Joshua Cude wrote:
> That's cold fusion's problem: the quality of the evidence is abysmal -- > not better than the evidence for bigfoot, alien visits, dowsing, > homeopathy. . . > > Incorrect. The quality of evidence is excellent. See: http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/McKubreMCHcoldfusionb.pdf As Ed pointed out, Cude has not found any error in any paper, and he has not pointed out errors here. Merely asserting that there are errors does not make it true. In 1991, Heinz Gerischer wrote: "there are now undoubtedly overwhelming indications that nuclear processes take place in the metal alloys." He was the Director of the Max Planck Institute for Physical Chemistry in Berlin, and one of the best electrochemists of the 20th century. He examined the experiments carefully and wrote detailed technical critiques of them. So, who are we going to believe here? Cude who offers no evidence? Or Gerisher and several hundred other world class experts? Skeptics have never looked carefully or published papers showing errors in cold fusion. Morrison tried, but his paper was a farce. This is the best that any skeptic has managed to publish in 25 years. It is here: http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/Fleischmanreplytothe.pdf - Jed
