I enjoy your cold fusion posts (but remain unconvinced).
In this case...
I would appreciate it if you wish to post any more references from that
particular blog (or whatever it is) please use cut and paste. That site
tried to load so much shit into my computer that I finally had to force
my browser to close. Therefore I never got to read the article you
posted, and certainly won't risk another try.
Vaughn
Hey Vaughn,
I'm not sure what problem you're having, I didn't have any problem
loading it.
It is an article that is 4 pages long, but to get to the second page you
you need to click "2".
Opps,
The page won't load right now, so I think they are having
an issue. Oh, just tried it again and it came right up.
Try again, I don't see a problem loading the page, and I'm on a boat
using wifi that's at least 100 yards away.
Here's the first few paragraphs, you can see if it interests you.
Mikek
Over the last several years, there have been many reports around the world about important multiple successes with what is popularly
known as "Cold Fusion", or more properly what is now known as
"Low-Energy Nuclear Reactions" (LENR). The latest was from January 31, 2012
at M.I.T. in Cambridge, Massachusetts. Professors Peter L. Hagelstein
and Mitchell Swartz gave a symposium and short class where a
successful 2-day LANL / LENR/ Cold Fusion experiment was done publicly
that produced at least 10 times the energy out, than was used.
This event was especially significant, since it was some professors and administration officials at M.I.T. who were leading the anti-cold
fusion attack wave in the early 1990's. Pro-CF proponents, such as the
late Dr. Eugene Mallove of Harvard and M.I.T. who wrote books and
articles on LENR before his murder in 2004, have theorized that the
vehement attacks, derision, and accusations publicly made about it then
were at least partially about M.I.T. and others trying to protect the
large amount of government funding they received for "hot fusion" research;
which would soon become utterly obsolete if cold fusion were a reality.
LENR research is dozens of times less expensive to perform than
hot fusion research, and much less ongoing funding is needed to maintain
a laboratory. No one knows for sure the real reasons CF was completely
discarded and discredited in the U.S. in the early 1990's; and certainly
many skeptics there and other places were genuine in their condemnations,
since many labs attempted "honest" replications and failed to get any
positive results (but others during that time did in fact get good
results).
At any rate, events have proven that the early Pons and Fleischmann
experiments were indeed correct and worthy of much greater study and
investment,
and the most prestigious scientific institute of all, M.I.T., has now
seen a successful public demonstration and verification over 20 years later.
Besides the above, NASA and other agencies of the U.S. government have expressed great interest in LENR. In late 2011, a presentation about it was
given at a major NASA meeting, verifying it is a valid and highly
important technology that will be pursued in the future. Dr. Dennis
Bushnell,
highly respected Chief Scientist at NASA Langley, has recently made
several positive public statements about LENR and its validity. And back
in 2008,
the CBS "Sixty Minutes" TV show did a segment on it ("Cold Fusion is Hot
Again"), where the amazing statement that the U.S. Naval Research Lab had
positively verified significant excess energy production was first
publicly made. Unfortunately, since that Sixty Minutes program first aired,
very little has changed regarding LENR in the U.S.: University labs are
still routinely denied funding to study LENR (difficult to understand,
until one "follows the money" and sees that the majority of these funds
for university-level energy research now come as endowments and grants
from large corporations such as oil companies), and we hear very little
about it in the mainstream media.
