that looks familiar.
But remember correlation does not mean causation.
My "History" section now has:
Cravens And Letts (The Enabling Criteria of Electrochemical Heat: Beyond Reasonable Doubt) performed a statistical anaylysis of 167 papers, and identified 4 criteria which were satisfied in all successful experiments (including Pons and Fleishman's original paper), and in which one or more were omitted in failed experiments -- including all the original "Debunking" papers. The most important are Lewis (Caltech) -- where NONE of these criteria were met, and Williams (Harwell), in which only ONE was met. These two papers effectively removed Cold Fusion from main stream science (and funding). Cravens And Letts point out that although ignoring these criteria guarantees failure, folllowing them improves, but does not ensure success. Alchemists were well advised to include the "eye of newt" in their potions, since they did not understand which of the many steps was critical to success, and which were irrelevant. These alchemists used better science than Lewis and Williams.
[ I still need another pass through the spellchecker .. ]
Oh I wish I know what Rossi's secret additive is.
Don't we all!
