----- Original Nachricht ----
Von: Moab Moab <moab2...@googlemail.com>
An: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Datum: 13.12.2011 21:51
Betreff: [VO]: ENEA endorses the phenomenon
> 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 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."*
>
Yes, the proof is in the pudding.
The problem is: There is no pudding.
I looked up Piantelli in this document.
Piantelli reports neutrons 2000 times above natural background and gamma
radiation that darkenes a photographic film.
Remember, Bequerel discovere radiactivity by accident, when he used urane as a
paperweight for a photographic film.
He also had a scissor on the film and he found its shadow picture at the film.
This experiment was repeated many times and changed history of science.
So, if Piantelli where able to give definitive proof about this, he could
change history of science again.
Why doesnt he do it? I dont know his reasons, but probably he wants to protect
his secrets. This is always the problem with these LENR guys, they must protect
their industrial secrets. So nobody knows, do they industrial R&D or
unversitary fundamental research. They are always between two chairs, you dont
know what they want. Of course they cannot get public funding and scientific
acknowledgement, if they keep their methods secret and dont show definitive
results.
So they think they can do without public funding, then they should not
complain, if they get none.
> My question to Mary Yugo:
>
> Why would the president from ENEA endorse the existance of the phenomenon ?
Possibly because he is professor in economics, but not professor in physics?
> 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
>
