In short, thank you for mentioning Feynman. The contrast between that great man and those arguing for LENR could not be clearer. That is exactly my point. The LENR crowd do not talk like good physicists, none of them, and the contrast with Feynman is clear demonstration of that.
He would never do what Siha has done, which is to trip over the laws of physics without passing mention.
***That is a straw argument. Sinha has not tripped over the laws of physics. His claim is legitimate in that ordinary physics experiments do not see the results that LENR experiments see in metal deuterides. If you accept the observation of 14,000 replications of excess heat then the next step is to explain the physics of that observation. If you do not accept the observation, then the discussion stops there.
Here’s a modern analogy. Farmers for centuries would report that rocks fell from the sky. Scientists said it was impossible. And yet, the observation still stood, and once the observation was accepted, the physical explanation for that observation changed the viewpoint of science. The observers were not wrong, the scientists were.