my first post ... Mary Yugo wrote
> As Carl Sagan was fond of pointing out, the more extreme the claim, the > better the evidence has to be. Anyone can claim anything and there are > plenty of strange and not wonderful web sites that demonstrate the > phenomenon. The interesting thing to me is always the evidence and not the > claim, especially when it comes to Rossi. In their 2009 book *"COLD FUSION The history of research in Italy"* <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cold_fusion#cite_note-ENEAbook-14> The Italian National agency ENEA present an overview of the research in ENEA departments, CNR <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consiglio_Nazionale_delle_Ricerche> Laboratories, INFN, Universities and Industrial laboratories in Italy. In the foreword of the book Luigi Paganetto, president of ENEA says: *"In other words, two government programs – carried out in close interaction and with check of results – have proved the existence of this phenomenon in terms that are not ascribable to a chemical process. This must be considered a starting point. The results achieved so far represent an obligation to continue on the scientific path already started with the aim of achieving a complete definition of the studied phenomenon."* My question to Mary Yugo: Why would the president from ENEA endorse the existance of the phenomenon ? What would be is the rationale for that in your opinion ? If you use rhetoric to dismiss the ENEA as competent research agency or to dismiss its president as a loony then I will know that you have no real answer. Thank you Moab
