I often quote the story of Report 41 (DeNinno) made by ENEA, but it's story is lost in a messy thread.
Here is the short story. feel free to complete and react.
I get aware of that famous report through an article in the French blog FusionFroide.com that speaks of the report#41 (DeNinno) written by a group of researchers at the ENEA Frascati (Rome) and sent first to Nature and Scientific American, then to various journals.
This report was quickly dismissed, for nature with a "no room " and for other journals, various quick shallow critics, Verily not defensible ...
These two paragraphs are staggering and explain what I said before, it is impossible to contradict the consensus even with good articles, evidence ... everything is rejected "a priori".
Just found a videoOriginally Posted by http://fusion-froide.com
(part 1 and part 2) that seems to show
Emilio Del Giudice, citing Preparata like explained in previous post.
cannot see video/youtube now, and anyway need translation.
This report was by the way pushed by a Nobel Price winned, Carlos Rubbia who could not overcome the blockage with his name.
It was sent to many peer-reviewed scientific magazine, who all rejected it, starting by Science :
I've found the rejection letter of science
Dear Dr. De Ninno:
Thank you for submitting your manuscript "EXPERIMENTAL EVIDENCE OF 4He
PRODUCTION IN A COLD FUSION EXPERIMENTS to Science. Because your manuscript was
not given a high priority rating during the initial screening process, we will not be able to send it out
for in-depth review. Although your analysis is interesting, we feel that the scope and focus of your
paper make it more appropriate for a more specialized journal. We are therefore notifying you so that
you can seek publication elsewhere. . ,
We now receive many more interesting papers than we can publish. We therefore send for in-depth
review only those papers most likely to be ultimately published in Science. Papers are selected on the
basis of discipline, novelty, and general significance, in addition to the usual criteria for publication in
specialized journals. Therefore, our decision is not necessarily a reflection of the quality of your
research but rather of our stringent space limitations.
We wish you every success when you submit the paper elsewhere.
I've also extracted my previous quotes of Krivits slides, that apply here:
In those slides from Krivit, after ICCF 2007, there are few "science sociology" slides from page 27
some quotes about failing peer review :
some analysis about why LENR is rejectedOriginally Posted by Steven B. Krivit, New Energy Times
I've also extracted my quotes of Jed Rothwell that match well:Originally Posted by Steven B. Krivit, New Energy Times
On vortex, Jed Rothwell quote an article about the end of publishers, and extract a very nice sentence:
As I say, feel free to complete, correct or comment that documentation topic.Institutions will try to preserve the problem for which they are the solution.
EDIT: I have attached the Science rejection letter because rainews seems to have lost it meanwhile