Replies

"A few days is believable, but over 20 years isn't."

You must never have gotten a patent (or failed to get one). If what you think was true, no patents would be issued, because everything unique would have "already been invented".

The tokamak boys are running up on half a century, and have yet to deliver. The inertial confinement guys have a better track record...just about the equal of cold fusion. But in the two former instances, untold billions of dollars have been spent to reach the current level of technology. The cold fusion work has been FAR more "economically efficient" by several orders of magnitude

"I'm the one who wants to cut the hype and the scams, yet I'm the one who's dishonest and wasting time.

So, all the hundreds of research papers referenced in the Storms review article are "hype and scams"?? And the much larger bibliography in his book are all equally "hype and scams" also??.

In that case, precisely what would constitute "proof" for you that cold fusion was real??

"I can make a better case for LENR than you."

LOL. You haven't even made a good case "against" cold fusion.

The cold fusion work has been FAR more "economically efficient" by several orders of magnitude

Unsupported claims are economically efficient for the scammer and the washed up scientist looking for cheap attention. Accountable work consumes much more time, effort, and money.

So, all the hundreds of research papers referenced in the Storms review article are "hype and scams"?? And the much larger bibliography in his book are all equally "hype and scams" also??

There you go again. An appeal to quantity is hype. Pick the best experiment and make your case. As an example, the 1989 NASA memo is the best link you've posted. The claim for a very small and brief temperature anomaly is believable.

In that case, precisely what would constitute "proof" for you that cold fusion was real??

I'm beginning to think that you don't know what fusion is. Why do you think most in the field are calling it LENR? They're giving up on their always unsupported claim that it was fusion.

You haven't even made a good case "against" cold fusion.

I'm not trying to make a case against cold fusion. Scammers and hypers, OTOH...