October 5, 1998
Dear Mark,
For awhile there I thought you realized that you displayed some really poor judgment back on September 3rd and that the realization might have tempered your approach to reality. I guess your subsequent visit to the Park reinforced that illusion. However, from your "contributions" to renergy it seems as if you're still acting like a bull carrying around his own china shop.
Anyway, on September 3rd I asked you to speak to Dr. Khan at DoE. Dr. Khan tells me that you and he had a lengthy conversation, but that you were not entirely successful in altering his view of reality as it differed from yours in certain significant regards. At the same time you suggested that I contact Dr. Theodore Taylor about ZPE. As I recall, you assured me that he would quickly explain that I'd been totally hoodwinked. See, http://prop1.org/peacefulenergy.htm
Finally, just tonight, I got around to having a lengthy conversation, touching many subjects, with Dr. Taylor. Technologically speaking, you might be pleased to know Dr. Taylor believes that solar provides the most immediate potential for alternatives to fossil fuel energy. In fact, he told me that he is actively engaged in contracting to build a prototype I kilowatt system of his own design in Haiti. He promised to send me a paper on his design.
Notwithstanding his enthusiasm for solar technology, on the topic of ZPE, Dr. Taylor said he was very familiar with it. His knee jerk reaction was, "there is definitely something to it." He said something about energy residuals at zero point, which I didn't fully understand. Further along he noted there was some problem determining exactly what one meant by ZPE, and that it was the subject of intense academic debate. On the idea of "getting something from nothing," he said, "that would violate a basic law of physics … which is not to say that law is necessarily inviolable." He also mentioned that "the world of physics was turned upside down 75 years ago." We didn't go into great detail, and he didn't encourage me to devote my life to ZPE, but he definitely didn't say anything like you're saying. I asked him to review my perspective on the whole ball of wax <http://prop1.org/peacefulenergy.htm> and to tell me where, in his opinion, I might be off base. He said that he'd review it.
One other thing you'll probably dislike about Dr. Taylor's
thinking, he's real concerned about y2k. Like you, he noted that
the phenomena has prompted fringe right wingers (and others) to
stockpile provisions. Unlike you, he entertains the possibility
that "it may turn out that they were actually the one's being
practical, after all there are two things you must have to stay
alive." I'm not sure how much you've studied the subject,
he says he's been doing little else besides reading about it for
some months now. Still, you probably know a lot more than he does.
But he thinks it might have a silver lining -- maybe it'll force
people to comprehend that they're slaves to money.
Finally, in my opinion, there's a difference between "criticism"
and whatever it is you've been doing -- what would you call it:
"Proving a negative," "Leading the Sheep Down the
True Path," or what??? You wrote:
"It's true, I haven't done anything to promote MFPE. It is impossible for me to do so, as long as the MFPE remains a vehicle for bogus "new energy" ideas."
"Bogus" in your mind, and within the academic circles your mind travels. But shouting "BOGUS" until you turn blue doesn't prove anything. Since you apparently can't think of anything more constructive to do with your time than trying to browbeat people into joining your neo-Flat Earth society, why don't you consider PROMOTING some specific solar project, or anything constructive, instead of trying to act like a cyber-bully?
"If the program were under control of a responsible committee of serious and experienced renewable energy, environment, and human rights advocates (these seem to be the issues invoked here), I might be able to find time to help. No doubt I could be of assistance, since I have both professional and grassroots experience in political organizing and issues work, as well as some scientific credibility."
YEAH!! RIGHT!!!!! WE CAN'T BE UNDER THE CONTROL OF SOME DINGBAT UNDERGRAD, OR SOME KNOW-IT-ALL, NEW AGE WINGNUT, WE NEED TO BE CONTROLLED BY A MORE EXPERIENCED, POLITICALLY SAAVY, SCIENTIFICALLY CREDIBLE WINGNUT. Think you're up to the job, Mark? How about it, you wanna take over "the program"? Ha, ha. Just kidding of course … there ain't no "program" ... unless you want to call whatever you've been doing "a program."
"However, what we have here is an ad-hoc coalition heavily influenced by some seriously fraudulent interests. Under these conditions, all I can offer is critical feedback and information."
I'll believe it when you've convinced me -- through CONTENT -- that your comments constitute "critical feedback and information," rather than fanatical "opinionated theories and conventional wisdom." Of course, being only a peasant, I don't get to talk to highly respected conventional scientists everyday, but neither of the two folks I have been able to talk to, both of whom have academic credentials at least as impressive as your own, have embraced your Theory of Obvious Nonsense.
"If I have pushed the MFPE organizers in the direction of pruning back the obvious nonsense and moving toward more substantial bases for organizing a political movement, then I have made a very substantial contribution toward the ultimate success of that movement. If, in the process, I have made people furious or convinced them that I'm an asshole, well, too bad. That's the price you pay."
Perhaps you have pushed the MFPE organizers in the direction of … moving toward more substantial basis for organizing a political movement. If, in the process, you have slandered well-intentioned people as "seriously fraudulent," and debunked as "obvious nonsense" ideas which you are simply too dense to understand, then, I suggest, you have not engaged in reasonable and focused discussion on substantive issues, but you're well on your way to becoming a serious business as usual politician.