LENR Asked & Answered Thread

Free Republic ^ | 10/4/2021 | Kevmo

[Kevmo]

This is a rare combination thread with another Asked & Answered thread on Vortex-L combined with some Vanity Level thoughts on LENR.

Asked & Answered on Vortex-L

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Recently the sidebar moderator posted this about LENR:

Updated No Internal Trolling Rules for FR per Jim Robinson

If someone says stop, then stop. Do not enter onto a thread on a topic you don't like just to disrupt, rattle cages, poke sticks, insult the regulars, or engage in trolling activities, etc. ~Jim Robinson

----------------------------------------------------

The issue isn't whether we allow skepticism, it is whether we allow hyperskeptics and skeptopaths to ruin the scientific dialog. Such FReepers as who persist in polluting these threads have been asked to leave, and we are asking that they open their own threads if they have comments.

------------------------------------------------ ------------------------------------------

Sidebar Moderator Comments about LENR

Comment #13 Removed by Moderator

Comment #14 Removed by Moderator

Comment #16 Removed by Moderator

Comment #17 Removed by Moderator

Comment #18 Removed by Moderator

This topic has a following, people who wish to learn and discuss the materials presented.

Please refrain from posting anything that doesn’t legitimately address the issue.

Something is going on in this segment of science. There are a considerable number of research groups studying the matter.

19 posted on 7/19/2021, 6:45:09 PM by Sidebar Moderator

[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies | Report Abuse]

------------------------------------------------------------------

We recently had a person come onto our LENR thread and turn it into a bunch of nonsense in order to hijack the thread.

There was a time when I realized that generating Asked & Answered topics as a result of our collective learnings from the controversial topic of Certifigate would have been far more effective in dealing with trolls. When the certifigate trolls would go over the same nonsense again and again, it would have been far more effective to point them to a thread that covered the "same bs, different day" approach so that lurkers could see the trolls were not in it for conservatism nor getting to the bottom of the issues nor constitutionalism, they were just trolls hiding behind the skirts of a loud crowd. Certifigate Postmortem

LENR/Cold Fusion is a controversial subject. We as a community need to dig down under the controversy to see where the science will take us rather than endlessly having to deal with attempts at threadjacking.

So I will implement those learnings and put up as many links for LENR as time allows.

[Kevmo]

Asked & Answered: Fraud

[DoughtyOne]

If someone addresses the issue academically, they needn’t
agree with the hypothesis at all.

What they need to do is provide a scientific reason why
they think the the hypothesis is wrong, or that the results
of a test were misread.

A topic like this should have a robust debate. I see folks
try to talk in absolutes, but there is something going on
in this field, and denial isn’t productive.

People just jumping in with both feet and denying this
field is legit, aren’t helping themselves or the debate.

There are too many different groups doing studies for
this to be easily dismissed.

I’m curious how it will all turn out. It may be a
significant breakthrough. It may never pan out. It
may not pan out for another 50 to 100 years, and
then become something that is easily understood
because of a contributory discovery.

If this topic upsets you, just avoid it. You’ll be
proven right or wrong in time. You don’t need to
offend others on each thread.

[bhl]

Not sure why this chat was created, but since you’re labeling me as a “troll”, I will jump back in.

Thank you for linking to the Parkhomov experiment. Not sure why it was posted as news if the original experiment was from 2019. As others before me pointed out, it looked a lot like a Rossi replication with nickel and hydrogen being the primary ingredients. That should be a huge red flag. It also looks like excess power in the 200-500 watt range should be pretty easy to measure. Has there been further replication by independent scientists in the following 3 years?

My only message is trite: if it sounds too good to be true... demand real proof.

Parkhomov’s paper has not been validated and looks almost identical to Rossi’s claims. Because Rossi has no product or credibility, Parkomov should be looked at with equal caution.

As I’ve stated earlier, I spent a lot of time researching LENR that I can’t get back. I was bamboozled by the old convict from Italy. I spent significant time and money doing some basic experiments. I still have unanswered questions and there are definitely some interesting things still still to learn.. but I no longer give people the benefit of the doubt when they claim success but offer no proof. I am once bitten, twice shy.

And I would have been thrilled if you were able to prove me wrong about there being no experiments where a body of water is heated in a closed system. It’s the definition of a calorie and taught in high school level physics. But always missing when it comes to LENR experiments. Sad, but true.

Demand hard proof before parting with your time or money chasing “free energy” claims.

[Kevmo]

Not sure why this chat was created
***I told you I was gonna do it, and I did it. I also stated outwardly why I’m doing this.

https://freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/3999491/posts?page=44#44

[Kevmo]

Thank you for linking to the Parkhomov experiment. Not sure why it was posted as news if the original experiment was from 2019.
***It was posted in Chat. Why would it matter to you unless your aim was to derail and hijack discussion?

As others before me pointed out, it looked a lot like a Rossi replication with nickel and hydrogen being the primary ingredients.
***It was.

That should be a huge red flag.
***Why? Because Google gave the nod to Rossi for revitalizing the field when they threw down $10M looking into it? Just because the name Rossi comes up, you go into that “everything’s about Rossi” mode, which is asked and answered already. What you’re doing is simple trolling.

It also looks like excess power in the 200-500 watt range should be pretty easy to measure. Has there been further replication by independent scientists in the following 3 years?
***There have been more than 150 replications of the original PFAHE, but that aint good enough to someone who wants to go Rossi-Rossi-Rossi 24/7 rather than simply look at the straightforward LENR evidence.

My only message is trite:
***I agree, you are a trite poster.

if it sounds too good to be true... demand real proof.
***150 replications aint good enough for ya, I see. Obvious signs of skeptopathy.

Parkhomov’s paper has not been validated and looks almost identical to Rossi’s claims.
***It’s been replicated several times. One replication is ongoing right now https://www.lenr-forum.com/forum/thread/6666-ti-lialh4-in-a-parkhamov-type-experiment/?pageNo=1

Because Rossi has no product or credibility, Parkomov should be looked at with equal caution.
***You just plain have it real bad when it comes to Rossi. Just because someone has a similar experiment you think the cloud of sarcasm should fall on them — does that extend to Piantelli and Focardi who had results in Nickel Hydrides before Rossi was even on the scene? How about Hugo Abundo? https://www.lenr-forum.com/forum/thread/1199-ugo-abundo-parkhomov-replications/?postID=3232&highlight=parkhamov#post3232

As I’ve stated earlier, I spent a lot of time researching LENR that I can’t get back.
***You don’t show many signs of someone who supposedly researched it. Your signup date was in 2011, right during the Rossi days. Your entire perspective is warped by Rossi rather than those 153 replications that all happened BEFORE Rossi came along.

I was bamboozled by the old convict from Italy.
***Because he was your introduction to LENR. That’s like having Barnum & Bailey as your intro examples to show business.

I spent significant time and money doing some basic experiments.
***I do not believe you.

I still have unanswered questions and there are definitely some interesting things still still to learn..
***Then ACT like that was the case.

but I no longer give people the benefit of the doubt when they claim success but offer no proof.
***You have a thing for Rossi, I get it. But even very recently he said sumthin like his effect aint LENR, so I’ll just dismiss him entirely and focus on LENR. You can’t seem to do that.

I am once bitten, twice shy.
***I really don’t care what you think about Rossi. It has little to do with current ACADEMIC investigations into LENR.

And I would have been thrilled if you were able to prove me wrong about there being no experiments where a body of water is heated in a closed system.
***I do not care. Plenty of LENR researchers have demo’d their devices, so there’s no reason to focus on Rossi. It is a form of trolling these LENR threads, which is why it has its very own Asked & Answered post.

It’s the definition of a calorie and taught in high school level physics.
***I think you’re just bullshiiteing here.

But always missing when it comes to LENR experiments. Sad, but true.
***Horse manure. Basic science stuff doesn’t get peer reviewed when they are as far off as you claim.

Demand hard proof before parting with your time or money chasing “free energy” claims.
***GREAT advice, but not applicable to LENR today. Even the thread in question was measuring 1.2 grams of fuel as the equivalent of 88 gallons of gasoline. That ain’t FREE energy, it’s NUCLEAR energy. So quit trolling the LENR threads.

[bhl]

Here is a picture of my Rossi replication. Click for full sized image.

It has two pipe containers with heaters and thermocouples. One contains expensive nano powder nickel of a single isotope plus hydrogen gas. The other is a control that just contains the same mass of iron powder. It has identical band heaters (middle) and thermocouples (bottom). One is the control, the other is the test subject. I used labview to monitor both systems and control the heater (both either on or off.). Any "excess heat" would be immediately apparent. I found none. Even this crude system would be a huge improvement over the 2019 Parkomov system that relies on ballpark estimates of what the heat might otherwise be. How come nobody recommended adding a control? It would have been trivial for me to fudge something and graph some "excess heat" and ask for go-fund-me donations. I'm not trying to hijack anything. I'm sharing my personal knowledge and judgement.

[Kevmo]

I’m not trying to hijack anything. I’m sharing my personal knowledge and judgement.
***Well then, this is the thread to do it on.

[bhl]

You falsely accused me of being a troll and questioned my veracity. You have a lot of nerve telling me where I should reply to your lame post from 2019.

[Kevmo]

It was not a false claim. You were trying to hijack the thread, like several others have done in the past with that Rossi-Rossi-Rossi nonsense. Well, now you have a place to put it.

And since I said that Rossi is no scientist, since I pointed out that he isn’t even submitting his claims for peer review, your bullshiite attempt to “replicate” him is just that: bullshiite. Because he leaves out key details.

There’s 3 good reasons to ignore Rossi. One is because he said to judge him by his own measure: “In Mercato Veritas”. There’s nothing in mercato so there’s no veritas. And secondly, there’s that not-submitting-to-peer-review thing. Thirdly, he claims lately that his effect isn’t even LENR, but EVOs. All the more reason to ignore him until he’s a multi-billionaire. Judging LENR due to Rossi is like judging Ike due to Nixon.

[DoughtyOne]

I did not address you. I don’t remember even seeing your
‘bbl’ on the thread, until you responded to my post.

Are you sure you’re responding to the right post?

[bhl]

Sorry. Wrong person.

[DoughtyOne]

No problem.

[Kevmo]

Asked & Answered: Hbomb as an example of Controlled Hot Fusion [CHF]

[Kevmo]

We had someone just today who used this as a form of argumentation, as ridiculous as it is.

https://freerepublic.com/focus/bloggers/3998284/posts?page=83#83

10/5/2021, 3:00:33 PM · 83 of 83
amorphous to Kevmo
Lol, sure thing, Mr. Fusion.
From the time mankind landed on the moon and the first human flight was only 60 years. The first hydrogen bomb (fusion device) detonated almost 70 years ago. In 1989, chemists Stanley Pons and Martin Fleischmann claimed that they had produced fusion at room temperature; over 30 years ago.

---

Here’s the answer on Vortex-L

Re: [Vo]:Asked & Answered
Kevin O’Malley Thu, 06 Feb 2014 20:04:10 -0800
I have seen some skeptopaths say that an HBomb is an example of Controlled
Hot Fusion (CHF). This is, of course, an extremely stupid position. An
HBomb is an UNcontrolled reaction. We have pissed hundreds of $billions
trying to CONTROL that reaction, such as with lasers, magnetic confinement,
and other things. What is the result, after spending so much money trying
to control the HBomb? Nothing.

The following interaction is an example. It is also useful because he
hints that Solar Energy is an example of CHF, even though CHF funds NEVER
went into solar power. NEVER.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/3114918/posts?page=23#23

To: *Kevmo*
Right, because no one has ever *seen* useful amounts of energy produced by
fusion.

It’s like arguing with a deaf 2 year old.
23 — http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/3114918/posts?page=23#23 — posted
on *Wed 05 Feb 2014 08:46:23 PM PST* by
Toddsterpatriot — http://www.freerepublic.com/%7Etoddsterpatriot/ — (Science
is hard. Harder if you’re stupid.)
[ Post Reply — http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/3114918/reply?c=23 —
| Private
Reply — http://www.freerepublic.com/perl/mail-compose?refid=3114918.23;reftype=comment — |
To
21 — http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/3114918/posts?page=29#21 — | View
Replies — http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/3114918/replies?c=23 — | Report
Abuse — http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/3114918/abuse?c=23 — ]

---

To: *Toddsterpatriot*

By ALL FREEPING MEANS, post where ANY amount of Useful Energy has been
produced by CHF. H-Bombs are not an example of CHF. But if you want to
argue from that premise, it will be useful for the asked & answered offsite
knowlege storage & reference.

24 — http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/3114918/posts?page=24#24 — posted
on *Wed 05 Feb 2014 09:02:04 PM PST* by Kevmo
— http://www.freerepublic.com/%7Ekevmo/ — (”A person’s a person, no matter
how small” ~Horton Hears a Who)
[ Post Reply — http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/3114918/reply?c=24 —
| Private
Reply — http://www.freerepublic.com/perl/mail-compose?refid=3114918.24;reftype=comment — |
To
23 — http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/3114918/posts?page=29#23 — | View
Replies — http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/3114918/replies?c=24 — | Report
Abuse — http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/3114918/abuse?c=24 — ]

---

To: *Kevmo*

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_energy

25 — http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/3114918/posts?page=25#25 — posted
on *Wed 05 Feb 2014 09:27:12 PM PST* by
Toddsterpatriot — http://www.freerepublic.com/%7Etoddsterpatriot/ — (Science
is hard. Harder if you’re stupid.)
[ Post Reply — http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/3114918/reply?c=25 —
| Private
Reply — http://www.freerepublic.com/perl/mail-compose?refid=3114918.25;reftype=comment — |
To
24 — http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/3114918/posts?page=29#24 — | View
Replies — http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/3114918/replies?c=25 — | Report
Abuse — http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/3114918/abuse?c=25 — ]

---

To: *Toddsterpatriot*

That is a demonstration of supposedly Controlled Hot Fusion? Where does
‘fusion’ occur within those solar cells? It doesn’t. Everyone knows that
except you. Your CHF fraud boys produced Zip, as usual.

26 — http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/3114918/posts?page=26#26 — posted
on *Wed 05 Feb 2014 09:32:41 PM PST* by Kevmo
— http://www.freerepublic.com/%7Ekevmo/ — (”A person’s a person, no matter
how small” ~Horton Hears a Who)
[ Post Reply — http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/3114918/reply?c=26 —
| Private
Reply — http://www.freerepublic.com/perl/mail-compose?refid=3114918.26;reftype=comment — |
To
25 — http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/3114918/posts?page=29#25 — | View
Replies — http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/3114918/replies?c=26 — | Report
Abuse — http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/3114918/abuse?c=26 — ]

---

To: *Kevmo*
Right, because no one has ever *seen* useful amounts of energy produced by
fusion.

Deaf and blind.
27 — http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/3114918/posts?page=27#27 — posted
on *Thu 06 Feb 2014 06:08:38 AM PST* by
Toddsterpatriot — http://www.freerepublic.com/%7Etoddsterpatriot/ — (Science
is hard. Harder if you’re stupid.)
[ Post Reply — http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/3114918/reply?c=27 —
| Private
Reply — http://www.freerepublic.com/perl/mail-compose?refid=3114918.27;reftype=comment — |
To
26 — http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/3114918/posts?page=29#26 — | View
Replies — http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/3114918/replies?c=27 — | Report
Abuse — http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/3114918/abuse?c=27 — ]

---

To: *Toddsterpatriot*

There is nothing controlled nor useful about an H-Bomb. It is UNcontrolled.
It’s the difference between 13th century Chinese gunpowder bombs and 21st
century Internal Combustion Engines. 700 years difference, control vs.
uncontrolled. But someone as ignorant as you is calling an Hbomb “useful”
amounts of energy produced. Go ahead and stand next to one and let it go
off to prove to us how useful it is to you.

28 — http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/3114918/posts?page=28#28 — posted
on *Thu 06 Feb 2014 01:57:29 PM PST* by Kevmo
— http://www.freerepublic.com/%7Ekevmo/ — (”A person’s a person, no matter
how small” ~Horton Hears a Who)
[ Post Reply — http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/3114918/reply?c=28 —
| Private
Reply — http://www.freerepublic.com/perl/mail-compose?refid=3114918.28;reftype=comment — |
To
27 — http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/3114918/posts?page=29#27 — | View
Replies — http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/3114918/replies?c=28 — | Report
Abuse — http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/3114918/abuse?c=28 — ]

---

To: *Kevmo*
Damn, you’re denser than osmium.

*There is nothing controlled nor useful about an H-Bomb. It is
UNcontrolled. *

I’ve never heard of an H-bomb going off accidentally. Have you?

I’m pretty sure most H-bomb tests were successful.

Seems controlled to me.

*But someone as ignorant as you is calling an Hbomb “useful” amounts of
energy produced. *

Can you read? Right, because no one has ever *seen* useful amounts of
energy produced by fusion.

Are you under the impression that the only fusion we’ve seen was in an
H-bomb?
29 — http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/3114918/posts?page=29#29 — posted
on *Thu 06 Feb 2014 05:24:24 PM PST* by
Toddsterpatriot — http://www.freerepublic.com/%7Etoddsterpatriot/ — (Science
is hard. Harder if you’re stupid.)
[ Post Reply — http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/3114918/reply?c=29 —
| Private
Reply — http://www.freerepublic.com/perl/mail-compose?refid=3114918.29;reftype=comment — |
To
28 — http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/3114918/posts?page=29#28 — | View
Replies — http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/3114918/replies?c=29 — | Report
Abuse — http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/3114918/abuse?c=29 — ]

---

To: *Toddsterpatriot*

Damn, you’re denser than osmium.
***which would make you as stupid as a bag of rocks.

I’ve never heard of an H-bomb going off accidentally. Have you?
***Case in point, right here. Just look how incredibly stupid your argument
is. Your argument is that because you can decide WHEN it’s going to blow
up, that is an example of CHF. So, after hundreds of $billions trying to
control this reaction, the best we have is an on switch, no off switch, and
entire populations vaporized. That is YOUR example of controlled hot
fusion, a hot fusion car, a hot fusion water heater, a hot fusion jet pack.
I’d be more than happy to stand for an hour next to a Cold Fusion reaction;
and it would make me happy to see you stand for just a few seconds next to
your shining example of Controlled Hot Fusion while it’s turned on, as long
as I’m a continent away.

I’m pretty sure most H-bomb tests were successful.
***And we’ve spent hundreds of $billions trying to control that reaction so
we can use it. By your own admission, the only “control” we have over the
reaction is when to turn it on. In the meantime, guys like Hagelstein are
running Cold Fusion cells for MONTHS. My goodness, it just boggles the
imagination to see someone so stupid as to promote an atom bomb as an
example of a controlled, useful reaction. You can’t be that stupid. But
when we look over your posts, yup, you are that stupid.

Seems controlled to me.
***Yup. You ARE that stupid.

Kevmo: But someone as ignorant as you is calling an Hbomb “useful” amounts
of energy produced.

Toddiot: Can you read? Right, because no one has ever seen useful amounts
of energy produced by fusion.
***So, it’s so useful to you? Hundreds of $billions have been spent trying
to control the power of the hbomb, and what do we have to show for it? The
fact you can SEE it from afar? That’s USEFUL? Keep in mind this is money
spent well after the HBomb was produced. Its aim was directly to turn it
into a useful and controlled energy source. The best we have is that we can
stand 100 miles away and SEE an HBomb go off. And that’s supposedly
hundreds of $millions well spent. Only a stupid person could hold such a
position. And you DO hold such a position.

Are you under the impression that the only fusion we’ve seen was in an
H-bomb?
***No, we’ve seen fusion in that star that hangs in the sky. So, now your
position is that we’ve spent hundreds of $billions trying to control this
HBomb reaction and the best we have to show for controlled hot fusion is
that you can go outside and look at the sun? WTF? What was that money
fraudulently spent on? We could go and look at the sun long before that
money was spent, and if only 2% of it were spent on Cold Fusion instead of
CHF, we’d have LENR cars by now.

30 — http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/3114918/posts?page=30#30 — posted
on *Thu 06 Feb 2014 06:08:18 PM PST* by Kevmo
— http://www.freerepublic.com/%7Ekevmo/ — (”A person’s a person, no matter
how small” ~Horton Hears a Who)
[ Post Reply — http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/3114918/reply?c=30 —
| Private
Reply — http://www.freerepublic.com/perl/mail-compose?refid=3114918.30;reftype=comment — |
To
29 — http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/3114918/posts?page=29#29 — | View
Replies — http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/3114918/replies?c=30 — | Report
Abuse — http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/3114918/abuse?c=30 — ]

On Mon, Aug 12, 2013 at 9:23 PM, Kevin O’Malley — kevmol...@gmail.com — wrote:

[Kevmo]

Asked & Answered: When will I get my cold fusion Water Heater?

[Kevmo]

Re: [Vo]:Asked & Answered

Kevin O’Malley Mon, 02 Dec 2013 19:11:49 -0800
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/3097515/posts?page=62#62

What is amazing to me is that it’s OBVIOUSly an inductive pursuit right now
to figure out LENR, otherwise WE WOULD BE BUYING THEM. But skeptopaths
come onto inductive threads like this and act like their post is the
end-all, be-all that answers all questions: I’ll believe it when I can buy
it. It simply adds ZERO substance to the investigation. It is a form of
trolling, because you add in all kinds of snarky comments along the way.

Do you log onto other inductive threads the same way? Do you DEMAND to know
who’s going to win the 2014 elections? Do you log onto those threads and
say, “I’ll deal with this guy when he’s president, until then you all are
all just wasting your time.” No. Because such behavior is obvious trolling.
And if you DID post such nonsense, everyone would know you are a fool. But
here, you act like your foolishness is some kind of virtue.

It’s totally ridiculous. You can’t even answer one simple question about an
established scientific fact in the number of times this effect has been
replicated. You are a FOOL. And you can’t even see it.

62 — http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/3097515/posts?page=62#62 — posted
on *Mon 02 Dec 2013 07:07:40 PM PST* by Kevmo
— http://www.freerepublic.com/%7Ekevmo/ —

— http://www.freerepublic.com/%7Ekevmo/ —

On Mon, Aug 12, 2013 at 10:10 PM, Kevin O’Malley — kevmol...@gmail.com — wrote:

—
—
— I don’t know if these claims are ‘real’, I haven’t seen the device, nor
— personally ‘tested’ it.
— ***Raising the bar for cold fusion, lowering it for other things like hot
— fusion. You haven’t seen nor tested a huge range of scientific findings,
— but you aren’t engaged in hypercriticism of those developments. By such a
— standard you should be absolutely apoplectic over AGW
—
—
—
— When I can buy a $289 Cold-Fusion Water Heater, I’ll believe it. (Or various versions of technology).
—
— ***Raising the bar for cold fusion, lowering it for other things like hot fusion. Where is our hot-fusion flying car or jet pack? Why is controlled hot-fusion always 50 years away, and has been for the last 50 years?
—

[Kevmo]

We had someone use this fallacious form of argumentation today.

https://freerepublic.com/focus/bloggers/3998284/posts?page=83#83

Kevmo: especially since it has been replicated more than 150 times in peer reviewed journals. Stick that through your fallacy detector.

Amorphous: To date, not a single proven kW of electricity from a purposeful fusion reactor (hot or cold) has powered a consumer device, using less energy than it consumed, since man first purposely fused atoms 70 years ago. So, stick that through your reality detector, Mr. Fusion.

[Kevmo]

bhl is trolling these LENR threads once again, with that Rossi-Rossi-Rossi fixation he has.
https://freerepublic.com/focus/chat/4004206/posts?page=23#23

[Kevmo]

Moving The Goalposts
Skeptopaths constantly move the goalposts for LENR. This doesn’t happen in any other area of science.

https://www.lenr-forum.com/search-result/66261/?highlight=moving+goalposts

https://www.mail-archive.com/search?q=skeptopath&l=vortex-l%40eskimo.com

https://www.mail-archive.com/vortex- href=”mailto:l@eskimo.com”>l@eskimo.com/msg120295.html

[Kevmo]

Re: [Vo]:Asked & Answered: Derision
Kevin O’Malley Thu, 15 Aug 2013 16:46:54 -0700

Basic derision

***That’s all the skeptopaths seem to be able to muster. They can’t
counteract the science. They downshift into ridicule because they can get
away with it. It’s basically like saying, “hey, look, I can be an asshole
and get away with it, so that’s what I’m going to do.” It does NOTHING to
further the science. There isn’t even an attempt to refute the science
behind the claims.

The same thing happened to the Wright brothers for 5 years between the time
they first flew an airplane in 1903 and the time they had a contract to
demo against in 1908. What happened to those skeptopaths in 1904? They
were utterly discredited, but within a few weeks of the Wright brothers
demonstration, they were spouting off yet again about how things should be
done differently, better, more to their liking. It’s horse shit.