The following article was posted in another thread by Joe Shea who was having trouble posting it on the American Reporter site. I think it deserves a post of its own. Guest posts reflect the views of their authors and not necessarily those of E-Cat World.
WHO WILL TELL THE GREAT SECRET?
by Joe Shea
American Reporter Correspondent
BRADENTON, Fla., March 19, 2014 — From Forbes magazine to Foreign Policy Journal, from Wired magazine to the Washington Post CrowdBlog, from “60 Minutes” to “Motley Fool,” from NASA to the Defense Intelligence Agency, the word about the renewed discoveries of cold fusion and the hydrino and how they may change our lives has been working its way toward the mainstream press and the consciousness of the American public.
Scroll down the American Reporter homepage and you can see a list of dozens of organizations, websites and publications that have already spread the word that has yet to reach the man in the street.
But which will be the first major mainstream daily newspaper, wire service or broadcast news organization to break the news to its readers of fuel and energy sources that will utterly transform the world within this generation?
It won’t be the Associated Press – for many reasons – or the New York Times or Los Angeles Times, because they thought they were burned so badly when incompetent studies at MIT shot down their first enthusiastic stories in 1989 –
and it won’t be the pathologically skeptical editors at the venerable American Physics Journal, because their unshakable faith in the infallibility of quantum mechanics will not allow them to accept important new theories based on the Maxwellian classical mechanics theory that apparently underlies much of the new research.
As each stage of independent duplication and verification of lab-based discoveries, and also a series of not-so-independent product studies, the paper whose readers will be most deeply impacted, The Wall Street Journal, has been absent. So have the major Texas-based papers, the Dallas Morning News, the Austin Statesman and the Houston Chronicle, whose oil-based economy will be so devastated by the news.
Among the pantheon of radio broadcasters, neither Rush nor O’Reilly, neither Levin nor Cunningham, neither Beck nor
Schnitt have dared to breach the mainstream silence.
On top-rated national radio, only the spunky and quirky “Coast to Coast AM” has dared to even touch the subject. You won’t read about it on Slate, Salon or the Huffington Post, but it’s been around for years in the low-rent environs of The American Reporter.
While CBS did break a small part of the story via “60 Minutes,” the major 6:30pm evening newscasts of ABC, CBS and NBC have not told their viewers yet. Neither has Fox, on cable or at its affiliates, ever managed to break its Obama-obsessed newscasts with one of those faux “Breaking News” reports.
CNN has done a single story on the hydrino reactor’s potential, but that was several years ago. Recently, one of my
own stories for CNN’s iReport got more than 19,000 reads, but when I contacted a producer about the story, he immediately altered the reader count – as I watched – down to a few hundred, presuming that somehow the readership was faked, which it was not.
In fact, at least five busy websites are dedicated to this new science, and tens of thousands of readers check out the latest news every day. E-catworld, Cold Fusion Now and the little-known Journal of Nuclear Physics are swamped with readers and comments, so many that their volunteer editors are often hard-pressed to keep up with them all.
NASA bravely made a video at its Langley Research Institute featuring Dr. Joseph Zawodny, one of its top researchers, and it has a substantial group of scientists dedicated to design of a future aircraft based on cold fusion/LENR principles; pressure from the “hot” fusion industry forced Zawodny to revise his video, but the original has remained available on NASA’s website. NASA has also commissioned a rocket propulsion design based on the hydrino reactor.
Both the U.S. Defense Intelligence Agency and Great Britain’s Ministry of Defence have issued weighty reports on what the new energy sources will mean for the world’s economy. The latter warned Vladimir Putin last year that his country’s dependence on oil revenues will be devastated by LENR. The first commercially available E-Cat cold fusion reactor was sold to the U.S. military.
The absence of any information at all about this new science in the New York Times is worrisome, though. As a reader and subscriber to the Times off and on for decades, I have begun to wonder how much my favorite newspaper can really be trusted if it ignores so much evidence of something truly important to Earth’s future.
After all, these new energy sources are non-polluting, cheap, don’t emit radiation, and ultimately make it possible for homes to go off the grid forever and poor and rich alike to save thousands of dollars a year on heating bills and gasoline – and yet it covers the missing Malaysian airliner and the IRS non-scandal in exhausting depth.
What are we to make of it? Is it possible that the Times is secretly the puppet of fossil fuel giants that financially dwarf it? Is it possible The Wall Street Journal’s readers are not quite so important to them as the economic interests of the energy companies that rule the world with their oil and gas cartels? I am slow to believe that, but is it becoming obvious anyway?
Are we on the verge of Snowden-sized revelations, not about the NSA, or Assange-style exposés not about our nation’s
diplomacy, but instead about those who control the major sources of the world’s supposedly objective information? Are they ultimately controlled by social engineers and supercomputers in Washington that prevent them from
publishing anything that is too “disruptive?”
When the Associated Press sent a reporter all the way from New York to Bologna, Italy, to cover a significant cold fusion demonstration, it refused to allow their reporter to publish his story, and until photos of him at the demonstration appeared, it even hinted he wasn’t there. The wire service has refused to explain why. They are the source of news for some 1,500 daily newspapers, all of them currently deprived of news crucial to our visions of the future.
I hope that corruption is not the cause. I hope these otherwise honorable news organizations are just too insulated and isolated, too self-referential to take notice of things that some mainstream scientists frankly acknowledge as “miracles.”
One of those, Robert Duncan, the academic dean of the University of Missouri and a cold fusion skeptic, found himself agape at the evidence of overunity – more power output than power input – cold fusion occurring in the Israeli labs of a company called Energetics, and soon accepted a $5-million gift from a retail clothing billionaire to allow the college to study the phenomenon. Unfortunately, Duncan was gone in months, still promising to further the work but not heard from again.
Professor Peter Hagelstein and Dr. Mitchell Swartz of MIT, the college that had so much to do with cutting down the first blossoms of cold fusion, have been demonstrating a small, working cold fusion device in their labs at MIT for months, albeit under intense academic criticism and stoic media silence.
At the University of Illinois, Dr. George Miley has published and demonstrated several important, groundbreaking stories on cold fusion, but Miley is still of far less interest to the major press than that other Miley, the butt-bumping one with her tongue hanging out.
Harvard? Princeton? Forget about it. The Harvard/Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics, the pinnacle of spectroscopic science, verified the hydrino theory of Dr. Randell Mills, but the college shut up about it. Princeton’s bread is buttered by billions spent on fruitless “hot” fusion research, and even Rep. Rush Holt, the quantum physicist who represents both Princeton and Mills’ Cranbury, N.J.-based BlackLight Power in Congress, has failed to make mention of the hydrino discovery.
It is the hope of many that in the end, whether major media come along or not, cold fusion will go beyond the industrial-sized products now in the works or on sale and in service – like Andrea Rossi’s Energy Catalyzer – and allow us to slough off the open and hidden costs of fossil fuel from our backs like scabs from a minor bicycle accident.
If I was going to guess, I’d put my money one of two wire services as the organization most likely to break the news of an authentic energy revolution. It would be Reuters, I believe, which I have seen break stories ignored by the AP and the rest of the press, sometimes at a risk to its reputation but always accurately, that other outlets have
The other, which has also always been fairly courageous, is Bloomberg News Service, a source I have never known to
back away from difficult truths and whose owner, former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg, has the deep pockets to resist attacks from the oil giants. Bloomberg, though, doesn’t have the daily newspaper presence to generate the
kind of excitement that Reuters would. It could also be New York’s Village Voice, which covered Mills all the way back in 1991.
Will I be right about Reuters, Bloomberg or the Voice? As genuinely independent verification studies conclude shortly on Rossi’s Energy Catalyzer, hundreds of thousands of people around the world are watching, quietly; I certainly am.
Soon, we will know the truth.
Joe Shea is Editor-in-Chief of The American Reporter.