What do you think?
Rate this book
Cold Fusion: The Secret Energy Revolution
Antony C. Sutton, D.Sc., declares that cold fusion in several variants is already working in research labs around the world and will soon be brought to market by several different companies. Cold fusion today has many variants including catalytic, vapor phase, [and] solid state and has been verified in over 200 laboratories world wide. These include U.S. government labs... Numerous private firms worldwide have also confirmed, including Fiat, Motorola, Westinghouse, Toyota, EPRI (Electric Power Research Institute) and Stanford Research Institute. Free energy is here with water as fuel and it will revolutionize our world.
70 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1997
8 people are currently reading
43 people want to read
About the author
Antony C. Sutton
57 books202 followersAnthony Sutton was a research Fellow at the Hoover Institution, Stanford University, from 1968 to 1973. He is a former economics professor at California State University Los Angeles. He was born in London in 1925 and educated at the universities of London, Gottingen and California with a D.Sc. degree from University of Southampton, England.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 2 of 2 reviews
May 20, 2021
Responses towards Pons and Fleischmanann from the media as they fled to France :
New York Times (April 30, 1989) “in one word it’s garbage”.
NBC TV Report Bazell “I know what is possible and what is not....I think it’s a bunch of junk”
Nature - Editor, John Maddox...”a milestone in the history of entertainment”
Nature, David Lindley “ Pigs don't have...wings”
Time: “ I don’t think that data is worth anything”
Steven Koonin, Cal Tech “They found something that didn’t exist”
Robert Park, American physical society”...a seance of true believers”
Herman Fesbach, MIT “ I don’t want to see any more...evidence. It’s a bunk of junk”
The negative approach was largely confined to the U.S.
and Britain. In Japan in 1991 about 2 percent of the hot fusion budget was devoted to cold fusion. The U.S.- NONE. In India, a broadly based cold fusion program was continued under the Indian atomic board. In Russia, in spite of troubled times, about 15 million rubles were allocated to twenty laboratories in the four years between 1991 and 1995 for cold fusion research.
Pg. 2, 3, 4 Cold Fusion, The Secret to the Energy Revolution
The book is a brief overview on Cold fusion and Martin fleischmann’s discovery of it. And of course the refuting of such methodologies. The author is adamant about it not only solving future energy needs but even as an exit strategy to the Middle East (which I disagree, geothermal would be more practical). Theirs commentary on how not only the media , the DOE in the US refuted the claims even after institutions like NASA, Shell have all tested the theorem of cold fusion being conclusive as a technological methodology of effectiveness. The author states some US institutions may have publicly refuted conclusions, however on the other hand still pursued the technological methods under the guise of secrecy.
Personally my view of cold fusion is quite simple, it’s an effective electrolysis methodology that can be utilized for certain fabrication refinement but because of its excessive heat. This excess in thermal emittings may be indicative to, shape and exact measure of the diameter of the vessel, shape and form of cathode, as well as purity of material contents amongst other things.
New York Times (April 30, 1989) “in one word it’s garbage”.
NBC TV Report Bazell “I know what is possible and what is not....I think it’s a bunch of junk”
Nature - Editor, John Maddox...”a milestone in the history of entertainment”
Nature, David Lindley “ Pigs don't have...wings”
Time: “ I don’t think that data is worth anything”
Steven Koonin, Cal Tech “They found something that didn’t exist”
Robert Park, American physical society”...a seance of true believers”
Herman Fesbach, MIT “ I don’t want to see any more...evidence. It’s a bunk of junk”
The negative approach was largely confined to the U.S.
and Britain. In Japan in 1991 about 2 percent of the hot fusion budget was devoted to cold fusion. The U.S.- NONE. In India, a broadly based cold fusion program was continued under the Indian atomic board. In Russia, in spite of troubled times, about 15 million rubles were allocated to twenty laboratories in the four years between 1991 and 1995 for cold fusion research.
Pg. 2, 3, 4 Cold Fusion, The Secret to the Energy Revolution
The book is a brief overview on Cold fusion and Martin fleischmann’s discovery of it. And of course the refuting of such methodologies. The author is adamant about it not only solving future energy needs but even as an exit strategy to the Middle East (which I disagree, geothermal would be more practical). Theirs commentary on how not only the media , the DOE in the US refuted the claims even after institutions like NASA, Shell have all tested the theorem of cold fusion being conclusive as a technological methodology of effectiveness. The author states some US institutions may have publicly refuted conclusions, however on the other hand still pursued the technological methods under the guise of secrecy.
Personally my view of cold fusion is quite simple, it’s an effective electrolysis methodology that can be utilized for certain fabrication refinement but because of its excessive heat. This excess in thermal emittings may be indicative to, shape and exact measure of the diameter of the vessel, shape and form of cathode, as well as purity of material contents amongst other things.
June 10, 2019
Infinite energy? It would be nice, in fact it sounds a little too good to be true. I am not yet convinced. Especially since most of the information is from before 2K. And I looked at the website Infinite Energy and it didn't look like that much progress had been made since, which is discouraging. If all this had been discovered more recently, I would have more faith it might work more given time - this has already had quite a lot of time. The issue with this book is, that it comes down to belief. Some will believe it and other will be skeptical like myself. There is simply not enough proof. Patent numbers for something mean nothing to me. I want to know if it really works from someone who is not biased to believe in this. It's not that I think the DOE is perfect. They could be suppressing the information or they could be right. So, it isn't that I don't believe it's just that I don't know either way right now. Which means the book was not convincing to me. It was too short and should have gotten in to how it works not just what materials are used. Also why wasn't there more recent information on it? It was publish in 2017 I believe, so why nothing since 1996 or 2000?
Displaying 1 - 2 of 2 reviews