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

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.


22 posted on 10/04/2021 11:34:11 AM PDT by DoughtyOne (Democrats, fixing things that haven't been broken, so they don't work, for over 197 years.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: DoughtyOne

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.


23 posted on 10/04/2021 4:07:39 PM PDT by bhl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | 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