Garwin's statement was mind boggling. As Ed says, 60 Minutes did us a
favor by airing his comment.
McKubre's response was good. I would have exploded! Perhaps, if I had
been the interviewer, I might have had the presence of mind to ask
Garwin: "If this is an error measuring input, how do you explain the
heat-after-death and gas loading results, where there is no input
power?" He would evaded the issue I am sure, but I would love to see
him squirm.
Beaudette commented on Garwin:
"Earlier, I mentioned the three experienced electrochemists who
visited the McKubre laboratory at SRI, Menlo Park, California, during
the years 1990 through 1994. They were A. Bard, (University of Texas,
Austin, Texas), H. Birnbaum, (University of Illinois, Urbana,
Illinois), Richard Garwin, (IBM, White Plains, New York), and N. S.
Lewis, (Caltech). Each spent several days examining McKubre's
laboratory practice in detail. They found no procedural error with
the measuring technique or data reduction techniques used to evaluate
the operating performance of the cold fusion type cells. They had no
contractual obligations either to reveal or to keep the things they
learned confidential. Nevertheless, they chose to say nothing to the
scientific community."
Steve Krivit has the Garwin report here:
http://www.newenergytimes.com/v2/reports/GarwinLewisReport/garwin.shtml
I am looking for a juicy quote from it that gives the lie to his
statements on 60 Minutes.
- Jed
