Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: E. Pluribus Unum

My only explanation for the long development time is that the mainstream science rejected it because it doesn’t fit any known nuclear model. This is the same mainstream science that says AGW is not open to debate. I will be reading up on Pons and Fleischmann from the original cold fusion days in the ‘70’s. Science is not supposed to be run like the Inquisition with non-believers discredited/disgraced by those in power.I haven’t made up my mind yet, but I don’t trust mainstream anything anymore.


17 posted on 10/08/2014 11:59:03 AM PDT by wattsgnu
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies ]


To: wattsgnu
"Mainstream science" doesn't have anything to do with it.

If it is a viable source of energy a revolutionary product would have been introduced long ago.

You don't need the permission of "mainstream science" to build something that works. You just have to have a technology that works.

20 posted on 10/08/2014 12:08:05 PM PDT by E. Pluribus Unum ("The man who damns money obtained it dishonorably; the man who respects it earned it." --Ayn Rand)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson