Replies

I've read Beaudette’s book and as the sub title would indicate he focus’ on the tug of war between skeptics and believers. nuclear physisicts and chemists.

He does a good job describing the mindsets of both and even tries to explain the many failed attempts to reproduce the early results of F-P by saying,

“The insistence that science requires a general reproducibility represents a kind of duck-pond thinking”.

The one criteria that imposes some discipline Beaudette dismisses as herd..flock? mentality.

If a person is looking for background information on lenr, canr, cold fusion that's not cold or fusion or whatever is the latest term, then his book is at least the equal of Wikipedia.

"I've read Beaudette’s book and as the sub title would indicate he focus’ on the tug of war between skeptics and believers. nuclear physisicts and chemists."

LOL. That part of it is strictly incidental to his cataloging of the experimental science of LENR. I'd say you've been VERY guilty of selective reading. Check the page counts of descriptions of experiments and results vs those pertaining to the sociology of skeptopathy.

But for the lurkers, don't believe me OR CYC. Read it and decide for youselves.

"The one criteria that imposes some discipline Beaudette dismisses as herd..flock? mentality."

Of course, as you and the skeptpaths sell it, that sounds "really bad". But any real scientist knows that 100% reproducibility of ANY experiment simply doesn't happen in the real world. The LENR phenomenon is difficult to make happen, and the percentage of successful experiments was, at first, a good bit less than 50%. LENR researchers combatted that problem by running many cells simultaneously, with slightly different conditions. Some cells showed consistent excess heat, others didn't (and thus served as controls). But over the years the precentage of reproducible experiments has increased (which is NOT what would happen if the effect were due to random error). Once the percentage of successful runs exceeded 50% of experiments (which many prominent skeptics said was all that was necessary for proof), those same skeptics "moved the goal posts" and began claiming (as you have) that experiments had to be 100% reproducible.....a requirement that is ridiculous on it's face.