More breaking down...
"In any case, Shanahan's claims are physically impossible." Incorrect.
"You cannot have recombination without a deficit in the gas flow..." in an open
cell. (You need that phrase to be correct. You are nonsensical in a closed cell.)
So as I said before, the one case where this was measured (and reported) had a
~+7% error. If you consider the proposed mechanism that gives the CCS in an open
cell, specifically the entrainment point, you would realize that the '7' is a lower
bound, it is probably higher, since increased entrainment during a FPH event would
'cover' for lost gas flow.
"Heat cannot magically move from a cell and concentrate in a thermocouple centimeters
away from the cell." We've been over this before. First, your explanation is
very unscientific in that heat will not concentrate as you postulate. *However*, it
will move centimeters (maybe meters) down a line filled with heat transfer fluid to
cause a thermocouple to register a temperature rise. So...
"[Your] assertions are nonsense, so they explain nothing."
"Even if some cold fusion results are in error (which is likely), Shanahan's
"explanation" for them is worse than an error. It is nonsense."
You do so wish that were true don't you?
------
THHuxley wrote:
"You will argue that F&P were masters of their field and can be trusted. I disagree"
Jed wrote:
"Who the hell are you to judge?"
Trust should not be the issue. That it seems to be is the strongest indication that
the pseudoscientists involved are not following scientific protocol. THH can easily
see that. The 'judgement' is obvious. (And BTW, collections of honors don't immunize
you against this.) (And another BTW, the whole listing out of honors is another
'call to authority' which is not acceptable for scientific decision making.)