Editing Pathological science (section)

===Cold fusion===
{{main|Cold fusion}}

In 1989, [[Martin Fleischmann]] and [[Stanley Pons]] announced the discovery of a simple and cheap procedure to obtain room-temperature [[nuclear fusion]]. Although there were multiple instances where successful results were reported, they lacked consistency and hence cold fusion came to be considered to be an example of pathological science.<ref name=labinger>{{cite journal |title= Controversy in chemistry: how do you prove a negative?{{snd}}the cases of phlogiston and cold fusion |author1-last= Labinger |author1-first=J. A. |author2-last=Weininger |author2-first=S.J. |journal= [[Angewandte Chemie International Edition in English]]|year=2005 |volume=44 |issue=13 |pages=1916–1922 |doi=10.1002/anie.200462084 |quote= So there matters stand: no cold fusion researcher has been able to dispel the stigma of 'pathological science' by rigorously and reproducibly demonstrating effects sufficiently large to exclude the possibility of error (for example, by constructing a working power generator), nor does it seem possible to conclude unequivocally that all the apparently anomalous behavior can be attributed to error. |pmid= 15770617}}</ref> Two panels convened by the [[US Department of Energy]], one in 1989 and a second in 2004, did not recommend a dedicated federal program for cold fusion research. A small number of researchers continue working in the field.