No, that is NOT true. I spoke with him last week and we have exchanged emails over the weekend. We are DEFINITELY in agreement. His work has simply been IGNORED for over 40 years because he lacked OBSERVATIONAL evidence to support an idea that originated in nuclear chemistry circles. My visual evidence supports his 40 years of effort BEAUTIFULLY. His work is utlimately what will be scritinized for accuracy since I have already listed my sources and they are PUBLIC sources.

I believe he was right all along, and I've simply provided the VISUAL evidence to support his NUCLEAR CHEMICAL ANALYSIS. I think it's a MAJOR one-two combination that science and business will simply not ignore. Sooner or later others will come around. I've aready recieved DOZENS of very supportive emails over the last few weeks, and this will make the news sooner or later. You can't ignore nuclear chemistry AND observervation forever.