Mark Gibbs <mgi...@gibbs.com> wrote: I know, I know ... I'm being harsh but this report smacks of boosterism > more than anything else . . . >
I see your point. This report from Lichtenberg is nothing to write home about. I thought you were saying that Rossi himself is not kind, competent or reputable. I would say he is two out of three. I agree this report is somewhat pointless. So is the recent statement by Defkalion. As I said, it mainly says "the energy market is large." > and, as such, merely makes the field of LENR even more hype-ridden. > Are you sure LENR is hype-ridden? Compared to what? I have often heard this from you and from various critics. I do not see much evidence for it. Most of the papers I read are carefully hedged and scientific. People often point to the 1989 press conference by F&P as unreasonably hyped. I have seen it often. It was very careful and sober. Everything they claimed then was soon confirmed by well over 100 major labs. In my opinion, mainstream research such as plasma fusion and cancer research is far more hype-ridden than cold fusion. The only hype I have seen in this field are the unreasonable, ignorant claims of opponents at *Nature*, the *New Scientist*, the *Washington Post*, the APS and elsewhere that cold fusion researchers are "Branch Davidian lunatics," criminals and so on. If Rossi's claims are ever fully substantiated, no one will say they were "hype" or exaggerated. Other than Krivit, I have not spoken with anyone who is familiar with his work, and who has actually seen and tested the devices, who thinks he is exaggerating, or lying about the performance. If anything, Rossi has understated the impact of his discovery. That is true of mainstream cold fusion as well, as I showed in my book. - Jed
