Actually, this one too: http://www.globalenergycorporation.net/Publications.aspx
Though it's a link to links, it's a good one to use for scientists who like peer reviewed pubs. On Fri, Jul 26, 2013 at 5:30 PM, blaze spinnaker <blazespinna...@gmail.com> wrote: > (Not for pathoskeptics, who I ignore, they bore me with their repetitive > noise) > > 1. https://www.google.com/patents/US8419919 (Navy Patent) > 2. http://www.google.com/patents/WO2013076378A2 Soinen's patent (In > particular pointing out the pyroelectric fusion) > 3. http://arxiv.org/abs/1305.3913 (I point out all of the 7 employed > academics stand by this report still, even after skeptical criticisms) > > Mostly I'm trying to come up with links that are hard to ignore / > debate. Ideally they'd be relatively fresh and come from people who > aren't amongst the widely known usual suspects in this sort of thing. > > I like to avoid meta links which are just links to more links. > > I'd love to hear other suggestions! >
