"Skeptic" means exactly that. You can call us deniers of claims until we see proof. I do not know what to call the opposite of that except believer. "Believe" means you can't observe or prove something, so I don't know why believers object to the term. They can't prove even the possibility of an EESU based on known physics and no one has reported seeing a prototype except in a patent. Patents are so full of it that wikipedia does not accept them as a reliable source. So I do not see a better term than "believer" and I can't remember anyone suggesting or at least agreeing on a different term. I guess the opposition to the term "believer" is based on a religious connotation. Believing what you can't see or prove does indeed mean a type of religious belief about something, but I would be happy if there was a term that meant the same without a religious connotation. It's certainly better than the "faithful" which is more appropriate for those who have stuck around these past 3 years that me and y_po have been around. Y_po was here and denying at last a few months before me. There was an MIT student and BT expert posting severe negativity in comments a year or two before that. So the skeptical deniers seem to stay around longer than the believers. The story seems to depend on a new and continuing influx of fools. I wonder if the ego boost of seeing idiots is what keeps skeptics around. That implies we skeptics are suffering from low self-esteem. :)
Thorny wrote:I hate the word "believer". I have been skeptical from the beginning but still see the risk/reward ratio worthy of a moderate investment. Why has this blog degenerated to labels and name calling?
How many believers are still here and believing (other than B) from early 2008?
Last edited Thu, 14 Apr 2011, 11:59am by zawy
"EEStor, Inc. remains on track to begin shipping production 15 kilowatt-hour Electrical Energy Storage Units (EESU) to ZENN Motor Company in 2007 for use in their electric vehicles." - EEStor, January 2007