posted on Jan, 13 2012 @ 12:45 AM
reply to post by CaptainBeno
It's very reminiscent of cold fusion actually. Here are some similarities:
1. They are pursuing patents and communicating through the media, rather than publishing scientific papers.
2. The scientists worked in relative isolation, first Fleischmann and Pons with cold fusion, now Rossi (and apparently NASA is trying to copy Rossi or
something and get their own patent).
3. Both are claiming to "save the world" with a fantastic new source of energy.
4. The scientific community has been skeptical in both cases.
They may be a little less skeptical of NASA's claim that there aren't really any heavier elements being produced, so it's not really fusion, but as
Fleischmann and Pons demonstrated, applying for a patent doesn't necessarily mean the thing works.
Let's see how many of the seven warning signs of bogus science
1. The discoverer pitches the claim directly to the media.
2. The discoverer says that a powerful establishment is trying to suppress his or her work.
3. The scientific effect involved is always at the very limit of detection.
4. Evidence for a discovery is anecdotal.
5. The discoverer says a belief is credible because it has endured for centuries.
6. The discoverer has worked in isolation.
7. The discoverer must propose new laws of nature to explain an observation.
- Cold fusion proponents claimed this, and now LENR is the "new" cold fusion.
- Actually with cold fusion experiments, it was sometimes beyond detection, depending on the batch of palladium used. And I've seen no credible
confirmation of the LENR process NASA speaks of.
- Applies. The video in the OP is anecdotal, as is most of the other information on the Rossi LENR claim.
- Doesn't apply.
- Rossi works in isolation, and he may be the only person in the world who knows the "secret ingredient".
- This was true of cold fusion. It's unclear from a 2 minute NASA video and their draft patent what process they are really claiming. Even the
patent is horribly ambiguous. So it's hard to say whether it involves new laws or violation of existing laws yet when the process is so
So I think 6 out of 7 of the warning signs suggested by Dr Park at least partially apply, though we don't really know about #7 but that's a warning
sign itself that the process is so ill-defined. Therefore if you're holding your breath waiting to buy an e-cat in Home Depot this fall, I'd suggest
you may want to reconsider.