If it all worked so well as its advocates claim, then put one of these power producing cold fusion cells in an electric car and take a few turns around the block. It will convince everyone.
***It doesn’t “work so well”, as Sinha even points out in THIS paper. But this electric car analogy is another fallacy of raising the bar for cold fusion that isn’t there for hot fusion. Why don’t we have hot fusion electric cars? Then why do you demand that cold fusion produce such progress?
It is possible that Rossi is moving forward into production and will settle the debate in that manner, but until that happens we’re stuck with inductive reasoning.
No one is claiming that hot fusion has demonstrated that it is or that it can be a viable controlled source of energy (as opposed to the uncontrolled energy that we know it can produce). It is very much a research problem, and so far there is no movement to claim results that are substantially at variance with generally accepted laws of physics.
The LENR crowd on the other hand has been making claims far beyond what any good physicist finds credible, claiming as you have repeatedly done, extraordinary levels of heat production, and claiming to see not only what no one else can see, but claiming to have a theory for why no one lese sees what they see. One of the immutable laws of physics that is pretty broadly accepted is that the laws of physics are the same in all laboratories. When you claim the amount of energy released that you have claimed folks want to see the somking hole, the moving vehicle or some evidence that the extra heat is not a fever in the brain of the claimant.