Robert Duncan on Cold Fusion and the Scientific Method

Robert Duncan, vice chancellor for research at the University of Missouri, is one of the few American academics that I am aware of who has what I would consider an open mind regarding the subject of cold fusion. He rose to fame in cold fusion circles when he was recruited by the CBS 60 Minutes show as an ‘honest broker’, an independent scientist with no skin in the game to look at some cold fusion claims. Duncan was selected on the recommendation of the American Physical Society because he was a recognized expert on measuring energy. After visiting an Israeli company, Energetics Technologies, and examining their cold fusion experimental results, Duncan came away convinced that anomolous excess heat was quite real.

A week following the airing of the 60 Minutes piece, Rob Duncan gave a presentation at the 2009 Missouri Energy Summit in which he talked about cold fusion and discussed how he felt it should be approached from the point of view of legitimate scientific inquiry. He discusses his involvement in the 60 minutes story, and what he observed when he visited Energetics Technologies in Israel. Duncan also talks about other experiments in which the excess heat effect has been observed.

Duncan remarks that he has faced criticism for his position on cold fusion and talks about one angry Ivy League professor who chastised him for being involved in the 60 Minutes story. Duncan states his position that, “the scientific method  is a wonderful thing, in my opinion it’s time to stop growling at each other from separate sides of this issue and apply the scientific method to figure out what’s going on.”

In concluding his remarks, Duncan outlines the major lessons he has learned from his involvement in cold fusion research

  • There is a huge gap between new science discovery and useful engineered systems.
  • Mass media needs to approach new discoveries in light of the above point (the media should not be overspeculative and create false expectations, but rather engage the public in the scientific process)
  • Research funding needs to become less dependent on the common assumptions within the culture of scientific communities, and much more courageous and objective
  • The scientific method is a wonderful thing. Use it always — no exceptions.
Recently Duncan has been involved in the establishment of  the Sidney Kimmel Institute for Nuclear Renaissance, or SKINR, at the University of Missouri which was established by a $5.5 million gift from billionaire Sidney Kimmel.
Although given three years ago, Duncan’s lecture is well presented, a good introduction to cold fusion (not difficult to follow for non-scientists), and I believe worth watching. You can see it in three parts below.

  • Pingback: Cold Fusion and the Scientific Method | Cold Fusion & LENR – USA()

  • Frank

    In his first presentation slide Mr. Duncan mentioned that the first time a possible nuclear fussion was reported by the two professors Paneth and Peters 1926.
    He should also have mentioned that just a few months later they clarified the flaws in their measurements which let them initially wrongly believe to observe transmution of hydrogen into helium.
    Here the epilogue from that clarification:
    http://www.gravitronics.net/articles/editorials/epilogue-to-the-transmutation-of-hydrogen-into-helium-paneth-nature-09-25-1926.html

    • http://www.health-answers.co.uk Peter Roe

      From what is recorded it seems that Paneth and Peters were subjected to much the same treatment in their time as Pons & Fleischmann and now Carpentieri would later encounter. It seems possible that the retraction may have been the price they paid for continued employment. Even a certain S. Krivit seems to have his doubts:

      “Only a thorough historical investigation will reveal whether Paneth and Peters believed they had made an error, or, like Galileo, recanted under coercion from science authorities.” (Nuclear Energy Encyclopedia: Science, Technology, and Applications, edited by Steven B. Krivit, Jay H. Lehr, Thomas B. Kingery)

      • GreenWin

        “…or, like [Dr. Joe Zawodny, Dr. Carlo Rubbia, MIT’s 1989 researchers], recanted under coercion from science authorities.”

        Those demanding recantation of empirical findings are not “authorities” at all – merely thugs, criminals and con artists.

        • jacob

          exactly,thugs,criminals and con artists,or organized crime,mafia and science under the cover of accepted trusted peers .

      • Frank

        Sorry – Paneth described in his follow-up clearly the flaws in the setup and measurements of his experiment, which caused im initially wrong assumptions, and you speculate about conspiracys ???

        I think you make up your very own world!

  • http://www.health-answers.co.uk Peter Roe

    Robert Duncan’s thoughts on Rossi et al., given in a recent interview with Marianne Macy, bear repetition:

    “I have never met the inventors, and I have no ties to them in any way, but I understand that they have announced their intentions to commercialize products, that they state are based on LENR, very soon. Hence their accomplishments will soon be gauged by the level of satisfaction of their customers. So all we need to do is wait and see what happens.

    I take no opinion on this either way, neither pro nor con, since I have no independent data to base an opinion on, and since no opinion from me is necessary. These issues will resolve themselves very soon naturally once these inventors deliver their products to the marketplace. Our goal at MU is to determine the physical mechanism that is responsible for the observed AHE, and our scientific effort will stay focused on determining this mechanism, regardless of the outcome of these early commercialization results. Clearly these commercial results may have a profound influence on the level of public support for this field, so I hope all goes well for them, but the scientific search for the underlying physical mechanism will continue either way.”

    • http://www.health-answers.co.uk Peter Roe

      AHE = Anomalous Heat Effects, Robert Duncan’s acronym for all things LENR:

      ““I personally like to refer to these extreme heat releases from metals loaded with hydrogen isotopes as the anomalous heat effects (AHE), since we still do not understand their origin. While this has been called ‘cold fusion’ historically, there are alternative theories that predict that conventional nuclear fusion of hydrogen isotopes is not the origin of the AHE. Hence some refer to these effects as ‘low-energy nuclear reactions’ (LENR). Furthermore, the anomalous heat from hydrogen loaded metal nanoparticles appears to be different in both size and character as well, and this much smaller anomalous heat that these nanoparticles produce is close to the levels of heat release that may be associated with known chemical reactions. So, since it appears that there may be many different new and yet unknown phenomena at work here, I prefer to refer to these phenomena as AHE until we clearly understand the physical origins of these very interesting effects.”

      Full article including Sidney Kimmel’s rather strange introduction to CF here: http://www.infinite-energy.com/resources/kimmel.html

    • John Williams

      “I take no opinion on this either way, neither pro nor con, since I have no independent data to base an opinion on”.

      It would be nice if more scientists voiced this type of stance. I suspect many scientists have this same view but are not as vocal about it as the loud and opinionated minority of pseudo-skeptics, who forbid experimental results based on theory, and are therefore drowned out of the conversation.

      “AHE = Anomalous Heat Effects, Robert Duncan’s acronym for all things LENR”

      That is the best acronym I have seen for these effects because it does not presuppose the cause and instead it just points out exactly what has been observed.

  • Roger Bird

    Robert Duncan has some serious health issues, as can be witnessed by his heavy breathing. Of course some of that could be due to nervousness. I hope that he takes a month off from work and tries to adapt to a paleo lifestyle.

  • GreenWin

    The New York Times continues to bury its head in the sand with regard to LENR. Even with the now very public announcement that Dr. Duncan heads the Kimmel Nuclear Renaissance project. Pointing out one more time the blackout forced on the distributed intelligence reports masquerading as a mainstream press.

    Dr. Duncan IS one of the more high profile leaders in the LENR revolution. He was hired by CBS 60 Minutes as a skeptic to debunk the work of Energetics Ltd and SRI – and came away convinced LENR is a real science.

    NASA has put their recent Zawodny video on a new Support Center page:

    http://support-center-consulting.com/nasa-larc-abundant-cleangreen-energy/

    A fascinating scifi story “MicroCosm” tells of an advanced race of beings who wish to guide primitive cultures like Earth’s toward enlightenment. They select high potential candidates and import them to a “school” that is in fact a holographic reproduction of Earth. Most students excel in this controlled microcosm – except for a few, who see through the fabricated world and “actors” animating it. They demand enlightened beings be rigorously honest. But these people cannot bring themselves to admit their “school” is merely an illusion – and students’ faith and trust collapse.

    “Half measures availed us nothing. We had to be rigorously honest.”

  • Bill Hill

    I think Rossi is so fed up with people questioning his results that he’s just going to go ahead and produce his devices and let the public decide. It appears that he has discovered a sustainable and controllable way of producing heat in the form of steam. It’s interesting to see how many scientist now claim to have produced similar results in their labs having remained silent for more than 20 years, where are their explanations of this effect? They have no need to see inside Mr Rossi’s magic box, unless they are missing some vital element of control. Let’s just wait and see.

  • jacob

    I hope the current drop of crude oil prices ,down to the lower 80’s is due to panic in the energy sector,and maybe something that was triggered by LENR being out of the bag so to speak,no real needs anymore for crude oil ever to be high again,sharp drop of crude oil prices happened since beginning of may 2012
    and the end of the MAYAN calender may be the start of LENR commercially available units.

    • http://www.health-answers.co.uk Peter Roe

      Unfortunately I think the fall in price is more likely to be a result of falling demand due to worldwide economic recession. Such shifts are always amplified by the activities of futures markets, and it is more likely it is these people who are panicking as a result of accumulating over-supply.

      • Ged

        Absolutely right, Peter. And then you have recent goings on like the UN Rio+20 conference where the final manuscript, supported by our own US representative, wants to put a 0.7% tax on every country’s Gross Net Product, which works out to over $1,000 -per person- in this country per year. All in the name of sustainability.

        Talk about insanity. We’re on the highway to economic ruin. We’ll never hit peak oil, we’ll be too poor to afford any in the first place at this rate.

        • http://www.health-answers.co.uk Peter Roe

          Odd isn’t it – we’re told that it is our alleged profligacy that has led to the massive ‘debts’ we are now required to repay through ‘austerity’ and massive government abuse of the social contract. Yet somehow we can apparently afford to give a few more tens of billions to some international quangos that will siphon off most of this new tax before it gets anywhere near the average African. But it must be OK because its a ‘green’ tax.

          The UN and its unaccountable spin-offs have got away with so much already that now they are taking the pi$$. Makes you wonder what ‘our’ politicians get out of agreeing to this kind of wholesale theft doesn’t it.

        • dfnj

          A product is only worth as much as people are willing to pay for it. The more interesting question is if accept the premise of peak oil, then at some point, the amount of oil needed to retrieve one barrel of oil will exceed the amount of oil retrieved.

          • http://www.health-answers.co.uk Peter Roe

            A bit like substituting ethanol in petrol then. Depending on who does the cost analysis, and where, the net gain (oil used to make/distribute ethanol vs. oil saved) appears to be marginal. And that ignores the additional financial cost of many billions of dollars wordwide, and the effect on the availability and cost of food.

      • GreenWin

        And the street and global markets have begun controlled shorting petroleum.

      • jacob

        yes Peter,it is quite possible and it makes sense ,but for the last few years it seemed the price of crude was what seemed to go along by what the market could bear ,to avoid another economic recession like that of 2008 . Now oversupply? that seems then to be poor judgement on the part of Oil producers,to oversupply the market to this level.

        • http://www.health-answers.co.uk Peter Roe

          Jacob – OPEC is a deeply divided bureaucracy that only meets every 3 months, and it takes some time for them to respond to demand. Not only that but transit time on the tankers is significant. OPEC probably will cap overall production at some point, but prices will already have been fixed by the speculators for all oil in transit and in storage. Hopefully they (speculators) will have their fingers severely burned.

          • jacob

            hmm

    • Charles

      Jacob, I agree. The oil industry is not operating in a vacuum and they are staffed by geologists and engineers that can understand the threat to their livelihood by LENR. The greatest threat to LENR is that it is going to turn the world upside down over the next 10-20 years. The powers that be have got to be in a panic as to how to deal with this destruction of jobs and industries.

      The Mayan calendar may be alledged to indicate the end of one age and the beginning of another. LENR would sure cause that. Investors will be getting rid of coal, oil, natural gas and uranium power stocks.

      • jacob

        There is many other uses for Oil.plastics,cardboard,packaging,reducing the demand on pulp and paper,trees should be left standing and clean the air to remove CO2 and not be burned as fuel,oil should not be burned as fuel,it pollutes our air and causes a number of dis eases.

      • http://neotreksoftware.com Allan Shura

        The powers that be were not concerned about the jobs of carriage makers, milkmen and elevator operators.

        The world will change and it has since the first industrial revolution.

        New jobs and opportunity will arise and
        the world can begin to focus more on the
        important issues there never seem to be enough time and money to really do something about.

        Of course this will have the effect of
        some reorganization of social structure
        and what is valued.

        Inevitibly there will be debate with the philiosophy of how to best apply this to the reality as opposed to clinging to pure and sometimes incomplete theories in the application of realpolitik and political economy.

        History reveals that common sense has not a been a strong suit in adaptive societal change.

        • http://www.health-answers.co.uk Peter Roe

          Well said – completely agreed.

        • jacob

          good post

    • Jimr

      I doubt that there is any panic but I’m sure it has been drawn to their attention. Although not as much as ethanol has had an effect on the oil companies. I watched a program last week where a group claims that ethanol has held down the price of gas $1.09 in 2011, and $.89 a gallon during 2010. I have no idea how this study and many others calculate these things.

      • http://www.health-answers.co.uk Peter Roe

        It probably depends on who is doing the calculating and what the answer they want is.

    • http://neotreksoftware.com Allan Shura

      The fall in oil prices in 2012 has three primary causes, although they are not the only factors infuencing the price.

      The primary factors are:

      1)

      The decision on the Saudis to bring oil down to $80 a barrel in January. This is about the minimum needed to stimulate the North American
      economy and it is a much closer to fundamental supply and demand equilibrium.

      2) Speculative cooling off with the easing of Iran tensions since January.

      3) For the first time in history fossil natural gas had fallen in price and diverged from the oil price pattern to compete with the supply of shale gas.

      Over all demand has not fallen with China and Japan picking up the slack in North America and Europe.

      The Saudis increased production to 9.5 millon barrels a day for 5 months to the end of May
      and with their price target in sight they have started to cut back production again.

      • jacob

        What i don’t get is why they would increase oil production to bring down the price per barrel of oil ,to shoot themselves in the foot ? what to help the economy of the US? does not make sense.
        what does make sense is keeping the price of oil down,so the drilling in the Falkland Islands would be brought to a standstill ,considering the Falklands have ten times the Oil reserves than Saudi Arabia,but if the oilprice stayed at 100$ a barrel the infrastructure to produce oil could have been built in the Falklands at record speed to produce enough oil, that the west would not have to rely on the middle east oil anymore,OPEC has kept the oil price artificially low in the eighties and nineties and forced a lot of American oil companies out of business and it was simply cheaper to import oil and make the money on the resale .
        But with LENR just around the corner,it messes with the whole oil industy,and some oil rich Nations will turn into 3rd world countries,for some change will be hard.

        • http://neotreksoftware.com Allan Shura

          Partly to continue being a
          supplier to existing customers.

          Note that the US has steadily decreased Saudi imports and increased Canadian and Mexican imports.

          It is also to discourage the
          alternatives including the gas fracking putting pressure on the price where customers might switch now and in the future.

          It is also to encourge stability
          some of the increase was to offset the Iran sanctions to Europe completely barring imports in July.

          The main reason is this: if you have a lot of money or control a vital to making money commodity
          like oil you would just spend the money to get material things. If others work to supply those material things every once in a while you have to feed them so they continue to produce. They have power nad they want to keep and maintain this power.

          If they cut the output so the price was $200 a barrel the west could collapse as they are so addicted to oil and the money would not be worth much and allies in trade could turn against thier interests and they need trade to benefit from oil exports.

    • tedr

      Jacob it’s interesting to find someone else who has thought of the possible connection of lenr to the Mayan phrophesy. I hope it’s not possible that some of this amateur garage research occasioned by the need to keep away from big oil and tptb won’t release a large chunk of some of this energy thats all around us in some massive explosion that rocks the world on its axis.

  • georgehants

    The World is Quantum, not classical science.

    (Phys.org) —
    First observation of the hall effect in a Bose-Einstein condensate
    National Institute of Standards and Technology researchers have observed for the first time the Hall effect in a gas of ultracold atoms. The Hall effect is an important interaction of magnetic fields and electric current more commonly associated with metals and semiconductors. Variations on the Hall effect are used throughout engineering and physics with applications ranging from automobile ignition systems to fundamental measures of electricity. The new discovery could help scientists learn more about the physics of quantum phenomena such as superfluidity and the quantum Hall effect.
    http://phys.org/news/2012-06-hall-effect-bose-einstein-condensate.html

  • Jason

    I have often said that science is a method of separating objective fact from opinion. People have always resisted facts that they are not ready to believe. The introduction of chaos theory back in the 1960s almost caused a riot at a mathematics convention.

    • http://www.health-answers.co.uk Peter Roe

      The idea of ‘objective’ science does seem to be taking a bit of a beating doesn’t it. I suppose we should not be in any way surprised, but it is disappointing.

  • georgehants

    It really does not matter who talks about Cold Fusion or any other scientific subject.
    It only matters if their message is follow the Evidence and do the Research.
    The more important the subject the more Research, quickly.
    Why do some people wait for a “hero” and then follow them.
    His opinion is only important if it leads others to follow the Evidence and do the Research.
    Anything else, no matter how well disguised, is not “scientific method” but irrational rambling.

  • georgehants

    Is this another Cold Fusion–From Rossi’s page.

    Commercializing the First Room-Temperature Superconductor:
    A Bleak Outlook
    On December 6, 2011, Superconductors.ORG announced the discovery of the first true room temperature superconductor. Since that discovery created worldwide interest from thousands of people, this report is being written to share what progress has been made in bringing this discovery to market.
    Since the volume fraction of the 28C compound was low, the first step in commercialization was to find a governmental or industrial partner to help develop a refining and manufacturing technology. However, in the past [six] months a concerted effort to find a partner – or even a university to vet the discovery – has yielded nothing but apathy.
    http://www.superconductors.org/rtsc2mkt.htm

    • Robert Mockan

      LOL! Not apathy. They will all still be around when the patents expire. The rule in business is if it might take longer to develop than the patent life, wait and get all the cookies for free. Meanwhile they can all work on it in the privacy of their own laboratories if they think it might pay off.

  • moab

    What I would like to know is the status of SKINR. Is it already established, are scientists already recruited, when will the first experiments be set up, first results, timeframes. What is happening ?

    Same for the Pirelli experiments, what is currently going on, when will be the next milestone ?

    And what happened to the MIT experiment, the NANOR ? When will Hagelstein have his measurements concluded ?

    Are they all waiting for the ICCF-17 to present results ?

    Frank, I really appreciate your reporting, but if feasible for you, a bit more investigative journalism would be great.

    • GreenWin

      You might ask members of the “mainstream media” – people actually paid to do investigative journalism. But wait… there is no free press in this sim. So never mind, moab.

  • andreiko

    Professor Kroesen, Universiteit Eindhoven heeft een aantal testen gedaan bij BlacklightPower en kon niet anders concluderen dan, dat er een onverklaarbaar energie overschot aanwezig is in het BlacklightPower proces en zou dit proces verder gaan onderzoeken, tot op heden zijn er nog geen onderzoeks resultaten bekend gemaakt.

    De prehistorische mens ontdekte het gebruik van vuur
    zonder wetenschap van het proces, zo ook kan LENR gebruikt worden, Dr Rossi is op de goedeweg.

    • jacob

      Yes,Rossi is on the good road to educate us of the LENR cold fusion potential ,and anybody that slanders Rossi,slanders their own future energy supply.

      • Bigwilly

        I beg to differ Jacob,

        Anyone who slanders Rossi is slandering one individual for whatever reason.

        LENR is much bigger than Rossi. LENR is documented and reproduced by hundreds of entities around the world over the last decade.

        While I do not condone attacks upon Rossi personally his supposed E-Cat is orders of magnitude less validated than the phenomenon of LENR.

        BW

        • jacob

          BW,if Rossi would not have got the ball rolling on LENR,ask Frank,would we be posting on this bloc.

  • Alan DeAngelis

    Plenty of good science was being done in the early days of cold fusion, in 1989. Researcher like John Bockris at Texas A&M where seeing tritium (a fusion product). The attack dogs immediately pounced on him. This had a big chilling effect on other researchers. http://www.lenr-canr.org/acrobat/MalloveEalchemynig.pdf
    Tritium is used to make hydrogen bombs. Perhaps the powers that be felt that they had to disparage cold fusion (an easy way to make tritium) for this reason.

    “Hot fusion budgets on the line; tritium production for weapons; India believing that test-tube fusion would become a classified secret in the West…”
    (from page 51 of Frank Close’s 1991 book Too Hot to Handle) http://www.amazon.com/Too-Hot-Handle-Race-Fusion/dp/0691085919

    PS
    Deuterium was discovered by Harold Urey in 1931 so my guess is that Paneth and Peters
    Hi Ruby:
    would have been using light water in 1926.

    • Alan DeAngelis

      PS
      Hi Frank, too much on my clip board. Would you please remove the “Hi Ruby”

  • Pingback: Tentativi di teorizzazione dell'utente Camillo - Pagina 69()

  • Stephen

    Some people have to realize that unverified and fuzzy claims are the worst enemy to the field. I absolutely agree with Duncan about the scientific method. Both for what concerns the hyper-critics and the hyper-aficionados. If there is anything real in LENR what we need are EVIDENCES, maybe even very modest, but absolutely bullet-proof and universally recognized. The more-or-less demonstrations, maybe-its-a-scam-who-knows, it-would-be-so-cool-lets-hope-its-really-real, tomorrow-you-ll-see stuff in the usual AR style are the absolute worse thing, in my opinion. This is why I am so critic against him…

    Maybe that is a good strategy to collect some public interest but it’s not doing any good to the subject, I think. It’s easy to collect some interest on something which – if real – is likely to change the face of the Earth. Btw, this already happened in 1989 and it was not a happy end. Do you think it will be different if something pretty real does not emerge? And pretty soon?

    • Stephen

      … and mind… this is no conspiracy: it is simply the obvious and predictable outcome of a silly way of behaving. I disagree with people thinking a priori this stuff is all BS… but I understand them.

    • jacob

      Steven, to bad you are sitting on the fence waiting for a miracle to drop in your lap and more evidence,and sitting there trusting official science throwing rocks at anyone who has a better method of supplying low cost energy to the world,if you owned all the oil companies ,and had a massive pay roll to meet every week,you would do your best to buy up your competitors ,in this case LENR,you have no Idea how big this is,and please study Lenr a little deeper and gain KNOWledge,to form new opinions based on what you know

      • Stephen

        Jacob… this is not a matter of me being passive rather than do something, etc…. Btw I have read a lot on the subject and I believe LERNs are real, but here I was making a more general discussion that goes a bit beyond what I or you believe.

        If one does not have the elements to truely and soundly support a claim probably he would better stay silent. The fame one gains in these situations might well be a phyrric victory. Maybe this is unfair or it is fair (I vote 80% for “fair”)… I don’t know, but it is a matter of fact.

        • jacob

          I see no reason why Rossi should provide more test results,the proof is in the finished product,If it works people will buy them.

  • dsm

    On another line here is some very interesting LENR stuff here related to Ed Storms new theory …

    Here are the links (answers to a set of LENR questions posed by Prof Peter Gluck to Ed Storms + Eds replies).

    The link takes you to the 5 replies + 2 new questions (bolded) posed by Prof Peter Gluck…
    http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com.au/2012/06/ed-storms-answers-to-5-questions.html

    The blog post here is the reasoning behind the questions …
    http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com.au/2012/06/some-questions-regarding-ed-storms-new.html

  • Thomas Ammons

    Three years later now and very little progress. We don’t need to hear more heat claims, more unverified reports from those are probably scam artists, We don’t even need more speculative theories. We need experimental investigation of the mechanism involved and three years later we still seem to be very far from that.

  • http://deadstickarizona-zedshort.blogspot.com/ Zedshort

    I keep thinking that Robert Duncan is really the only person I want to hear from today on the subject of CF. If he concludes CF is bunk that will settle the matter for me and I can find other pursuits. But, I really, really want to hear something positive and new from him.

    • AstralProjectee

      Rob Duncan said something like he is waiting for Andrea Rossi to come out with device so he can test it and find out the physics and the underlying mechanism.

      Peace!

  • Pingback: Robert Duncan on Cold Fusion and the Scientific Method | ColdFusion, Cold Fusion, Free Energy()

  • http://www.american-reporter.com Joe Shea

    To my mind, Robert Duncan is a national – nay, international – hero. He is one of the few physicists who was able to open his mind and his eyes long enough to see what is going on in colf fusion. His emphasis on the “huge gap” between research and roll-out is well-taken, especially in the case of the hydrino reactor from BlackLight Power. That device now has ample validation from
    scientists and science journals,but Randell Mills is never forthcoming with information about its practical future. I read here recently a comment that he has promised some kind of device in 2013, but I have not been able to verify that and now I doubt he said it. Rossi and Defkalion remain enigmatic on the same issues. Brillouin, Nanospire and others are coming into the conversation but they are not rolling out any devices, and that must be the test.

    • jacob

      Not so fast JOE Shea ,since you are an editor,I don’t know if you are a little editor who does not know what the big editors are controlling in the form of news,or what we are supposed to know,or news in the form of propaganda,news favorable in the eyes of your big accounts.you tell me.

      Editors to me ,is, to keep and distribute common knowledge to the common little people,who have no idea what is going on in the real world,and nobody has the guts to tell them .

      • techmate

        The scientific method is a wonderful thing. Use it always — no exceptions.

        That is what he said. Nothing about the “little people”.

        Nobody has the guts to follow the “scientific method”!

        Just keep spewing “mainstream whatever”, “big editors”, “big science”, “controlling in the form of news” etc. WHILE ignoring his main idea

        The scientific method is a wonderful thing. Use it always — no exceptions.

        No “demonstrations” just complete tests and replications!

        The scientific method is a wonderful thing. Use it always — no exceptions.

        Quit trying to subvert what others say to further your own twisted agenda!

        • jacob

          techmate,i have a strong opinion with out an agenda,I just think it’s fun to keep news editors on the edge of their seat and no pun intended.LENR is proven many times over , but finds no support in the media ,government ,politicians and big business ,even if it could save them trillions in the future,its big business that runs most countries ,specially the US,CAN

          • techmate

            Why would you expect support in the media?

            Your argument that Government, Politicians and Big Business is “suppressing LENR” is just the hall mark of scam artists!
            You have made my point exactly!
            Thank you!
            The deal is this (as it will always be so) either the tech works or it does not!
            Your arguments of “suppression” do not hold water.
            Just think of the tremendous pressure that was placed on every new technology. The “horseless carriage” for example? Big Oil itself felt many challenges by the existing systems!
            Either it works or it does not is the way we have ALWAYS done business!

            • jacob

              you got it wrong again,techmate,governments,politicians,big business decide what we get,that is suppression,ok

              • techmate

                No you got it wrong! So your story is this “its all a waste of time because xxx will suppress the idea boo hoo” Then why post?
                if it is all a waste of time? I dont get people like you! Its all a con spiracy were all doomed!Then go occupy something or better idea go vote!

    • techmate

      So Joe Shea

      every competing theory of how the universe works is compatible with every other theory?
      So we can have multiple INCOMPATIBLE theories that cancel each other out?
      So the universe works basically on a GOD level?
      We can have hydrinos at the same time that quantum theory says we should not?

      Joe you are losing me!

      I know you are looking for that ONE journalistic “kill” that will propel you to fame and glory!

      You can not achieve your “kill” on this statement!

      The scientific method is a wonderful thing. Use it always — no exceptions.

      • techmate

        Let me put it another way. If Rossi’s Ecat is SO easily reproduced that he can not EVEN have it tested or patented HOW is he going to sell it?
        How then could it be “suppressed”?
        If it can so easily be reproduced how can it be “suppressed”?
        Something is indeed missing in the translation. How one hand do you have a technology that is easily reproduced (ECAT) like DGT reproduced it (you say).
        And at the same time you say it is “suppressed”?
        What universe are you living on? Could you give me an idea of the positions of the galaxies and stars of the universe you live on so I could relate it to MY universe?

  • AstralProjectee

    Rob Duncan represents the voice in mainstream scientific community that gets it, and would welcome change if they see the evidence.

    Peace!