Submitted by French reader Gerard Briand, a self described “self-taught thinker” and a professional in the field of building and construction. Many thanks to Claude Thiebaut who assisted with the translation.
Since the cold fusion of Andrea Rossi faces the dogmas of science, political conservatism and obscurantism from established energy interests, is Rossi’s strategy of fait accompli and the evidence that has been provided so far sufficient to impose the obvious technology?
If we refer to the ancient history of science and recent cold fusion claims by Pons and Fleischmann (1989), we see that we should not lack the character to tackle the certainties and defend the violent attacks from all sides. Cold fusion has already suffered severe consequences by being dragged through the mud, but perhaps now the whole environment has changed since we live in very different times..
In these events we must not see only the dark hand of conspiracy; there are also professional careers devoted to the hot fusion field with theoretical convictions about nuclear energy, educational and research programs, brilliant applications of nuclear energy, all involving much money. It is very human to be destabilized by challenges to a lifetime of work and an understanding of physics that has been established by the fathers. It can therefore be easy to deny, in collusion with parallel interests, the evidence of the implementation of the process of cold fusion.
Mr. Rossi and others are fighting against the dogma of a majority of scientists and politicians, media and major energy interests that would be put at a competitive disadvantage if cold fusion “finally came out of the woods.” But I think yes, they are on track, the battle has just begun and recognition in the public arena will take time. The most violent charges are yet to come, so we must turn to the forces of progress and credible personalities who will validate the technology.
I am now convinced of the validity of the concept of cold fusion, and there is no doubt that a new game is in progress, certainly much more violent than in the Pons and Fleischmann case. With the recent advances of Andrea Rossi, it is clear that it will be difficult. The suspicion of fraud is strong, and diverse and varied interests who fear of losing credibility and the dogmatic stance about the laws of physics are a major barrier. But the needs are such that it will tip the balance, I hope.
Mr Andrea Rossi, a great strategist, understands that the best angle is to popularize the revolutionary concept of cold fusion. He can expect little help from conservative European powers often in the pay of lobbies, including nuclear power in France, but also at home in Italy.
The huge financial investment in programs such as ITER are the mark of submission of the European powers to the interests of energy producers who want to keep the energy monopoly that made it so powerful. It also helps fill the coffers of nations when they are shareholders, with whole populations subjects of this monopoly. This great collusion of interests, intentional or not, results from the dogmas of experts and serves to stifle competition.
In Greece, Defkalion takes the rear, with or without the support of Rossi, and creates a positive competition that might be called “energy democracy”. At the same time still in the strategy of fait accompli Rossi moves his project in the United States on several levels. He bets on the entrepreneurial spirit of America and a market traditionally always ready for major innovations as evidenced by Tesla and Edison. The US is also less subject to nuclear power and has an awareness that their oil lobbies are at an end. The endless rise in fuel and energy prices along with the global crisis, plays into Rossi’s hands. The current administration’s policies supporting alternative energy, in comparison with “Bush oil dynasty,” can probably help, directly or indirectly by accelerating the recognition of cold fusion.
Today Mr. Andrea Rossi took checkmate in the first round; he has played against the blank face of financial interests of certainty in scientific dogma and advances. If other parts of the world will come and support us to make the switch permanently to a new energy era, their needs may such that they will tip the scales in favor of the “Holy Grail” of energy.
This would result in a chaotic period as was experienced in the last industrial revolution, we can not escape the brutal technological breakthroughs and the abandonment of “new technologies” such as ITER, made obsolete by Rossi’s cold fusion.