Who Will Tell the Great Secret (Guest Post)

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.

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.

  • RJ

    Bachcole. Maybe I wasnt clear. I personally believe there is an effect. Yes, it might upset known physics.
    It is my friend who said “we would have heard about it by now”. He is a chemical engineer who has worked with nickel and hydrogen in several plants. He readily admits that if there was a small thermal imbalance it would not be noticed in the noise of operating a real plant. I think he would have noticed an explosion. Thats what makes me think that it might be real but small. I agree that the “hot-cat” might be the wonderful breakthrough that means that its real and not small.
    Lastly, where do you recommend me to go to learn humility:)

  • RJ

    My own take is, CF is likely to be real, but is most likely small.
    The proponents make a big extrapolation of CF, that being
    FREE energy, it will shatter economies, etc.
    They forget that solar and geothermal are both FREE energy,
    its just the cost of making them useful.
    So far, it looks like that for CF, to me.
    (admission, I am an engineer working in geothermal)

    Another comment from an engineer who I have known for nearly 50 yrs!.
    I tend to agree with you, although I think I am more skeptical. It there
    was really a positive effect, I think we would have heard about it by now.
    Also do they take into account the cost of nickel, hydrogen, etc.
    These are not free. As for the reporter Joe Shea, American Reporter
    Correspondent, I was not impressed with his report, I think he is rather
    ignorant on technical matters and just likes to write on conspiracy theories.
    PS Frank, I love your work. I check it every day.

  • Beaudette report only one journalist to have challenged the emerging denial.

    It was Wiliiam J Broad of NYT (page 74):

    “The falsity of some of these accusations against Fleischmann and Pons was recognized immediately by New York Times science reporter William J. Broad.

    .” . . and one called them incompetent. They are far from that. Dr. Fleischmann, 62 years old, is a past president of the International Society of Electrochemistry and a Fellow of the Royal Society, the top honorary society for British Scientists.”

    (ref: Broad, William J., “Fusion in a Jar: Recklessness and Brilliance—Friends Say Two Researchers’ Enthusiasm Has Few Internal Brakes,” (New York Times, 9 May 1989; pp. B 5 &B 10). )


    But Broad was the only reporter to notice.”

    wiliiam J broad seems to support the consensus today, … have to investigate why.
    He is the co-author of “betrayers of the truth” about scientific fraud. a key book in epistemology…
    maybe he started to believe in the consensus to feel better, and groupthink theory explain.

  • “Initially the main stream media appeared to embrace the concept of LENR, then after the MIT “researchers” were ordered to discredit LENR, they dropped it very quickly. ”

    in fact beaudette explain the problem.
    when F&P made their announce (under pressure of Univ Utah) physicist were interested because it was nuclear, and though that it was their job (it was a chemistry jobs, which would take years as it did to be confirmed). They used their usual method working on physics, imagining that electrochemistry was high-school easy for them.
    They also used their usual method to look for nuclear ash, and to base all on their theory.
    They also expected as usual to replicate un 1-2 weeks…

    When they observed no neutrons, seen that F&P screwed the nuclear measurement they had bad prejudice.
    When they failed to replicate in 20 days (APS declared it was pathological science in 20days, 6 weeks for replications) they were comfortably biased agains that…
    Lewis proposed his theory that striing was the problem, that F&P were incompetents…

    it was quickly refuted but the press, the high impact journal, the AAAS, APS, DoE were already back into comfortable zone of denial…
    until then they ignored all data, and every problems were comfortably used to prove LENr was fake, and every success was interpreted as a faryd, an artifact, or anything of that kind, without any need of evidence.
    circular evidence is the rule. lack of peer-review paper (there are but not much) is caused by a blocus justified but the certainty no peer-review paper is possible.
    Artifact hand fraud are certain, but none is proven, and all pretended are refuted.

    dissenting people were demoted, ridiculed. scientific forum forbid discussion on that subject.
    Wikipedia is cleaned of LENr reference, with the library of LENr blacklisted…

    the Mutual assured Delusion is working at full speed there…

  • jousterusa

    To me, the real scandal is that Koch Brothers money got spent in support of partisan campaigns, which is a violation of the law. When they got caught, just as the Church of Scientology did they intimidated the IRS into making them permit it. In this case, though, the IRS has not yet relented.

    • It seems pocket money compared to the billion of public relation money of the few top NGO like Greenpeace/WWF, who are funded by (racket?) oil corps, governments…
      I treat Koch brothers the same as NRA or Greenpeace…
      In france if you see the laws the balance of power is clear. in Science too, just see which scientific journal get closed.

      see the results, the laws, the fashion in high impact journals, and you will see who have the power. time have changed since the 70s

  • jousterusa

    lady through whose profound and fragile lips
    the sweet small fragrant feet of april
    run through the ragged meadow of my soul…”

    What’s not to like about ee cummings?

  • jousterusa

    I was a bit dismissive about Robert Duncan, perhaps, because I found it hard to rationalize his success in getting the $5 million grant and then walking away from it. I remember that he did say upon departure that he would retain his interest in the topic, but I believe he was likely to be far more effective in its adoption where he was – at the head of the research faculty with a lot of money at a great research university – than he will be anywhere else. I was once lured out of a job by someone who told me (afterwards) he wanted to exact revenge on behalf of someone he felt I had wronged. Was Duncan lured out of the job to prevent an earlier advent of broad LENR acceptance? I think that is my intuition about it.

  • Alan DeAngelis

    What are the chances of the MSM reminding us about how our “finest institutions” set CF/LENR back a quarter of a century?

  • clovis ray

    Very good write up Joe, i enjoyed it , and i would vote for you if i could, we need folks like yourself to really, represent our nation, thanks again.

  • Ronzonni

    Joe Shea had trouble publishing something in American Reporter? Why?! He’s the editor in chief of that internet newspaper! His name appears on the copyright notice at the end of the long home page. He also has a Wikipedia page. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_Shea

    • jousterusa

      The bug was due to our 1996 Perl script and the unfettered power of Microsoft Word. It used to be that when we mailed out AR from our shell account, any non-ASCII characters picked up from Word would display as garbage characters. That got me in the habit of changing curly

  • gioj

    honestly I find it hard to understand the meaning ……. we have a reporter who complains that other colleagues and newspapers have not published ….. but we are sure that we have a story worthy of being published ……………………..have we the 5W (who, when, where, why, what)?

    • BroKeeper

      Interesting point about the 5W’s. Could be a post of its own.

    • jousterusa

      I see what you mean. But all reporters are not created equal, and neither are all publications. We have had some influential stories, but virtually every story in the New York Times is influential for years to come. Whether it’s a new science story or a dance review, it will be studied and believed and by some treasured for years. I’m afraid I can’t say that for my own work.

      • gioj

        it is impossible not to agree with you when you say “all journalists are not equal and neither their publications”

        but following your reasoning, then you will agree with me when I say that neither the 5Ws are the same!

        and in these cases (e.g. New York Times), for some publishers, for the journalists who work for them, it is not enough to count the 5Ws, but you also need to weigh them

  • bejammin075

    I have an alternative explanation for the media blackout. I think that these people, at some mental level, just don’t truly believe that they have the ability to distinguish fact from fiction. What they know, deep down inside, is that they don’t know how to tell what is real.

    • ecatworld

      Interesting point. It sometimes seems to me that many people in the media feel the need for some kind of permission from an ‘authority’ to say that there is something to LENR — there seems to be a fear in sticking one’s neck out and making an independent assessment.

      I prefer to make my decisions from personal investigation, and I’m fully convinced that LENR is a real and significant phenomenon.

    • bachcole

      Actually, B075, what you and I said are very close to the same thing, and I like how you said it. They don’t know what is real and what is unreal. They live in a sea of mind without any direct contact with the real world. All they know is what someone tells them. Until some authority figure tells them that LENR is real, it isn’t real to them.

    • what you say is a variation of one phenomenon described in “Groupthink: Collective delusion in Organizations and markets”.
      when delusion is installed, even people who should be immune to the mutual assured delusion fall into delusion despite evidence, despite interest, and despite freedom to leave the delusion without pain.
      They look at others behaviors and from that they infer that others are really sure of their position, because they ALL AGREE (strang consensus>97% ;-> ).
      rationally they interpret that what they see is an artifact and that they are wrong.
      It works even better when others are expertes and the victim is not expert.

      note that since science is a specialized system, most scientists are not expert on the question you ask them… nearly no physicist knows cold fusion experiments, and even less can understand well the subtleties of electrolysis and the errors of lewis and hansen, would they be informed…
      the paradox is that only few people took enough effort, like Beaudette, McKubre, Biberian or Ed Storms, to study the question in detail.

      this does not mean we should trust our eyes more tha opinion of experts… it is mostly wrong.
      It means it is a tricky problem, without good solution.
      best solution is to let few people get expert, or delusioned, and let them find a solution or burn limited cash.

  • Billy Jackson

    I think that the lack of reporting on this comes down to a number of issues. of courses politics being the major issue. no one wants to be wrong again. or be given the impression of being wrong such as the original announcement that got smeared back in the day by a false report by MIT (Who still stands by that report and refuses to admit they are wrong .. aka hence the politics)..

    no doubt their is suppression at work but i do not think that their is as much as we think. this technology if proven is coming and nothing we can do will stop it. All the US regulations in the world will not stop this from happening world wide.. and once it does.. the US will have no choice but to follow or be left behind. There will be resistance by big business and invested interest throwing their influence around trying to hang on to what they have.. inevitably they will fail.

    Ask woolworths or sears.. both use to be on top of the world or the gold standard if you would. .but due to an inability to change quick enough for the consumer. they were left behind.. slowly to be forgotten or replaced (hello Walmart) the same will be said for the energy industry.. adapt or die.

    and last but not least.

    we have to remember that despite our excitement. this is not a proven technology as yet. its nature is still experimental and unknown to the vast majority of scientist let alone the media. Caution against blind optimism and judicious review against the pragmatic dismissal of all evidence to the contrary by “established” scientist should the area’s we focus on till the reports from the latest series of test arrive.

    I see the lack of media attention at the moment more of a blessing to prevent disruption from the focused testing and targeted goals needed to push this technology forward. the last we need is uninformed reporters making bad assumptions and misleading statements further pushing back mainstream awareness of this technology through misinformed or false statements, at the moment i see more ways for the media to harm than help.

  • georgehants

    It is interesting that much of society is turning out to become Orwell’s 1984, strangely without the force that Orwell believed would be necessary.
    Many people with just a little psychological manipulation from the establishment have become model citizens, burning books and articles on Cold Fusion and many other important subjects.
    Allowing capitalistic doctrine to keep the elite in wealth and power while the citizens just continue their labours, fooled by a constant stream of advertising etc. keeping ordinary people under control paying their bills etc., always chasing money related false happiness.
    Thankfully we still have a few individual Rebels like Mr. Rossi et al, and many on this site including jousterusa and his good writings to encourage a freedom of mind almost lost in many areas, such as science.
    We I think are not robots but conscious individuals, fully able if we wish to use our abilities to always progress to better things, not just for ourselves but every miracle of consciousness alive in the World.

    • georgehants

      Giraffe bids farewell to Dutch zookeeper dying of cancer
      The heartwarming encounter between the mentally handicapped man named Mario
      and the majestic creature was arranged by the Ambulance Wish
      Foundation. The giraffe appeared to kiss the terminally ill keeper.

      • BroKeeper

        Animals are really designed to be our keepers. Beautiful!!!

        • jousterusa

          They are there to remind us of how lucky we are to be human…

          • BroKeeper

            You got that right bro. Best wishes on your election, Joe. Maybe you could get on a congressional committee to promote new energy incentives. 😉

  • Your comment about oil corps, seems not matching the facts.

    Shell, Amoco, replicated LENr and did not hid the results.

    the real evil guys are those you cite at the beginning, the manipulators of MIT, few outspoken US nuclear physicists, incompetent in calorimetry, who like Hansen, Lewis, interpreted their incompetence and their incapacity to replicated as an error by F&P, who could not do a better job than they, nuclear physicist, being only simple (Nobel) chemist .

    I thanks big oil, big industry, military-industrial complex, for their honest jobs…

    Shell,Amoco, Toyota, Mitsubishi, NASA, ENEA,Elforsk,BARC,DoD.

    Thanks to chemist, to engineers, to a handful of journalist who took longer than average to surrender, to a handfull of physicist who disobeyed and were demoted.

    shame on outspoken physicists and parrot physicists, APS as mafia, AAAS as groupthink-tank, DoE as physicist valet.

    My conviction is from reading Charles Beaudette book “Excess Heat”


    a must to read, the most boring science thriller.

  • Stranno

    Indeed a great article Joe. May i publish it on my facebook page?
    Regards, Stranno (the Netherlands)

  • Charles

    I want to put forth for applause the name of the Roanoke Times of Roanoke, VA, as the newspaper of a medium size city, ca 100,000 with a metropolitan area of ca 250,000, that has been very progressive in reporting on LENR. In the last two years they have published three articles on their Op-Ed page that I wrote and sent to them. The latest was published Monday, Feb. 3, 2014, and was copied from the Rke Tms by e-catworld.com. Applause, applause.
    Also, I have written e-mails to two of my favorite Fox News Business journalists, Lou Dobbs and Neil Cavuto (that is the order of my favoritism), encouraging them to cover the story. Unfortunately, they are not as progressive as the Roanoke Times. I will give them one final urging today.

    • jousterusa

      They are a rare exception among daily newspapers. I have one of their pieces listed on my homepage.

  • Gerard McEk

    Great story Joe! Did you try to send it also to you favourite newspaper?
    I wonder what will happen when Cold Fusion brakes through. Will a witch-hunt start on why the public media banned all the news about CF? Will scientists be blamed for their unprofessional behaviour?
    Let us use Cold Fusion again instead of LENR, CANR or whatever other underground expression is being used for it. The academic world does not deserve a scientific name for Cold Fusion!

    • jousterusa

      I did send it to them…

  • Andreas Moraitis

    There are only two days until the Fleischmann-Pons anniversary. It would be a good opportunity for mainstream media to bring a story – with low risk, since the anniversary itself is a sufficient reason to report.

  • jousterusa

    Now I’m appalled by my grammatical error in the first paragraph! The phrase “have been working their way” should be “has been working its way,” as it is modifying the noun “word,” not “discoveries,” as I guess I thought. My apologies.

    • ecatworld

      Hi Joe, I made the correction.

  • jousterusa

    Thank goodness for Peswiki! It’s a terrific site to find the latest news on free energy in general.

  • jousterusa

    I am honored to have this piece posted here. The cumulative impact of Frank Acland’s work is evident in this story, because I think nearly all of the reporting I mentioned was first mentioned on E-catworld. This site has been a must-read for me every night for a couple of years now, I think – it does a great job of covering very difficult stuff. Thank you, Frank, for posting this.

    • Buck

      +1 Amen

  • Ophelia Rump

    Nice article, very well thought out. But my guess would be The Peoples Daily in China.

    • jousterusa

      I never thought of that, but humorous or not, I think your post could be right. I sure got a laugh when I read it!

  • BroKeeper

    IMO the MIT Technology Review should give front page banner article by MIT’s Peter L. Hagelstein with an apology on behalf of MIT for the 1989 claims of fraud against Pons and Fleishmann. This followed by Peter expounding on breaking news of the world changing new energy P&F initiated. This would restore Pons and Fleishmann’s rightful place as founder of Cold Fusion/LENR and lessen history’s judgment against MIT and its supportive alumni. Integrity is the benchmark of any scientific institution which MIT cannot afford to lose.

    • jousterusa

      You’re right. An honest and sincere apology would go a long way toward healing those who were violated emotionally and intellectually by MIT’s substandard work.

  • ecatworld

    Joe, thanks for this well presented piece. I’ve often wondered why there have been so few journalists and influential thinkers who talk about this story. To me it’s a natural topic to discuss — in fact, I can’t think of a more important and relevant technological/scientific story to cover.

    I think the public deserves to know what’s going on. Little blogs like this can do their part, but our reach and influence is limited. I wish that were not the case, and we didn’t have to rely on the big news organizations to make something real for the public consciousness. But that’s the reality of the world we live in.

    I hope in time the things we talk about in here will be widely known and discussed around the globe.

    • Buck


    • jousterusa

      Many thanks, Frank. I feel honored.