Horace Heffner wrote:
This may be an interesting intellectual exercise, but what will it achieve? Another 15 years of bickering?
The purpose is to keep the readers at LENR-CANR informed. We would not want the public to think that we are satisfied with the quality of the DoE report.
The document is mostly written already. I was thinking of adding the text I just wrote here to the News report. It does not matter much, because most readers skip the news section and the other HTML screens. They go directly to the Acrobat documents. So it does not matter much what we say.
I just glanced at the DoE report yesterday, and those two mistakes caught my eye. There are probably more.
Anyway, the report has nothing to do with science, and no real technical content. The so-called objections are all transparent handwaving. All of the points they raised are addressed in the literature. Heck, they are all addressed by me, in a paper written for the non-expert general public: http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/RothwellJintroducti.pdf. This is babyfood. These "expert" reviewers made stupid mistakes that would earn a failing grade in high school chemistry. Obviously, they did not bother to read the papers, or stop and think. As I said, the purpose of the report is to arrange another assassination of cold fusion by proving that it does not produce neutrons. They probably plan to fund a few more experiments by Jones and others who despise excess heat, and then announce either:
1. CF does not exist. Case closed.
OR --
2. CF does exist, it produces neutrons, and it is an unimportant type of hot fusion.
When they say: "Several reviewers specifically stated that more experiments similar in nature to those that have been carried out for the past fifteen years are unlikely to advance knowledge in this area." Translated into plain English that means:
Stop telling us what we do not want to know! No more excess heat!
- Jed
