You totally miss the significance (probably deliberately), both past and present. Past....this is a completely unambiguous PROOF that cold fusion is real (of course, that is also true of the present). If followed up on, the field would probably be ten years ahead of where it is today. The reason it was not followed up on is the "groupthink suppression" of the idea that you could have CF without neutrons. Present....this report is a completely unbiased proof that CF is real. The fact that the authors bought into the "groupthink" and thought the experiment was a failure is proof of a lack of bias in favor of CR.
There are still a lot of physicists today that are victims or promulgators of the "groupthink meme". And there is no doubt whatsoever that there is a group of people who work behind the scenes to prevent funding of CF research, prevent promotion (or, if possible, promote the termination) of researchers engaged or interested in CF work.
Yes, this "is" a "technical memo" (or internal research report). I've read (and written) more of these than I care to think about and am still doing so. That doesn't invalidate the scientific content.
Yet, in spite of a certain Nobel prize, numerous other awards and mountains of money for the authors, neither memo makes that claim. They didn't even bother to publish real papers in real journals.
You totally miss the significance (probably deliberately), both past and present. Past....this is a completely unambiguous PROOF that cold fusion is real (of course, that is also true of the present). If followed up on, the field would probably be ten years ahead of where it is today. The reason it was not followed up on is the "groupthink suppression" of the idea that you could have CF without neutrons. Present....this report is a completely unbiased proof that CF is real. The fact that the authors bought into the "groupthink" and thought the experiment was a failure is proof of a lack of bias in favor of CR.
The authors of the 1989 memo are much more logical, scientific and well spoken than you, yet I'm to believe they are the victims of groupthink, rather than you. The 2009 memo isn't nearly as professional, but it's still way ahead of anything you've put out here on FR. If anybody's the victim of groupthink, you are.
Yes, this "is" a "technical memo" (or internal research report). I've read (and written) more of these than I care to think about and am still doing so. That doesn't invalidate the scientific content.
The scientific content is summed up by a small and brief temperature anomaly during an informal experiment. The authors make no claim that it's any kind of fusion, yet I'm supposed to believe it is, based on nothing more than "Warthog says so," and Warthog's nutty groupthink/conspiracy delusions.