Your link did not support your statement. In fact, I am fairly sure the science fair did not require university calibre research, or starting with the premise that something was fake or false.
"Volcanoes Are Fake Paper Mache, Vinegar and Baking Soda Scams" would be a great science fair exhibit, though.
Ok. I keep forgetting on sites like this with a positive bias I have to break things down. Here is a link to the definition of the scientific method from a physics dept:
http://physics.ucr.edu/~wudka/Physics7/Notes_www/node6.html
A few of the key points the physics dept. states are :
"The scientific method is the best way yet discovered for winnowing the truth from lies and delusion."
"The great advantage of the scientific method is that it is unprejudiced: one does not have to believe a given researcher, one can redo the experiment and determine whether his/her results are true or false"
"A theory is accepted not based on the prestige or convincing powers of the proponent, but on the results obtained through observations and/or experiments which anyone can reproduce: the results obtained using the scientific method are repeatable"
"Faith, defined as belief that does not rest on logical proof or material evidence, does not determine whether a scientific theory is adopted or discarded."
"There are many types of ``pseudo-scientific'' theories which wrap themselves in a mantle of apparent experimental evidence but that, when examined closely, are nothing but statements of faith"
You and others will continue to argue with me because you can't accept the reality that there are no experiments that a physics dept. can repeatably run to verify LENR and that there is no evidence in nature for the existence of LENR. Say my name.