On May 9, 2013, at 8:12 AM, Jed Rothwell wrote:

It is well-known that people engaged in wishful thinking often see patterns where there are none. This is why a gambler believes in a lucky talisman. It is less often noted that people in extreme denial sometimes look at a clear pattern and fail to see it. Any reasonable person looking at McKubre Fig. 1 can see that high loading is a control factor for excess heat, and that the results are not erratic or random:

http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/McKubreMCHcoldfusionb.pdf

Cude not only fails to see this pattern, he mixes up two numbers:

1. The number of tests that fail to achieve high loading and therefore do not meet necessary conditions. These never produce heat, which is good evidence that high loading is necessary.

And this behavior is exactly what would be expected. Deuterium is a reactant. Therefore, its concentration will determine the reaction rate. When the concentration is too low, the rate of power production drops below that which can be detected by the calorimeter, hence appears to be zero. Consequently, Mckubre observed exactly the behavior that must occur regardless of the explanation. Furthermore, everyone who made composition measurements while measuring heat, including myself, found the same relationship. As people keep pointing out, this and other correlations that cannot result from error support the FACT that cold fusion is a phenomenon of nature.

If Cude wanted to make a contribution, he could ask questions that would reveal facts that he and others might not know rather than giving a counter argument to every support for CF. This discussion is exactly like one about the earth being flat or the Moon landing being a fake. Reality does exist. Cude is either playing games with us for fun, as he claims, or he is insane. In either case, this is a waste of time.


Ed Storms

2. The number of tests that achieve high loading and produce high heat. Nearly all of them do. This is irrefutable evidence that high loading is necessary, but not quite sufficient.

- Jed


Reply via email to