Mitt Romney Endorsed Bonkers Quack Science of ‘Cold Fusion’ as America’s Energy Solution

Sep 28, 2012 by

AlterNet/Global Possibilities / By Sarah Seltzer
Romney’s answer to our energy woes “were based on nothing more than experimental errors by scientists in Utah.”
September 25, 2012  |

This article was produced in partnership with

Coming hot on the heels of Mitt Romney’s own demand for windows that can defy the basic laws of physics and open in airplanes , exposing him to ridicule across the web, a new factually impossible scientific statement from the candidate has been unearthed. This one involves the debunked notion of cold fusion.

Cold Fusion–or the idea of creating nuclear reactions at much lower temperatures–is a widely-known scientific joke, or as Wikipedia puts it ” It has been rejected by the mainstream scientific community because …there is no generally accepted theoretical model of cold fusion.” It’s as though scientists claimed to discover the genesis of life or the missing evolutionary link and then were revealed to have just made mistakes.

But that doesn’t stop Mitt Romney from being a believer, apparently. In a 2011 interview with the Washington Examiner , he offered this about his love of science ( h/t Daily Kos).

I do believe in basic science. I believe in participating in space. I believe in analysis of new sources of energy. I believe in laboratories, looking at ways to conduct electricity with — with cold fusion, if we can come up with it. It was the University of Utah that solved that. We somehow can’t figure out how to duplicate it.

First of all, cold fusion wasn’t about conducting electricity, but about creating power. But more egregiously, as DailyKos’s Jed Lewison points out, shortly after the original cold fusion “experiments” mentioned by Mitt Romney occurred, the alleged findings were given the kibosh.

He points to a contemporaneous New York Times article explaining the lack of evidence behind the cold fusion claims.

BALTIMORE—Hopes that a new kind of nuclear fusion might give the world an unlimited source of cheap energy appear to have been dealt a devastating blow by scientific evidence presented here…

Physicists seemed generally persuaded as the sessions ended that assertions of “cold fusion” were based on nothing more than experimental errors by scientists in Utah.


  1. itsme

    Hi Casey, just happened to Google on to your site. I’m no Romney fan. To be honest, after the Bush presidency, I’m pretty much cured of ever considering casting my vote for another republican for as long as I live. But as to your opinions regarding cold fusion: I hope you will look into it a little deeper. Check out the Navy’s SPAWAR program, the NASA video and just do a general look-see. It is starting to look more and more like cold fusion is real. Turns out that the critics of Flieshman and Pons back in 89 had a vested interest in cooking the books against the prospects of cold fusion. The folks at MIT and other research centers at the time were getting billions to research hot fusion. In all likelehood they fudged the numbers in order to cast cold fusion in a bad light. And admittedly, until recently, it has been difficult to replicate. But that is changing rapidly now. Check out the Italian scientist, Celeani. He has been showing off an operating cold fusion generator at recent scientific conferences. Casey, I think cold fusion is real and I think if you do a little poking around, you will agree with me. And as for Romney, there are alot of other reasons not to support him. Actually, the fact that he may be a supporter of cold fusion is the only thing that will give me solace if, God forbid, he becomes our next President.

    • Hi there — I’m not voicing my opinion on cold fusion, which I totally believe is viable, but posting other articles to show opinion, scientific or otherwise. Thanks for noticing and thanks for writing. casey danson

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *