First of all as I have said I am not authority in physics, my background is in information science, and as I have said I do not even have a tendency to say I am the one.
I am not claiming anything, in the about page I said reasons I write, more or less I am trying is to say let’s do bit of critical thinking before we take things for granted.
Fair point for "exposing truth" I was not looking at source, my bad, but let’s give more "credible" source http://www.wired.co.uk/news/archive/2012-02/27/rossi-roundup
- this is MIT source.
But again that defeats the purpose, I am not saying that argument from authority is good, I am saying it is bad because we have to use it, and we have to use is as we do not have choice, it because we are limited with time, money, brain (cpu/memory) for all subjects ... what I am saying is more wishful thinking ("it would be good if we could have")
"generous 40 million grant" let's compare it with fusion grants of $29.1 Billion over 57 years, and "running from 2014 to 2020 with an €80 billion ($104 billion) budget" did it produce results?
So now compare 130000 million plus with 40 million, yes 40 million is quite generous.
If there is something interesting going on, go and explore it, find the source of an error or what is going on, do not discard something just because your bias toward rooted thinking. Go and try, and fail... but learn what is the reason of failure, and spread the word about your fail ... This is more of a comment to people with training not without it, it seems they have lost courage to try bold ideas.
On the other hand "independent researcher with no formal training" did Thomas Edison had formal training?
"a dozen quantum theories," - was figure of speech, sorry now I know I have to be prices even in comments (although dozen=12 it was exaggeration), yes formulations, on the other hand "the paper Ron Maimon found looks like the source of the '11 formulations' " but even with 9 isn't that look as mess to you? Does reality have 9+ behaviours?
Regarding "EM drive is going through exactly the process of evidence and testing (and, not really showing the expected results)"
We must be reading different news, or you are working for NASA and you have completely different inside info?
Can I ask you politely for your background, how long are you in that field?
Maybe I can ask you to clarify few things, or maybe you can help me to resolve few dilemmas?