[Here is a follow-up message I sent to Steve, Scott and Mike Melich.]
To be fair, I should point out that as far as I know no one has replicated the latest claims by Dash & Zhang, and their method is significantly different from other cold fusion claims. So I think it is possible that they are making a mistake, as Scott's results indicate. Without much more information about both sides, plus some other independent attempts at replication, it is impossible for me to judge who is right.
I agree with Steve that the word "verify" does not describe this process very well. The first independent replication of Fleischmann and Pons did not "verify" it once and for all. There was still plenty of room for doubt. On the other hand, I would say the first 10 quality replications did verify it. Enough replications do add up to certainty. To put it another way, there is no other way to be certain about an experimental claim. Multiple, high s/n replications are the only standard of truth.
The tricky part is deciding how many replications at what s/n ratio you need before you can be absolutely certain. Laplace developed methods of determining this, which Mike Melich has been discussing lately.
Scott has not been able to replicate any cold fusion experiment, so he must lack some essential skills or tools. It cannot be that his results outweigh replications in hundreds of major labs. If that were possible, the experimental method itself would not work, and replications would mean nothing.
- Jed
