Axil Axil <[email protected]> wrote: In my opinion, the data revealed in the two Defkalion papers for ICCF-17 > and ICCF-18 contains a wealth of information or all those who take that > information seriously. >
I always take information seriously. But I have seen many, many experimental errors. Mostly unpublished. Heck, I've *made* many experimental errors. You have to be very cautious with a radical new approach such as Defkalion's. You must wait to see it independently replicated. Or, at least, independently confirmed. Many groups have visited Defkalion, but not one has published a paper. They are under NDA. The only thing I have heard from two of them was, in modern slang, "meh," said with the "McKayla is not impressed" look. > For example, the transmutation data in the ICCF is very revealing to what > the underlying nuclear reactions might be. > Either that or it is a mistake. For those who discount transmutation of elements as important in LENR and > for those who limit their beliefs to deuterium fusion to helium, the paper > was a disappointment and hard to accept. > Here is the problem with your hypothesis: There are no such people. No one, anywhere, has ever "discounted" transmutation. There has always been deep interest in transmutations, from the time they were first reported by the NRL in 1989, and later by Mizuno and Miley. Everyone has always considered this vitally important evidence. If people do not find Defkalion's transmutation claims compelling, it is because those claims have not been fully reported in detail with a complete description of the methods and instruments, and because they have not been replicated. - Jed
