many posts on this thread seems to be just provocations aimed at disturbing the debate. I know that my arguments are challenging, to say the least, for the LENR community, but I hope that the search for truth is important for many of us regardless of our views on the reality of CF phenomena and I think that there are many LENR supporters who are able to dispute my criticisms in a more constructive and effective way.
This thread has been opened by me, and I feel responsible for providing an ambient where people interested in seriously debating the scientific aspects of the F&P experiments are helped in following the discussion and possibly encouraged to provide their contribution. So, I kindly ask the mods to enforce and preserve such an ambient.
For me, the difference between an honest skeptic and a hyperskeptic is whether or not they accept that the Pons-Fleischmann Anomalous Heating Event was replicated in 153 peer reviewed journals by the top ~100 electrochemists of the day. It is an inductive watershed. On one side is honest skeptics, and on the other side are hyperskeptics or skeptopaths or skeptics with some strange agenda.
It is this basis on how I choose to treat skeptics. You chose the dishonest, skeptopathic side of the inductive watershed and so I will treat you in that manner. It's pretty simple. We even had here on this forum recently, a person who previously chose the skeptopath route and abandoned it for the honest skeptical route.
Do yourself a favor and choose the honest path.