I wrote:
> at least Defkalion with nelson can claim few hundred watt with good control > > > I have not seen hard data from them. I mean quantitative information: > instrument make and model, margin of error, power in, flow rate . . > It may be that I have overlooked something they published. I confess I have not looked carefully. I quickly lost interest in the ICCF17 presentation. As I said, it is not the sort of lecture I want to hear. To my taste, the best presentations in cold fusion are made by Ed Storms, Mike McKubre, Mel Miles and Pam Boss. Pam in particular gets right to the point. She says exactly what needs to be said, with all the details you need to make a convincing case, and not a word wasted. More like an engineer than a scientist. That's a good thing. When Storms or McKubre give a presentation, you can make an audio recording, transcribe it, and voila -- you have a paper. Not many people have the ability to talk in complete sentences, arranged in organized paragraphs. Gene Mallove could also do that. I myself stick to writing everything down and reading it verbatim. I don't do extemporaneous. Someone wants me to do one of these local TED talks. I said fine, but none of this wandering around the stage nonsense. Give me a podium and a mic. Haven't heard back. I have a low regard for TED talks. Here is an Onion News sendup version of a TED talk, which sounds so much like the real thing, the irony may be lost: http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=DkGMY63FF3Q Speaking of the Onion, they punked the Chinese "People's Daily" into believing one of their stories: "Kim Jong-Un Named The Onion's Sexiest Man Alive For 2012 [UPDATE]" http://www.theonion.com/articles/kim-jongun-named-the-onions-sexiest-man-alive-for,30379/ Either the "People's Daily" believed it to be real, or they have a sense of humor heretofore unseen. - Jed
