@Kirk: I think we are still at a disconnect with respect to what a replication is. Jed points to graphs of some parameter (H/M ratio) vs. heat output as evidence for replication. Well, I am sure that all loaded palladium experiments have a ratio and people do report better results with more loading. That doesn't say anything about replication, however. Are the set-ups the same? The methodology? The calorimetry? As long as we use the loosey-goosey definition of replication, then it's all swell. Perhaps I am dogmatic, but a bunch of related experiments with related results constitute something interesting and worthy of further investigation, but they are not replication.
All of this avoids your analysis of the validity and meaning of the results regardless of whether they are repeatable or not. But I am told that I should not listen to any of that because at some point you apparently said something peculiar about a bucket of water, so you are completely disreputable