, there is little internal criticism. Experiments and theories tend to be accepted at face value, for fear of providing even more fuel for external critics, if anyone outside the group was bothering to listen. In these circumstances, crackpots flourish, making matters worse for those who believe that there is serious science going on here.[30]

 

The bolded part implies a sort of conspiracy or collusion, barfo.

If it happens in this part of science, what makes you think it doesn't occur elsewhere?

 

Did a scientist steal your first girlfriend or bully you in grade school? You really seem to not like them.