Open answer about LENR/Cold Fusion to a consensual anti-scientific science apologist. « LENR news

    • Official Post

    http://www.lenrnews.eu/open-an…ntific-science-apologist/Today I found that article reporting the announce of Cherokee fund and industrial Heat, about buying E-cat technology... Nothing worth new except that astounding closing message :


    Quote

    Reminder: Cold fusion has not been verified by science and has been rejected. So I do not allow cold fusion advocates to post claims that it’s being verified all over the world.


    So since censorship is announced, I publish here that open answer. The occasion to answer many similar believers in consensus.


    "So I do not allow cold fusion advocates to post claims that it’s being verified all over the world. "


    This sentence resonated like one of the most awful, anti-scientific, and consensual position about the cold fusion. So forgive my extensive response, nothing is really personal and feel free to escape from the box.
    ...


    A good synthesis of the scientific arguments about old-school cold fusion... the one which was proven about in 1992, without the least honest doubt. A good reason to read the book of Charles Beaudette, Excess Heat. THE BOOK!

  • If their was a book of verified science we could lookup our topic and never
    have to question what is true again. If that happens all progress will cease
    and we will begin the next dark age.


    Investors however need to know that scientists of some standing have attacked
    the observations, experiments, and theories of cold fusion. We are like the ancients
    that used fire but did not know how it worked. It is interesting to review phlogiston theory
    to see what was thought about fire. Cold fusion is the new fire.

    • Official Post

    I feel the situation in worst than what you say.
    The problem is not that Cold Fusion after being unproven and questionable is now clearly proven.
    As you can see in Beaudette Books, since the beginning, despite come communication problems, and some errors in physicist domains (neutrons), all was proven and checked in 2-3 years like any good chemistry science...


    think about it... forget theory... don't care it is nuclear.


    what is F&P science ? F&P experiments? what is F&P evidences ?
    It is electrolysis, producing heat... absolutely pure chemistry science.


    I agree that when F&P did neutron measurement they ruined it as quickly as Lewis sabotaged his calorimetry. Don't ask neutron measurement to chemist, and calorimetry to physicist.


    why did we ask the physicist ? for the theory ? why not, but don't ask if it is real, ask them why it is real... and no problem if they cannot answer... no theory have never been a problem, except recently.

Subscribe to our newsletter

It's sent once a month, you can unsubscribe at anytime!

View archive of previous newsletters

* indicates required

Your email address will be used to send you email newsletters only. See our Privacy Policy for more information.

Our Partners

Supporting researchers for over 20 years
Want to Advertise or Sponsor LENR Forum?
CLICK HERE to contact us.