Great article.  I&#x27;m not going to defend Rossi, but what happened in 1989 was a travesty.  Yes, Pons and Fleischmann were premature in their annnouncement.  But they didn&#x27;t deserve to be made pariahs, and there were others whose careers were destroyed for so much as publicly entertaining the possibility that cold fusion might be made to work.  Edward Teller, on the other hand, was old enough not to care:<p><i>Around 1992, McKubre says, he was summoned for an audience with legendary physicist Edward Teller. &quot;He asked probing questions, in better depth, I think, than anyone else on the planet. You could see what a giant intellect he must have been in his time. I was subjected to this interrogation for four hours. At the end of it Teller said that he did not think that cold fusion was a reality, but if it were, he could account for it with a very small change in the laws of physics as he understood them, and it would prove to be an example of nuclear catalysis at an interface. I still don&#x27;t understand what he meant by that, but I&#x27;m quite willing to believe that it&#x27;s correct.&quot;</i> [0]<p>It really shows how political and, frankly, <i>corrupt</i> Big Science is.  As this article points out, failure to replicate proves nothing.  The charitable reading is that Pons and Fleischmann didn&#x27;t even know for sure what properties of the alloy they were using were critical to the reaction, though they had some ideas.  That possibility should have been considered.<p>[0] <a href="http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.wired.com&#x2F;1998&#x2F;11&#x2F;coldfusion&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.wired.com&#x2F;1998&#x2F;11&#x2F;coldfusion&#x2F;</a>