How many times has the Pons-Fleischmann Anomalous Heating Event been replicated in peer reviewed journals?

  • Apparently there are three options regarding LENR literature:


    1) If you don't read it, you are worthless scum (unless you embrace it sight unseen.)


    2) If you read it and criticize it, you are a crackpot.


    3) If you accept it as the gospel according to Jed, you are golden.


    Pick your poison.

  • Quote

    So if an effect has been replicated 153 times in peer reviewed journals (many of whom were the top scientists in the field of electrochemistry) , is that not enough for you?

    It's not that the *effect* has to be replicated (by 153 different methods). It's that an exact experiment has to be replicated including materials and methods and error analysis (thanks, KS). And it helps to pick the very best yielding experiment as your choice of what to duplicate/replicate. That's why I am after Jed to provide the one or a few BEST tests, not hundreds or thousands which non-enthusiasts have not the time to review.

  • Quote

    Prior interactions with you on this thread. Please take your nonsense to your own thread, ask that question on your thread and it will get the responses it deserves.

    Ouch! If you won't play nice on my terms, take your toys and go home! Somebody is overly defensive, methinks.

  • It's not that the *effect* has to be replicated (by 153 different methods). It's that an exact experiment has to be replicated including materials and methods and error analysis (thanks, KS). And it helps to pick the very best yielding experiment as your choice of what to duplicate/replicate. That's why I am after Jed to provide the one or a few BEST tests, not hundreds or thousands which non-enthusiasts have not the time to review.

    Seems like standard MY obfuscations that Jed has called you out on. When a bunch of data is presented to you that refutes your position, you say "too much to read". And when it gets pared down you act as if it's not surrounded by all the other data.


    The PREPONDERANCE of the evidence of >150 replications is strong. You may be familiar with calorimeters but you are nowhere near the top of the elctrochemistry field as these scientists were. I think you hide behind such things.

  • Kev: no, none of this is worthy of spittle, at least among sensible people. If you can't answer a simple question without ranting about what I have read or not read, then it is a YOU problem, not a ME problem. I thought my question was quite simple.


    I have repeatedly stated that I am pretty open-minded about LENR in general, but every single one of you guys who champion it act like lawyers who drown their opponents in useless paper in an effort to avoid getting to the meat of the matter. I kind of wonder why you guys argue with skeptics at all. Clearly, you aren't actually trying to convince us of anything. Your purpose seems to be just to vent about other people not seeing the world the way you do. Well, it's a (relatively) free blog. So knock yourself out.

  • The easiest way to clarify the discussion is to keep you on your thread and let real scientific discussions move apace here. That is one of the stated functions of moderators on this panel. I hope to see them doing what they say they do, because you have already derailed this thread once.


    We are not here at your beck and call. You are here at our pleasure. This is our forum, and you're a guest here.

  • I do remember an impressive paper I misplaced before I could take enough time with it to try to grasp exactly what had been done and how. Maybe that was it. If someone really got 400W out with zero power in, for an appreciable period of time and with proper blanks and calibration, it is the most impressive demonstration of LENR ever. So the link please. Pretty please?


    Please give him the link Jed! Everyone deserves a chance to redeem themselves...