Abd ul-Rahman Lomax <[email protected]> wrote: Perhaps we should go over Hoffman publicly, we've only discussed this > privately, as far as I recall. Hoffman was a true skeptic, not a > pseudoskeptic, and this is obvious from his book, Dialog on cold fusion. So > perhaps he was wrong on something, so he made an assertion that was not > ultimately supportable.
He made several assertions that were not supportable, one that was preposterous (about tritium -- a large fraction of the book) and several others that were outrageous distortions intended to make cold fusion look bad. Yes, he included some true information but it is mainly trivial, useless, or not relevant to cold fusion. Overall, the book was so bad SRI issued a legal threat and forced them to add the one-page addendum loose leaf sheet in the front, which is the only unequivocally true and important statement in the book. Granted, it is better than Taubes or Huizenga, but that's setting the bar low! I do not understand why Lomax claims I cited only one error in the book. I sent him a copy of my Infinite Energy review, which lists many errors and problems. - Jed
