Kevin O'Malley <kevmol...@gmail.com> wrote:
> ***Hagelstein wrote this editorial shortly after having his latest LENR > experiment run for several MONTHS in his lab. How has the size of the > claimed effect gotten smaller . . . > It has not gotten smaller. Especially considering the fact that the Italian cathodes are much smaller than the ones in use back in 1990. The ratio of heat to surface and mass is higher, not low. The s/n ratio is better, not worse, because the instruments are better. > , and how is that consistent with pathological science? > The skeptics have changed the definition of pathological science time after time. Cold fusion does not fit any of the criteria originally defined by Langmuir, so the skeptics either invent new criteria, or they ignore the facts and claim that it does fit the old ones. For example, they claim that a 100 W reaction is difficult to detect and might be an experimental error, or they claim that no such high heat reactions were ever detected. See: http://pages.csam.montclair.edu/~kowalski/cf/293wikipedia.html - Jed
