I couldn't agree more - the only sane call here is peer review. A guy (me) can dream though ... maybe just maybe he has cracked it. Who knows. Peer review time.
I don't understand the mileage if it is a scam. Deliberately setting out stall with a technique which would change everything about the world when you don't have it can only result in ruin. Where is the upside?
Anyhow, I'm not 'falling for it' - I'm a paid up member of the cynic & skeptic club - I just hope beyond hope.
Part of me thinks he might have stumbled across something he doesn't understand.
Maybe this isn't a LENR at all, but a not understood chemical reaction.
But when you know how much juice you're sucking from the wall, and you know this amount of energy + the maximum amount of chemical energy the device conceivably could store falls short of the amount of energy being output then something is worth a closer look
4 options so far as I can tell
1: The paper is explicitly lying - unlikely - there were independent scientists there. Scientists who could cry foul at any moment if the spotted something wasn't on the level.
2: More power was being sucked out of the wall than thought. Possibly, but national instruments will be running the test soon - no hiding from them. No win, so - why? Could be a legit fuck up, but pretty basic!
3: A non chemical reaction power source is operating internally to the device - but what? What are the options to provide enough power? Fission and ... ? Fraudulent but viable - and traceable too.
4: Something else is going on which provides way more energy then burning gasoline. Viable.
Anyway - definitely worth keeping tabs on one way or another.