>From Akira:

> -----Original Message-----
> > McKubre's M4 bogus experiment index:
> >
> > http://newenergytimes.com/v2/sr/McKubreM4/McKubre-Experiment-M4.shtml
> http://newenergytimes.com/v2/sr/McKubreM4/20111221ToWhomItMayConcern.sh
> tml
> In the above link it appears to me that Krivit is not just attacking
> McKubre, but also accusing him of scientific fraud, or at the very
> least strongly implying that he is involved in it. This is stuff for
> lawyers that won't benefit at all the entire LENR field, and I mean
> including W&L as well.

In the past I believe Krivit has strongly given the impression that
scientific fraud was perpetuated by McKubre. I recall this particular issue
hit me right in the face when I was still a New Energy Times board member.
This happened a year or two ago, when Krivit went on an internet radio show
and implied that key CF researchers had "lied" about their research. Krivit
didn't directly say they "lied" about their data during the interview, but
he made it quite clear what he wanted the listeners to draw such a
conclusion. I privately talked about the content of Krivit's interview to a
lawyer I have known for years. His response back to me was that Krivit was
using "weasel words"... to imply what he really wanted his listeners to
conclude. It was the final straw for me - one of the primary reasons I
resigned from the NET board of directors. The lawyer thought that my
decision to resign was a wise decision on my part.

Personally, I have yet to understand what "cold fusion" really is, what it
actually stands for, and particularly the actual physics that might
allegedly be behind it. I'm nevertheless astonished that there are people
who want to turn the "CF" word into a pariah - and then conveniently insert
their own brand word.

I don't think anything good will come of this. Certainly not for Mr. Krivit.

Steven Vincent Johnson

Reply via email to