Slate Article Slams Fusion, Hot and Cold

Slate Magazine has today published a particularly harsh article written by Charles Seife entitled “Fusion Energy’s Dreamers, Hucksters, and Loons” which criticizes all kinds of fusion energy projects.

He spends most of the article focusing on the international ITER fusion project, also mentions the U.S. National Ignition Facility, and a new project starting up in South Korea. He criticizes them for their massive budgets and decades-in-the-future projected completion dates. He also, however, lumps cold fusion into the same category, and doesn’t hold back in expressing his thoughts about some researchers in the field.

For one thing, the history of fusion energy is filled with crazies, hucksters, and starry-eyed naifs chasing after dreams of solving the world’s energy problems. One of the most famous of all, Martin Fleischmann, died earlier this year. Along with a colleague, Stanley Pons, Fleischmann thought that he had converted hydrogen into helium in a beaker in his laboratory, never mind that if he had been correct he would have released so much energy that he and his labmates would have been fricasseed by the radiation coming out of the device. Fleischmann wasn’t the first—Ronald Richter, a German expat who managed to entangle himself in the palace intrigues of Juan Peron, beat Fleischmann by nearly four decades—and the latest schemer, Andrea Rossi, won’t be the last.

His main critique seems to be that after decades of research in the fusion field, there has been nothing to show for all the time and money invested into them. I think most people who have been following the cold fusion story will recognize the many differences between hot and cold fusion, not least the minuscule amounts of funding that cold has received in comparison to hot. There is also, of course, the theoretical differences between the two approaches. Cold fusion may be a term that ends up confusing people who assume it is just a small scale version of the hydrogen bomb; from what researchers are reporting, there seems to be very different physics involved.

  • daniel maris

    I am coming to the conclusion that you might as well stick with cold fusion, even if somewhat inaccurate, given there is so much irrational opposition going on, why not “stick it to them”! There are plenty of examples in science of misnomers, big and small, being incorporated into the scientific narrative.

    • It’s a bit (!) funny that suddenly we are discussing if cold fusion should change its name to avoid inheriting bad karma from hot fusion. But I agree with you: no it shouldn’t. If a reaction reduces the number of atoms, it’s logical to call it fusion. And if it does that, it’s usually exothermic.

  • georgehants

    January 3rd, 2013 at 9:56 AM
    Mr. Rossi
    Happy New Year to You
    I was wondering if you were at liberty to explain more about the collaboration that is occurring with your partner. I understood from one of your previous responses that the partner has access to the key IP for the E-cat. Is this correct? What exactly is the nature of their contribution? Are they working internally on their own E-Cats based upon the information you have given them? Are they just providing technical suggestions and manpower?
    Thank you for taking the time to answer my question
    Andrea Rossi
    January 3rd, 2013 at 11:49 AM
    Dear Brian:
    1- yes
    2- they manufacture plants
    3- yes
    4- not just, but also.
    Warm Regards,

  • Joel C.

    Charles Seife is Scrooge incarnate.

  • Sandy

    “Several hundred years ago, Benjamin Franklin researched an effect he called ‘cold fusion.’ He meant by this term the strange heatless melting or fusing of metal objects struck by lightning or exposed to electrical discharge. He wrote that coins held in a pocket that was struck by lightning were found merged together without scorching the pocket and that a sword melted without scorching the scabbard that held it. Under certain circumstances, lightning, electricity or BL may cause atoms to change state. I call it a ball lightning state.”

    E. H. Lewis, The Ball Lightning State In Cold Fusion

    Andrea Rossi has reported that electromotive force is being produced directly by his Hot Cat. This electromotive force may be what is causing “cold fusion” to occur in the Hot Cat. I wonder if Rossi is aware of Benjamin Franklin’s use of the term “cold fusion”.

    • Sandy

      Does the hydrogen gas in a Hot Cat turn into a plasma? If it does then “magnetohydrodynamics” may be useful in explaining “cold fusion”.

      “Magnetohydrodynamics (MHD) (magneto fluid dynamics or hydromagnetics) is an academic discipline which studies the dynamics of electrically conducting fluids. Examples of such fluids include plasmas, liquid metals, and salt water or electrolytes. The word magnetohydrodynamics (MHD) is derived from magneto- meaning magnetic field, hydro- meaning liquid, and -dynamics meaning movement. The field of MHD was initiated by Hannes Alfvén,[1] for which he received the Nobel Prize in Physics in 1970.”

      • Curbina

        MHD is already being suppressed as it allows for many things that are “unconvenient” to be possible, even hypersonic flight. Early in the 60s it was being researched for 60% efficient transformation of heat to electricity…

        • MHD is not suppressed, it’s used nearly everywhere in space plasma physics and astrophysics nowadays. For example I have authored at least ten papers about it. The hypersonic MHD research is also going on. In fact, it’s only in recent years that hypersonic MHD research has gotten new momentum from the ability to do numerical simulations, after the surge of experimental activity in the 1960’s as you correctly said. But experimental MHD wind tunnel research is continuing as well.

          In principle, given an efficient enough source of electric power, MHD might ultimately allow hypersonic flight through atmosphere almost without frictional losses and without sonic boom. See e.g. Semenov et al., Plasma Phys. Control. Fusion 44 (2002) B293-305. MHD is also being researched in reentry physics for making a magnetic barrier for shielding the reentry vehicle.

    • dogman

      Lewis Larsen has speculated about the possible connection between lightning, neutrons, and LENRs…

    • Paolo

      The EMF generated in Hot Cat is probably due to nanomagnetism, a phenomenon and topic in which Brian Ahern, Rossi’s competitor and notable researcher in Lenr, is a very big expert. We will hear again about nanomagnetism very much in the future, because it opens an entirely new field of research in Physics.

  • GreenWin

    The most entertaining part of this article by “New Scientist” writer and mathematician Charlie Seife is his utter confusion about how LENR works. While his Slate diatribe is mostly accurate when talking about the absurdity of hot fusionists and their multi-billion $$ taxpayer funded black holes (ITER, NIF, mag confinement, etc.) – he has absolutely NO CLUE about cold fusion research and its empirical differences from hot fusion.

    Here we find evidence of the latest scheme to discredit the science of LENR. Confused “journalists” like Seife knowingly dismiss the hard LENR research evidence accumulated over the past 23 years; then lump LENR in with the loony hot fusioneasts – as if they are all from one taxpayer bilking family. How such a conclusion arrives from the mind of an NYU “Journalism Professor” can only be a work of gnarled science fiction.

    To his limited credit Seife makes well-known points about 60 years of failed hot fusion schemes:

    “…scientists at Livermore National Lab [National Ignition Facility] keep pretending that their hyper-expensive laser research is somehow going to produce fusion energy, even though they’ve got to go through Rube Goldberg-esque variations of the idea to make it look like they’ve got a shot at success. (For those keeping score at home, the latest project, too, will be an abject failure if it ever gets funding.)” Seife

    At some point Mr. Seife should do an experiment at his kitchen sink – running hot and cold water to “feel” the fundamental difference between hot and cold fusion. There are millions of degrees of separation. But one must be sensitive to hot and cold just as one is to good and evil – to be an honest journalist.


  • georgehants

    Sorry if old —-
    picture from newenergytimes
    NASA has produced and featured a video presenting LENR as a technology. The video features Dr. Joseph Zawodny, Senior Research Scientist at NASA Langley Research Center. The video highlights the potential of having a LENR nuclear power generation device in your home to provide all the power needs of your home as the “easiest” implementation, even though it could potentially be used even for transportation and infrastructure. The technology is “clean” producing no ionizing radiation or waste.
    NASA is all in and claiming to “be working on another way of producing energy with efficient nuclear power.” NASA as an organization apparently suddenly wants to be seen as in the forefront of this new thing they see coming. Pretty cool actually.

    • GreenWin

      ‘Bout time for Joe and Langley RC to tell the world what progress they’ve made. You’d think at least one green organization (IPCC??) might have looked at this video and endorsed the whole idea.

      • Hogo

        I don’t think NASA is ‘all in’. According to their budget plan for 2013, they’ve dropped the program. At least I couldn’t find it.

  • LilyLover

    Toxic Waste + Waste => Toxic Waste
    Toxic Waste + Nutrients => More of Toxic Waste
    More of Toxic waste – Toxic waste = Some of Toxic Waste = Nutrients
    Nutrients = Some of Toxic waste.
    Integrating over n = 1 to n = infinity,
    We get,
    All the Nutrients = Total Toxic Waste

    … Is this how your logic works, Charlie-the-non-Chaplin?
    If not, learn this very well.
    You can use this as a rationale behind everything you teach.

    Substitution with creative imagination will please your masters.
    Instead of:
    Nutrients & Toxic Waste
    Truth & Lies
    Good & Bad
    Nice & Evil
    Cold & Hot
    Freedom & Slavery

    If you need more strategies on how to teach “journalism” …
    Ask & ye’ll receive.

  • Fibber McGourlick

    We must remember to put a picture of this guy alongside his diatribe against cold fusion into a special place in the “Virtual Museum of Infamous Cold Fusion Deniers” when it’s established.

    • GreenWin

      Why virtual Fib? The University of Utah will be offered a stupendous grant to build and maintain the ICFD museum on their campus. Funding for incredibly lifelike wax figurines is budgeted. Imagine Bob Park, Johnnie Huizenga, Ron Parker, Stevie Koonin, etc. all gathered around a F&P cell replica… hands covering eyes, ears, and mouths. Ticket and merch revenue to the University might rival football!

      “Those late to the gate are tardy. Those repeatedly late are re-tardy.” sage

      • Fibber McGourlick

        Great image, GreenWin.

      • GreenWin

        “The general scientific enterprise is vibrant and healthy and has weathered the cold fusion flurry with only minor bruises and scratches. The cold fusion fiasco illustrates once again, as N rays and polywater did earlier, that the scientific process works by exposing and correcting its own errors.”

        Johnnie Huizenga, Cold Fusion: the Scientific Fiasco of the Century

        • clovis

          Hi, everyone.
          Good topic Frank, And great responces, this is why ecw is the number one
          place to find the latest news on the lenr front and the new energy physics, as ganduff, would say, the tide is turning.

        • georgehants

          Steven N. Karels
          January 3rd, 2013 at 12:53 PM
          Dear Andrea Rossi,
          I would be surprised if your can extract sufficient “diect EMF” from an eCat to either sustain itself or provide a reasonable amount of electricity. The current nuclear reactors essentially are huge Carnot cycle machines. Admitted they are fission and your eCat is a “LENR” device but I would guess they would have extracted “direct EMF” energy if it were plentifully available. Do you think this is a low-probability path to electrical energy generation or even COP enhancement?
          Andrea Rossi
          January 3rd, 2013 at 5:36 PM
          Dear Steven N. Karels:
          Your consideration is correct, and I agree with you. Nevertheless we got evidence of this generation of power, that at the moment we call ” strange power”. We are researching on it, we are not ready for definite opinions. It’s interesting, though.
          Warm Regards,

        • Gerrit

          Or he might as well be called Johnnie Hatchetjob Huizenga

          Johnnie H.: “Furthermore, if the claimed excess heat exceeds that possible by other conventional processes (chemical, mechanical, etc.), one must conclude that an error has been made in measuring the excess heat.

          In other words: if it cannot be explained by the currently known theory, it does not exist.

          Is it necessary to highlight that ALL great thinkers in science have a complete different understanding of what science is all about ?

          Do you know why Huizenga became the chair of the DOE 1989 panel ? Read this explanation of Seaborg black on white on a goverment hosted website ->

          “I was called to Washington on April 14, 1989, to brief George Bush on cold fusion. I don’t know whether you know what cold fusion is, but it was the idea that you could fuse nuclei very easily and get a lot of energy just by passing electric current through heavy water, whereas, of course, physicists had built huge machines and worked for decades trying to do this, spending billions of dollars. The chemists thought they’d really stolen a march on them. The idea swept the country and I was called to Washington to brief President Bush on it. It was a real dilemma. What should I do? I decided to take my background as a nuclear scientist and really come to the sensible conclusion that this work was not right, that it was really cold. You couldn’t do it. So that’s what I told him at that time. I said, “You can’t just go out and say this is not valid. You’re going to have to create a high-level panel that will study it for six months, and then they’ll come out and tell you it’s not valid,” and that’s what he did.”

          • GreenWin

            Wow. The abject ignorance foisted on the human condition by “experts” like Huizenga – is criminal. Thanks Gerrit.

      • Gerrit

        you can add Gary Taubes and Frank Close to your list.

  • Brent Mosley
  • I think this explains a lot…
    “Nuclear Power: What is the future of fusion and fission? The Big Questions: The Future of Science Brought to You By Statoil.

    lol 😀

    • Omega Z


      Surprise of all surprises.
      As I’ve learned more about LENR, I Find that Big Oil has actually spent quite a bit of time investigating it themselves.

      It would appear that they to run into big Mr PARK & his buddies blocking their way.

  • georgehants
    • Chris

      Skeptics have every right to be skeptical, but there comes a point where you should hold your hands up and say “I was wrong”

      We must be at that point with regards to the reality of lenr.

      • Jimr

        I have heard very few that are skeptical of LENR. Most comments I have read are in reference to Rossi’s statements.

      • GreenWin

        Chris, a comment elsewhere noted a PhD today, is license to never admit, “I was wrong.”

        • Hadamhiram

          I have a PhD and I am wrong daily. You buffoons disparaging science are either ignorant, jealous, or both.

          The person writing this Slate article doesn’t have a PhD. If he did, maybe he would have done better research on the subject.

          • Hadamhiram

            Correction: the author DOES have a PhD.

            I was wrong. See? Not so hard, is it?

            Still, he has a journalism degree – he is not a scientist. That must be the difference 😛 !

          • b4FreeEnergy

            Are you sure you have a PhD? 😉

          • GreenWin

            A “physics” PhD was the comment I recall.

        • georgehants

          Pekka Janhunen
          January 3rd, 2013 at 2:22 PM
          Dear Andrea Rossi,
          In August 2012 you wrote: “we will test soon reactors very small (200-300 watts of power). For the future, not for short term sales.” Any news about those small reactor tests?
          regards, pekka
          Andrea Rossi
          January 3rd, 2013 at 5:33 PM
          Dear Pekka Janhunen:
          We are working also on it, in our R&D program. But our focus now is on the industrial plants.
          Warm Regards,

    • Bernie Koppenhofer

      georgehants….thanks for the site above…..cannot understand why NASA is concentrating on a source of energy for space vehicles, when it is needed so desperately here on earth????

      • Peter_Roe

        Because that is their brief – to replace plutonium TEGs and solar sails in space and for planetary exploration. Other govt. agencies such as departments of energy should be pro-active in discovering the facts about cold fusion for use in ground energy generation – but of course this would not mesh with their briefs (‘climate change’ scares, promotion of nuclear fission and wind turbines, carbon trading and taxes, maximising oil revenues etc.).

        Rossi has always been right – the commercial marketplace is the only viable introduction point for general use of CF.

        • Bernie Koppenhofer

          This is from the NASA site: “NASA’s vision: To reach for new heights and reveal the unknown so that what we do and learn will benefit all humankind.”

          For some reason NASA has narrowed their involvement in LENR research…..we might find out why in twenty years. The President is directly responsible for NASA, the buck stops there.

    • Zurita

      Rossi is mentioned on page 17 of this NASA document.

  • Charles Stewart

    Charles Seife? Isn’t he the guy that won the Nobrel Prize for comedy and the Pulitzer prize for Spritzer and the Columbia Prize for J urinalist of the Year?

  • Roger Bird

    Charles Seife is not merely ignorant of LENR. He is being vicious and stupid. He failed to notice that Fleishmann was one of the World’s foremost electrochemists before his discovery of cold fusion. Why would two eminent scientists throw away their careers on something that wasn’t true? Does that even make sense?

    I wonder if journalists throw their careers away when things that they said turn out to be false, and their delivery of the things that they said that were false was idiotic and cruel. When (not if) LENR has it’s debut in the light of universal acceptance and credibility, will Charles Seife’s career be ruined. I would think that it should be if we are to be consistant.

    • GreenWin

      Again, one wonders how such journalistic bias affects his students. A sorry commentary.

  • Sandy

    The hot fusionists assume that the Sun is a ball of hydrogen gas. They are wrong.

    The surface of the Sun is made of calcium ferrite (CaFe2O4).

    And the core of the Sun is made of uranium…

    “Without fissionable elements to spark ignition, the stars remain dark.”
    J. Marvin Herndon, Ph.D.
    And see

    Uranium fission in the Sun’s core provides the energy that powers “cold fusion” processes on the Sun’s surface.

    The hot fusionists do not understand how the Sun works so they are unlikely to succeed in building an electrical generation system powered by hot fusion.

    • The elemental composition of the sun is known from spectroscopy and from direct measurements of the composition of the solar wind. Also, calcium ferrite or other molecule would decompose because of the high temperature. There is very little uranium in interstellar matter, so why would there suddenly be a lot of it in Sun’s core since the Sun was formed from interstellar matter by gravitational accumulation. The latter we know from the fact that we are seeing many other solar systems forming by a similar process all the time.

      • Sandy

        “…why would there suddenly be a lot of it in Sun’s core since the Sun was formed from interstellar matter by gravitational accumulation.”

        Marvin Herndon’s “nuclear planet hypothesis” proposes that during the formation of a planet or protostar uranium sinks to the center of the body and becomes a natural nuclear reactor. He proposes that Earth’s magnetic field is generated by a uranium core about 5 miles in diameter.

        Mars had a magnetic field but it’s uranium core ceased to function as a natural nuclear reactor. The absence of a magnetic field allowed the solar wind to strip away most of the Martian atmosphere, reducing Mars to the dead, dusty world we see today.

        Jupiter is still emitting twice as much energy as it receives from the Sun. Jupiter has a very large uranium core that will probably last as long as the Sun is still shining.

  • Pweet

    Everyone is entitled to an opinion, so he is entitled to his.
    He may well be right, or he might be wrong. These are the only two options.

    If he’s right, then we will be stuck with digging deeper and deeper holes to dig up the last remnants of stuff to burn and blow the waste products up chimneys. We have an ever increasing demand for energy so we will do this until there is nothing left to burn, or we choke on the exhaust.

    No radical new technology comes with total agreement from everyone. Mostly it comes with agreement from very few. There are always doubters and detractors. It’s the natural order of things.
    However the clear and inescapable fact is, we need something to replace burning stuff to produce energy.
    We have tried all the obvious ways and they all have either limitations or negative side effects; some of them very serious, to the point of making the technology unacceptable to most.
    I accept the statement that the production of useful energy from “cold fusion” or LENR is a long shot but in the absence of anything else, we have reached the point where long shots are worth looking at.
    I consider it would be a gross departure from natural human inquisitiveness not to.

    • Peter_Roe

      In your final paragraph you have identified the single main reason that many people have followed this story for 2 years or even longer. It initially (and on a few occasions subsequently) seemed a long shot, but the danger of throwing out such a baby with the bathwater was always just too much of a risk to even consider, even when there were problems with Rossi’s narrative. Fortunately the odds seem to be getting way shorter these days, and in any case Rossi is no longer the only player.

    • Omega Z


      This is 1 of your better posts. Fairly balanced.
      Not overly positive or negative. But of hope.

  • georgehants

    Frank Acland
    January 3rd, 2013 at 12:34 PM
    Dear Andrea,
    Some people have surmised that since you are now in partnership with a large manufacturer of power generation equipment, that they may not have an interest in providing home-based E-Cat units which could affect the economic interests of large power producers.
    Is your new as partner committed as you are to manufacturing the domestic e-cats?
    Andrea Rossi
    January 3rd, 2013 at 5:42 PM
    Dear Frank Acland:
    Absolutely yes, provided we resolve the certification and intellectual property issues. The certification, in particular, is absolutely necessary ( I mean safety certification) and, believe me, there is no certificator in the world that will take the liability to certify a LENR device for domestic utilization. It is necessary that a history of safe and reliable industrial plants makes up a lattice of good statistics before this certification becomes possible. This is the truth, who says the contrary does not know the issue.
    Happy new Year to all your Readers.
    Warm Regards,
    Many thanks,
    Frank Acland

    • Gerrit

      What Rossi says here is absolutely plausible to me.

      This is a very different way of communication compared to, say, a year ago, when he was talking about the automated factories spitting out home

      To me Rossi seems to feel more secure and focussed and he communicates his strategy much more clearly (now that the seems to have a clearer strategy 🙂 )

      • GreenWin

        It is almost like character evolution! Pragmatism has tempered expectations for a domestic e-cat; and I suspect practical minds have directed a path starting with industrial e-cats. It is all good and well on track to revolutionize the human condition.

    • captain

      Hi Frank, very clear your question and Rossi’s answer too!

      But, IMO there are still some buts…

      Rossi is still under NDAa, I believe 2 for sure, and that’s OK. So now we don’t know exactly what the inventor really counts in the new Leonardo corp., beyond being the Chief od Scientists, and how great could be his power/importance in making relevant decision within his company. Does he have the possibility of ‘veto’? We don’t know so far, hence some innocent doubts can arise from time to time.

      As Rossi used to say, if it’s a secret, it’s secret 🙂

      DGT: supposing, repeat supposing, they’ve decided to have an R&D root in the boot (= Italy), and supposing also that so far Defkalion has not been able to have the LENR technology ready to be applied to a commercial working device, IMO, repeat IMO it’s only a question of a short time.
      In Italy they can resolve very quickly all their problems, so to put on the market their first operational prototype. No doubts at all, cause now as now Italian technology can do it.

    • Pedro

      Hi Frank, there is hidden complement in AR’s response to you… His “best wishes to your readers” makes clear he knows who you are and probably also knows e-catworld. You certainly stand out in the crowd. Keep up the good work!

      • admin

        Yes, Pedro, he does know us — but I don’t think he reads ECW.

        • captain

          My opinion is that Rossi knows for sure that at least a few website/blogs are truly believing in his cat.
          ECW, Passerini’s 22 passi… blog and ColdFusionTimes(this one known mainly for fighting against the USPTO scandalous management for CF and LENR).

        • clovis

          HEY, HEY,
          Frank don’t be so modest , you have worked hard and deserve a bit of patting on the back,and i for one believe that Andrea does in fact read, our post, here on e-cat world,
          Why wouldn’t he, as captin said.
          this site is his Revolutionary headquarters,—SMILE

        • Omega Z


          As Clovis says don’t be so modest.

          I’m sure Rossi doesn’t read here on a daily bases as time wouldn’t allow, But I’d be surprised if he didn’t cruise by from time to time. At the very least, he has someone monitoring the mood/environment here.

          Simply put, You don’t provide early access to certain information as he has provided to you on occasion without checking you out. Are you Friend or Foe. Rossi has determined that your a friend by fact checking.
          ECW is probably 1 of several sites that Rossi & Company monitor at least occasionally.

  • georgehants

    From Phys.Org.
    German Environment Minister Peter Altmaier said Friday his country would never again return to nuclear energy, hitting back at a top EU official who doubted Berlin’s commitment to phase out nuclear power.
    Read more at:

    • Peter_Roe

      Naughty Germany – not towing the EU pro-fission line. They’re a bit to big and powerful for the Brussels unelected ‘government’ to do anything about it though. Sadly they seem to be just as blind as the rest of northern Europe (except perhaps Sweden) to the possibilities offered by LENR.

      • Peter_Roe

        Toeing not towing! Admin – hope you are still working on restoring an edit function.

        • clovis

          Hi, Peter
          i know frank is always working to make his sight better,
          as time permits, being a family man,and all that entails. and if we alloy the computer to correct our mistakes, will we forget how i wounder? with the news about B&W today Frank may have a full time job trying to keep up, and may have to enlist some help, lets hope so.—– BIG SMILE

  • pasquale

    This is the mammoth contract Rossi?

    • HeS

      No, these are the classic nuclear reactors, only in a very small monolithic package. I read about this new trend two years ago.

      • clovis

        HeS, Hi,
        It sounds to me like they have just changed it a little and are calling it by a new name.
        I think that hot fusion is dead, it would be a Big mistake to do what you,have said. just look at what Germany has just said about it, never again would they build a hot fusion plant.

        • HeS
          • clovis

            Hey buddy,
            Your are correct, sorry, after reading a little more i found this.
            The B&W mPower SMR is designed to provide 180 megawatts of carbon-free electricity. It is based on advanced integral pressurized water reactor technology which incorporates robust, passive safety protection systems within a fully underground containment structure. The B&W mPower design philosophy maximizes the use of proven, mature systems and components within an innovative plant architecture to reduce licensing and construction risks. The unique, security-informed, underground reactor building significantly improves plant security, and largely mitigates potential environmental impact and the effects of external events.

            but i still think it a big mistake, or it’s dis information, not sure .

    • clovis

      Hi, Pasquale.
      Nice find, wow, it all makes scene ,i would think.

  • dave

    I’ll bet that Charles Seife is not betting his entire fortune on the claim that the ECAt and Andrea Rossi is a scam. So Charles Seife put your money where you mouth is and maybe people will take you more serious.

    rubbish article

  • Martin Leonard
    • GreenWin

      Thanks for finding this Martin. It is a good start. I am especially taken with this paragraph:

      “Create an ethical code. Hippocrates was right: Every profession needs formal standards of conduct. Doctors, lawyers, and engineers have them; science should not be exempt. There has been some movement in this direction; there needs to be more so that young scientists know what is expected of them ethically as well as intellectually.”

      Burying or hiding scientific findings is a kind of theft from public intellect IMO. Cold fusion is an excellent lesson to that extent.

      Read more:

  • GreenWin

    As has been pointed out in previous comments, the article appears under a banner sponsored by Statoil. Statoil is the national oil company of Norway:

    “Statoil ASA (STO) world’s largest offshore operator, 21,000 employees – the government of Norway holds the majority share in the company (67% in May 2010).[1] Statoil generates revenue in the exploration and production of oil and natural gas.”

    This suggests the author Charles Seife and Slate owner The Washington Post Company might be spinning for oil. Dr. Robert Bussard, a father of the tokamak mag confinement(ITER) concept – described hot fusion programs essentially as white collar welfare. An excellent diversion away from simpler, more practical energy alternatives.

    Note that Mr. Seife has not always thought tabletop fusion to be loony; in 2005 he wrote Science Magazine’s article titled “Tabletop Fusion Heats Up”

    • jjaroslav

      It’s a tough economy…and many ‘journalists’ push their reputations and make their money by expounding controversial and counter points of view….most of the time it’s just more flotsam on the ‘news’ pile….but it needs to be publicly countered if it can be before it gains any traction.
      On the other hand, it rare to see good science running so timid and scared. Alot of nervousness and whispering out there…
      Rossi doesn’t seem to care since his agenda apparently transends these distractions, and everyone else is either unsure or too busy. Not a good situation.