"Excess heat effects were observed in Cell A using a palladium cathode that previously produced
positive results. No excess heat was found in Cell B with a palladium cathode that previously
failed to give any excess power production. Later experiments produced excess heat in Cell B
using small palladium particles in a novel fluidized bed approach. These palladium particles
produced larger amounts of excess power under pulse electrolysis conditions. No excess heat
was observed, as expected, for platinum particles in Cell A.
Fleischmann-Pons type cells gave excess heat effects for Pd-0.5B and Pd-Ce cathodes, but no
excess power was observed for the cell using a Pd-Ce-B cathode. Experiments involving the co-
deposition of palladium and deuterium from the D 2 O solution produced excess power in all three
cells. However, recombination cannot be completely ruled out as an explanation for this excess
heat. An electromigration experiment also produced evidence for excess heat.
Although these excess power effects are small (400 mW or less), they cannot be explained away
by experimental errors. They contribute to the body of scientific evidence for the presence of
anomalous effects in deuterated metals. "
NB, I was asking for a specific claim, not a regurgitation from the report. Can you write in plain English a claim of something that is happening experimentally. Then we can move on to who has repeated such experiments and if there is any basis to believe the claims made in the paper.
No, not really. There are lots of ideas that want to be science (eg the claim here of cold fusion), but they aren't science until the experiments are repeated and empirical data show some worth to the claims.
Religion does not have the emirical means to test its own claims.
It's easy to sort the wheat from the chaff in science. Religion hasn't shown that it has any wheat.