>>906418 (OP)
I will try to answer with my shitty physics skills even though this is a (((stackexchange))) article.
Because cold fusion in concept breaks the fundemental laws of physics in both classical and quantum terms. In other words, either the entire community fucked up or the person. Considering that most physicist lean towards a heat death of the universe theory (where everything is heat and nothing else) it would make sense of the community to think that "cold" as in endothermic fusion is possible. In otherwords because we don't (((know))) assuming its just not kikes worried about the energy monopoly enough to know how it works, but it supposedly does, the people who do this are heretics and should be burnt at the stake.
Also cause chemistry. A reaction is
a) Spontaneous when Gibbs free energy <0
b) Non-Spontaneous when Gibbs free Energy >0
c) At equalibrium when Gibbs free energy =0
Where the change in gibbs free energy (Delta G) is equal to the Enthalpy (Delta H or change in heat content in system) minus the Entropy (Delta S or Change in the degree of disorder or randomness in the system) mutiplied by temperature in kelvin
>Paneth and Peters reported Helium production in Pd heavy water electrolysis.
Electrolysis is defined as a reaction where Delta G >0. And therefore cannot possibly be spontaneous and must also have a net energy loss to proceed. To this day we require more amounts of energy to put into fusion than what comes out and that is the main argument.
>Hydrinos/little hydrogen
Seems to be something about the ability for an electron to be absorbed within a proton without causing an ejection of some particle to follow conservation laws.
>Bose-Einstein
No idea because I haven't seen the paper, the response posted doesn't go into enough detail and I'm sick so im not gonna spend time right now.
>Lattice enhancement mechanisms
Roughly means that instead of requiring additional energy to the system. It somehow absorbs entropic energy throughout the sytem (Think the random movement of electrons) during the reaction... Which we can't prove. Analogy to this theory would be like black holes absorbing all the shit around them.
>Weak Force Neutron production
No evidence (even contested). Also the energy required for the electron to be "inserted" and fuse is quite absurd when lepton number is not conserved
>sporadic atmospheric muon capture
Uh.. Basicly it's too rare for the presence of a muon to actually be absorbed because there are too few Muons. Not to understanding of this
>tunneling with weird many-body enhancement
Tunneling I have no idea so no help here.
>His own theory
Basically we cant measure it due to the reaction occurring within the dense metal, and I don't understand jack shit about femi metals aside from a brief bit about that and high temperature superconductors.