maybe some should revert the question? is there any credible critic by someone who have proven an artifact , published it, and that this artifact explain many possible positive results ?
I feel there is very few, narrow, and addressed. am I wrong? 2013/12/7 Jed Rothwell <[email protected]> > Blaze Spinnaker <[email protected]> wrote: > > "Obviously it can, since it has been." >> >> I long ago realized never to say something like this publicly unless >> >> >> - I had personally done it myself >> - Someone everyone trusts had done it >> >> Martin Fleischmann and Stan Pons did it, in France, long ago. See the > paper I linked to, above. I trust them. Maybe you don't, but I do. > > >
