I wrote:
> I can't identify such an artifact, neither can you identify a nuclear >> reaction that fits the claims. >> > > I do not need to identify the reaction. The tritium and helium proves it > is a nuclear reaction. > To put it another way, the only 'theory' I need is the what engineers call the theory of the instrument. That is, I have to show that tritium detectors and x-ray film work, and that according to conventional nuclear theory, tritium production is by definition a nuclear reaction. Those two assertions are extremely well established. A "skeptic" who ignores them or tries to overthrow them to prove that cold fusion is not real is no skeptic at all. That would be an extreme true believer. Cude's assertions about instruments artifacts that magically cause fake tritium and fake excess heat are far more radical than any controversial cold fusion theory, such as Widom-Larsen. I hate to say it, but the notion that a thermocouple artifact can cause a tritium detector to malfunction and x-ray film to show phantom radiation is far into wild-eyed, tin-foil-hat territory. - Jed
