If YOU think about it, you will realize that no one has even proven if the theory works, no tested machine is capable of making me a piece of toast (using either electricity or gamma rays) AND you predict 1M machines being distributed to the world within the next 6 months. If you think about it, this entire line of research might be based on greed. Research money is reported to be continuing to flow in but nothing is showing for it. The the researchers want to validate the theory by the existence of the research money, while they continue to ask for research money to validate the theory.

Next an application is reportedly made to the USPTO and the application itself is used to validate the theory, even though it has also been reported that the USPTO has denied they are accepting applications on Cold Fusion.

The researchers have not completed a trademark/copyright process because they are afraid that a Nuclear Scientist might have to look inside the cat box and find only a pile of kitty litter. Do you truly think that UL is going to certify the machine without peer-review? Do you think that UL is going to let some middle management office administrator quickly apply a rubber stamp to a machine that has a label Nuclear Reaction?

Finally what about Home Depot. Really. Home Depot. You actually think that they are on board? Do you actually think that a buyer for Home Depot has even seen a sample product? Is Home Depot ready to warranty the machine and what about the cost when it starts emitting gamma rays and short-circuiting peoples houses? How many consumers are going to put a machine in their dining room labelled Nuclear Reaction? No problem there, we will just lie to the customer and call it E-Cat and not tell them its a Nuclear Reaction.

Time to give it up. The theory is flawed. The working model is flawed. The testing/evaluation system is flawed. The business plan is flawed. The manufacturing plan is flawed. The supplies/repair model is flawed. The distribution model is flawed. You promise that it is going to be free then you change your mind, then change it back again. Finally, we are told that you will need to buy powered nickel and deuterium to make it work, neither of which are generally available, and may not be legally available.

If LENR is flawed, then why the sudden public interest of so many in the last 2 years? Can you EXPLAIN THAT?

I am sorry that your world is rocked by scientific advancement.
Frankly it is all for the better that LENR is getting sufficient attention now. Oil is not clean, wind and solar is too expensive and nuclear fission is catastrophic to say the least, if not suicidal. LENR is the ONLY real option to go forward. And everybody is starting to realize that now, so they start coming to the conferences.

http://www.cvent.com/events/international-low...479ca69ff752477cbd25.aspx

See attendees list at the last one:

Barnhart, Beverly DoD S&T Outreach Program Manager
Brennan, Thomas West Virginia Wesleyan College Assistant research professor
BUSHNELL, DENNIS NASA - Langley Research Center Senior Scientist
Cantwell, Rick Coolescence, LLC General Manager
Chauvin, Nicolas LENR Cars Sàrl CEO
Claytor, Thomas Los Alamos Scientist
DeChiaro, Louis Naval Surface Warfare Center Physicist
Dhakal, Pashupati Jefferson Lab Research Associate
Duncan, Rob University of Missouri Vice Chancellor for Research
Dunn, James Energy Technology Consultants President
Fomitchev-Zamilov, Max Quantum Potential Corporation President
Forsley, Lawrence JWK International Corporation President
French, David J Second Counsel Services CEO
Hagelstein, Peter MIT Associate Professor
Hendricks, Robert NASA-GRC AST, HEAT TRANSFER
hinderliter, brian viginia commonwealth university Associate Prof.
Hunt, Ryan Hunt Utilities Group LLC R&D Manager
Lepsch, Roger NASA Langley Research Center AST, AERO VEH DES & MISS ANALYSIS
Little, Reginald Howard University Dr.
Maloney, Tim One Design International Chairman
Martin, John NASA Langley Research Center AST, AERO VEH DES & MISS ANALYSIS
McKubre, Michael SRI International Director, Energy Research
Miley, George U of IL Professor Emeritus
Miller, Edward Carbon Labs Founder
Mitteldorf, Josh self none
Myneni, Ganapati Jefferson Lab Senior Scientist
Pike, Robert College of William and Mary Professor
Popa-Simil, Liviu LAVM LLC President
Priego, Robert Loyola University Maryland Student
Rampado, Andrea Vortexfusion srl President
Renstrom, Marytat
Rothwell, Jed LENR-CANR.org Librarian
Sah, Sanjay Virginia Commonwealth University Student
Staker, Dr. Michael Loyola University Maryland Professor
STEINETZ, Bruce NASA-GRC AST, STRUCTURAL MECHANICS
Van Keuls, Fred Advantage Systems
Wallace, John Casting Analysis Corporation metallurgist
Witter, David ANAXTAL Inc. President

griddlecrunch
Good and balanced point.

Like I said previously and going on further on your idea regarding real Science and pseudo Science, LENR has both and in order to discover what is true from what is not in LENR field, I am scanning all the important news regarding LENR. From those I select the most noteworthy and I let the public (me, you and skeptics) judge based on their experiences and even psychological profile. Me, I’m on the hopeful side, You might be in the middle and Skeptics are obvious on the pessimist side. And there is astrolabe... a category of its own.
No matter on what category we find each other, I find any censure on this subject highly offensive, reason being that nobody here really KNOWS ANYTHING about LENR (either pro or against this field).
So, the news I insert in this thread should be judged by anybody here, but nobody has the right to say that the news should not be inserted in the first place. Censure is counterproductive on any field of knowledge.

LENR is interesting and it is important to be monitorized while is happening.

I don't know how true it makes Rossi claims, but E-Cat Australia PTY LTD claims to take orders for ECAT 1MW Plant to deliver within 3 months and for ECAT Home Unit to deliver in 2013:
http://www.e-cataustralia.com/order-and-buy/domestic-10kw/

If you have any doubts, take it with this man:
Roger Green
CEO, Managing Director
E-Cat Australia PTY LTD

For the record, I believe in E-cat Orders only after full mainstream media disclosure (completed with third party test), like everybody else in its right mind.

See one of the earliest Ecat third party test from Hanno Essén and Sven Kullander here:

http://e-cataustralia.com/pdf/Independent_Rep...n_on_E-Cat_Technology.pdf

"Discussion. Since we do not have access to the internal design of the central fuel container and no information on the external lead shielding and the cooling water system we can only make very general comments. The central container is about 50 cm3 in size and it contains 0.11 gram hydrogen and 50 grams nickel. The enthalpy from the chemical formation of nickel and hydrogen to nickel hydride is 4850 joule/mol [6]. If it had been a chemical process, a maximum of 0.15 watt-hour of energy could have been produced from nickel and 0.11 gram hydrogen, the whole hydrogen content of the container. On the other hand, 0.11 gram hydrogen and 6 grams of nickel (assuming that we use one proton for each nickel atom) are about sufficient to produce 24 MWh through nuclear processes assuming that 8 MeV per reaction can be liberated as free energy. For comparison, 3 liters of oil or 0.6 kg of hydrogen would give 25 kWh through chemical burning. Any chemical process for producing 25 kWh from any fuel in a 50 cm3 container can be ruled out. The only alternative explanation is that there is some kind of a nuclear process that gives rise to the measured energy production."

So long story short, the box that Hanno Essén and Sven Kullander saw in 29 March 2011 had greater thermal output than if it was full of oil or hydrogen, but it did not burn anything inside, since it had no residues due to any chemical reaction. Their conclusion, based on simple calculation was that it was nuclear reaction.

NASA and Boeing are looking at LENR (among other technologies) for next generation of airplanes:

"This final report documents the work of the Boeing Subsonic Ultra Green Aircraft Research (SUGAR) team on Task 1 of the Phase II effort. The team consisted of Boeing Research and Technology, Boeing Commercial Airplanes, General Electric, and Georgia Tech. Using a quantitative workshop process, the following technologies, appropriate to aircraft operational in the N+4 2040 time-frame, were identified: Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG), Hydrogen, fuel cell hybrids, battery electric hybrids, Low Energy Nuclear (LENR), boundary layer ingestion propulsion (BLI), unducted fans and advanced propellers, and combinations. Technology development plans were developed."

http://naca.larc.nasa.gov/search.jsp?R=201200...A%2B(Unspecified%2BCenter)

So what BOEING and NASA know about what will happen in the LENR field in the next 30 years? Something that they don't tell us?
A key question is: Why will NASA and Boeing link themselves with "pathological science" like LENR?

Remember... 23 years ago they said LENR effect did not exist and now (although they do not push this technology out in the mainstream) they are planing next generation airplanes on a technology that does not have any commercial device on the market (maybe they have this kind of devices in black program). Interesting.

So check the PDF from that link to see LENR all over the place in regards to powering the aircrafts.

From the PDF document:
"LENR-powered via heat turbines

Flight weight
Conversion of heat to mechanical power
Electric generation via gas or steam turbine?
Hot fluid transfer to heat exchanger in core?
Possible need for radioactive shielding"

"As with the Virtual East team, the West team identified that the LENR concept provided the highest payoff."

So in other words... NASA and Boeing are planning Cold Fusion Aircrafts .