To whom it may concern,

In 2010, I conducted an investigation of the EPRI-funded SRI International experiment “M4,” performed by Michael McKubre and staff, and I published my findings. I also provided them to the federal intelligence community.

My conclusions are that, starting in 2000, McKubre began retroactively to manipulate and fabricate data that was associated with M4. He did so without presenting scientific support and without disclosing his changes to the public or to his sponsor, the Electric Power Research Institute. New Energy Times provided McKubre with multiple opportunities to respond to the investigation. Many questions remain unanswered. Please see the summary slides, questions and, where known, answers from McKubre below.

Our collection of our reports, research and records on this matter at this Web address:
http://newenergytimes.com/v2/sr/McKubreM4/McKubre-Experiment-M4.shtml

I have also asked SRI International as well as EPRI if they are willing to perform an independent investigation and release their conclusions, as well.

Steven Krivit
Editor, New Energy Times
(310) 470-8189

LENRs Versus “Cold Fusion” and the Search for Scientific ‘Truth’
A Philosophical Comment for 2012
by Lewis G. Larsen, Lattice Energy LLC

Dear Mr. Krivit,

Please forgive me if I use some incorrect scientific terminology or if I link terms to the wrong concepts. I have no background in physics or chemistry. I am reading from your site and other sites to get a basic understanding of the field as quickly as possible, so that I may have a better understanding in the two different philosophies regarding LENR research.

I have become fascinated with you and the information on your Web site, particularly with regard to your claims about the traditional, cold fusion researchers and their actions to stifle any interest regarding weak interactions and transmutations.

From what I’ve seen from the cold fusion researchers’ side of the argument, they ignore weak interactions and transmutations as much as possible. They seem to ignore your belief that cold fusion has been disproved. They seem to include weak interactions as one of the new, unproven theories that have only a few followers. They only defend their research when directly attacked by your writings, but they don’t counterattack to specifically show how the Widom-Larsen theory is wrong.

From your side, it seems completely different. From everything I’ve seen and read so far, it seems like your Web site and your writings depict a huge fracture in theory (weak interactions versus cold fusion). You depict deliberate and specific attempts to stifle information about weak interactions: behind closed-door meetings to discredit Widom and Larsen; delaying visas for Russian scientists; deliberately altering their own results; etc.

Letter Continues in News Section