> I’ve read and seen several instances where one of the scientists you’ve mentioned above has taken a totally unsubstantiated claim from Rossi and treated it as though it were a well-established fact.Cold Fusion: Physcists Sven Kullander and Hanno Essén interviewed about the Rossi-Focardi cell
***Feel free to provide evidence for this assertion as well.
Kullander says:
In this case, you have to believe in the inventor Rossi, who says he has been producing heat without any input of energy... And, in addition, he has heated a building in Bologna for a year."No evidence, you just have to "believe" in Rossi.
Kullander than says:
But the problem is that Rossi, and to some extent Focardi, won't release any details. It is unknown what the reactor looks like inside, what substances it contains, the patent is not approved, so therefore the experiment cannot be repeated. And therefore the process cannot be scientifically grounded. The question now is the reliability of the information we have been supplied."The interviewer asks why they think it's credible despite that lack of some essential pieces of information. Kullander says:
Well, partly because he [Rossi] says it... and partly because he has optimized (the process) in different ways.He says that Rossi "has optimized the process in different ways" even though he just finished talking about how they don't know anything about the contents or operations of the gadget. So, how does he know that Rossi has "optimized the process"? Why, Rossi said so, of course!
Kullander then says:
What I think is important... there is a device which is made in many units and which is being sold...Again, no evidence, just Rossi's unsubstantiated claims.
These scientist obvious trust Rossi, but they seem to be doing so in spite of, not because of, any actual evidence being provided.