The article discusses the ongoing debate surrounding cold fusion, particularly focusing on a court case involving Martin Fleischmann, Stanley Pons, and three Italian scientists. The court's verdict, which acknowledges the production of an unexplained amount of heat but does not mention fraud or misconduct, is criticized for being influenced by widespread negative sentiment in the scientific community. The authors argue that the scientific community's dismissal of cold fusion without thorough investigation and resorting to defamatory language is problematic. They plan to appeal the verdict and continue defending the right to free research and discovery.The article discusses the ongoing debate surrounding cold fusion, particularly focusing on a court case involving Martin Fleischmann, Stanley Pons, and three Italian scientists. The court's verdict, which acknowledges the production of an unexplained amount of heat but does not mention fraud or misconduct, is criticized for being influenced by widespread negative sentiment in the scientific community. The authors argue that the scientific community's dismissal of cold fusion without thorough investigation and resorting to defamatory language is problematic. They plan to appeal the verdict and continue defending the right to free research and discovery.