“THE BELIEVERS” : Cold Fusion Documentary Premieres Oct. 16

The long awaited premiere of “The Believers“, the Cold Fusion documentary made by 137 Films, will premiere in Chicago, Illinois U.S. at the AMC RIVER EAST on October 16th at 8pm, and again on October 20th at 2pm, 137 Films announced today.

The film is part of the Chicago International Film Festival.

The AMC River East 21 is located:
322 E Illinois St, Chicago, Illinois 60611

More information about the premiere is at http://www.thebelieversmovie.com/.

A cold fusion energy cell is small, and safe, using as fuel the hydrogen from water.

We will have a Cold Fusion Now operative in the field to cover the event. The filmmakers will have a Q&A after the first screening on the 16th, and it appears they will be present for a Q&A at the second screening on the 20th as well.

This movie is very timely with the recent passing of Martin Fleischmann, who is featured in the film. Our own James Martinez is also featured throughout, as well as a number of Cold Fusion heavyweights.

A 200-word synopsis from 137 Films reads:

The Believers begins in March of 1989, when two respected scientists from the University of Utah stand in front of a wall of reporters; flashbulbs pop as the pair — one shy, the other cracking jokes— announce a startling claim: they can solve all the world’s energy problems using seawater, batteries, and the mysterious glass contraption they hold in their hands as they pose proudly for the US and international press. “Cold Fusion” is born. Within days, Stanley Pons and Martin Fleischmann are on the cover of Time Magazine. But, only three short months later, their careers in tatters and their reputations ruined, they flee the country and cold fusion becomes synonymous with “bad science.” An embarrassed press, a confused public who have witnessed this highly unusual science fight, and the entire mainstream science community–knowing it violates the laws of physics–all assume that Cold Fusion is dead.

But there are those who refuse to accept that. More than twenty years after the infamous event, a band of professional and amateur scientists, a high school whiz kid and a Hollywood-based internet DJ are confident that Pons and Fleischmann were right after all and Cold Fusion will save the world. These are The Believers.

The Believers Cast and Crew


Kevin Ashley
Karen Ashley
Irving Dardik
Rod Decker
Martin Fleischmann
Sheila Fleischmann
Pam Fogle
Ryan Freilino
Thomas Gieryn
Eric Golab
Rafal Golab
Marvin Hawkins
Peter Hagelstein
Michael Lubell
James Martinez
Michael McKubre
Robert Park
Chase Peterson
Edward Storms


Directed and Produced by
Monica Long Ross and Clayton Brown
Edited by
Clayton Brown (with Monica Long Ross)
Assistant Editors
Stephen Poon
Amy Ellison
Associate Producers
Mia Capodilupo
Carole Snow
Assistant Producer
Stephen Poon
Stefani Foster
Clayton Brown
Clayton Brown
Phil Wade
Betse Ellis
Amy Ellison
Mikal Shapiro
Laura Kick
Hillary Bachelder
The Believers is copyright © 2012 by 137 Films, NFP

“The Believers” test screening February 11 in Chicago, Illinois

The Believers is a new documentary on cold fusion from 137 Films described as “a work in progress” and currently in Festival Submission.

137 FilmsThere will be a test screening in Chicago, Illinois on February 11 at 12 Noon local time at the Gene Siskel Film Center.

This is the announcement from their website:

137Films The BelieversIf you’ve been waiting to see our new film, The Believers, now is your chance!

The Chicago Council on Science and Technology is presenting a work-in-progress screening of The Believers on Saturday, February 11 at noon at the Gene Siskel Film Center, and filmmakers Monica Ross and Clayton Brown will be in attendance for a Q & A session after the film.

You can attend for free by becoming a 137 Films Backer. We hope to see you on February 11!”

James Martinez, who has interviewed a dozen scientists on the topic, was filmed for the movie last year during a Ca$h Flow interview with Dr. Edmund Storms who related the then-recent news on Andrea Rossi‘s 10 kilowatt E-Cat demonstration with the quote “There will be a stampede.

The film does not appear to be on the Gene Siskel Film Center calendar, but it is posted on the Chicago Council of Science and Technology front page.

There is an RSVP required and Registration at 11AM.
$15.00 non-members / $5.00 Students. Details here.

Related Links

Science and Storytelling – 10 Questions for the Upcoming Cold Fusion Documentary The Believers by Eli Elliott May 13, 2011

Cold Fusion Now Weekly Wrap + Updates

This week brought more action on the E-Cat front with promising news, and views, of a new test performed and insight into the one megawatt plant.

Our friends at Pure Energy Systems have a new write up published today which includes some posts by Andrea speaking about household units, finances, and future tests, one very important one in Uppsala . Check out their post here – “The Ultimate N-H Cold Fusion E-Cat Test”


Here’s an update from 137 Films on their upcoming documentary on Cold Fusion, called “The Believers”:

Update: 9/13/11

The Believers: Finishing Act III.  Cut to-date sent to POV for consideration for their upcoming 2012 season.  Assembling film festival calendar.  Partial screening at Northwestern University’s School of Engineering September 27.

Translation: They’re sending the as of edited version to the popular PBS based documentary series “POV” for a hopeful inclusion, which would be a huge deal for getting it seen thoughout the TV landscape. Though I’m guessing they are still leaving an editing gap open in Act III, for say, some end of October results. If anyone attends Northwestern and can go to the September 27th screening, let us know how it goes and what the discussion is like afterwards.

Finally, back to the E-Cat and the mystery partnership; while everyone has been talking the nostalgic giant NASA, have they been forgetting the current giant ruling the digital environment?  Here’s a bit about why Google could be the real partner – “Cheers and See You At Google Next Month”

Giuliano Bettini on the E-Cat facebook page adds to the above,

I add that the test early September with that customer, which has been much talk in here and said that they had done in the U.S. at NASA, were actually carried out in Bologna. Add that, from what I’ve been told, the test was successful: the American customer is satisfied and does not doubt that the E. Cat represents a new source of energy and not a scam, and I repeat is NOT a customer bamboozled in any way.
Mats Lewan has achieved its video after the test with the American customer had already been concluded (again positively)

All for now, stay well and add any updates/insights in the comments.



Regarding belief

Since there is a new movie coming out soon on the cold fusion scene called ‘the Believers,’ I thought I would talk a little about belief.  This exposition does not necessarily have much to do with the movie, since I have neither seen nor heard anything about it.  It does, however, have something to do with how one might look at the movie, giving tools for how one might look at belief.

I see there as being two different ways of looking at belief. “Belief that,” and “belief in“. These two different ways are not actually quite separate from each other, but we will start off with this distinction.

“Belief that” is propositional knowledge.  One has (1) a believer, (2) a belief stated in the form of a proposition, and implied is (3) a warrant (or reason) for that belief. It is necessary that the belief is in the form of a proposition so that it might be expressed in the form of a claim or statement of fact.  That proposition is either true or false, and hence the belief in its content is true or false.  If that belief is false then the reason behind it must not be valid or, in other words, applicable.  The belief is true in this limited sense of being a true proposition if it is an adequate idea, in other words, an idea that is “equal to” the thing that it is meant to match.

For example, I believe that 2+2=4, I have a reason for believing this because of the rules of mathematics.  Any ordinary elementary school student could tell us that 2+2=4.  It seems like a “no brainer.”

However, I could be wrong and 2+2 could equal 11, if we are dealing with a base 3 number system.  Implicit in my initial judgement is the fact that we usually only deal with base 10 arithmetic.  It is not wrong that 2+2=11 and it is not wrong that in a base 10 system, 2+2=4, it is just that model of a base 10 system which is implicit in our everyday calculations is not valid or applicable for the base 3 calculation of 2+2=11.  Normally, however, most of our reasons for believing a propositional belief go unexplored, and normally that matches up quite well to the way the world works.  If it looks like a duck, chances are, it is a duck.

“Belief in” is not about the truth or falsity of a propositional claim.  The biggie of this kind of belief is the belief in God.  Belief in God is not a propositional belief that God exists.  One believes in God not because of the sum of the evidence, but because one reads the evidence in a certain particular way, from a certain perspective.  It is a way of structuring everything else, or rather, everything else in a certain ‘realm.’  That particular perspective reinforces itself, whether it is belief in religion or in science, or belief in little Joey.  A lot of “belief in” claims are vaguely defined and for good reason too.  ‘So you believe in science?’  Which type of science?  The basis for looking at the world from a perspective of Physics is quite different than the basis for looking at the world from a perspective of Chemistry or Biology.  How much or how little does your belief in science rely on mathematics?  The answer that one ‘believes in’ God or science, or little Joey is not the end of the questions, but rather often the beginning.

Philip K. Dick said that, “reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn’t go away.”  I am not a scientist, but to me there is enough evidence and testimony from various scientists to convince me that there is something persistent about cold fusion, something that “doesn’t go away” regardless of sceptics.  This not due to societal delusion, the inquiry into cold fusion has been a sincere interest of too many scientists from different parts of the world, for too long of a time.  It is not that there is cold fusion because people believe, but rather that we believe (or disbelief, it matters not the phenomenon) because there is a nascent phenomenon that, in our search to understand it, we call cold fusion.

I have suggested earlier that maybe cold fusion is a gift and maybe it is so.  Maybe there is no “downside” to cold fusion once it is developed.  A golden age is an attractive option, but I am more of the opinion that regardless of how good of a thing cold fusion will be, it cannot cure human nature.  We cannot see the problems, but that doesn’t mean that they are not there (careful: double negative).  Human nature will be that we will push things as far as they can go, and then a little further until they break.  No matter how great cold fusion will be, I have quite a bit of confidence that mankind will find a way to muck it all up.  That is not a reason to reject cold fusion (or anything else for that matter), mankind has that capacity with everything else as well.

btw ‘the gift’ is a topic of postmodernists like Derrida and Marion.

Related Posts

cold fusion as a gift by John Francisco April 14, 2011

Persecution of (Early) Philosophers
by John Francisco March 27, 2011

Science and Storytelling – 10 Questions for the Directors of the Upcoming Cold Fusion Documentary, “THE BELIEVERS”

THE BELIEVERS is the highly anticipated and very timely documentary on Cold Fusion, created by 137 Films, a non profit documentary production company whose mission is to “promote science literacy through storytelling”.

Of course the past dramas and ongoing sagas of Cold Fusion make for the perfect cinematic storytelling exploration. 137 Films tapped into a subject with a fascinating, controversial past, and a future which many believe, will completely change the world.

Since they began the project over 2 years ago, the excitement over Cold Fusion has rapidly grown, especially with the current Andrea Rossi E-Cat news. This makes “The Believers” a very important examination of how this technology arrived from the Pons and Fleischman of yesterday to this new found excitement of today, with all the arguments from supporters and detractors along the way.

If the massive increase in traffic and emails for the www.ColdFusionNow.org website is any indication, then the public’s hunger for wanting to learn more about Cold Fusion is present and rapidly rising. “The Believers” is landing in the right place at the right time. The filmmakers genuine desire, as seen in the interview below, for providing a balanced picture and creating a meaningful story, may make this one of the most relevant and fascinating films of the year.

I asked directors Clayton Brown and Monica Ross from 137 Films 10 questions on their upcoming documentary.

1. When is your new documentary on Cold Fusion, “The Believers”, going to be released? Any film festivals lined up?

We don’t have a release date yet. That depends on how it will be premiered and what deals we make (knock on wood). Our first film, The Atom Smashers, was acquired by the PBS show Independent Lens and we also secured home video, internet, and international distribution through a variety of different organizations. We’ve gotten more interest earlier with The Believers, so we hope we can make a similar deal for broadcast or (fingers crossed) a small theatrical release. We haven’t lined up festivals yet because we’re still working on it; we should start those plans later in the summer. Also depends on sales agents and other not particularly interesting behind-the-scenes machinations.

2. How long did it take to make the film?

We started work on The Believers in January, 2009, so it will take about 2.5 years by the time we’re done. The Atom Smashers took us four years, so we’re getting faster!

3. What inspired or excited you to take on this project? Did the surprising 2009 60 minutes episode on Cold Fusion set off a light bulb at all, perhaps prompting a realization that a feature film should be devoted to this?

We started work on the film before the 60 minutes episode was aired. We were drawn to it through some historical reading we had done. Our initial attraction (and much of what drives us today) was the complicated story of Pons and Fleischman in 1989. We didn’t anticipate when we began working on the film how much attention the pursuit of cold fusion would garner twenty years later. Our interest has always been, both as a company and as the directors of this film, the strange relationship America has with science. This involves the role that media, money, politics, and personal stories play in the pursuit of knowledge. This is a very complicated story with competing interests, opposing viewpoints and personal stakes, so it immediately appealed to us as filmmakers. The 60 Minutes broadcast convinced us that this was not just a historical story but, in fact, a very timely one, with a debate that still was very current.

4. What was the general reaction/response when you told people you were making a film on Cold Fusion?

Many people said “Cold Fusion? I thought that was a hoax/debunked/dead!” We also got a lot of eye-rolling from our physicists friends, although some of them expressed interest and surprise that there are still people pursuing it. Most people believe we are making a film promoting Cold Fusion, so we have to explain to them that our film is neutral, neither promoting nor discounting it, and is in fact a film more about science and the process of science — the collision of science, ideas, the media, greed, pop-culture, and solutions to complicated problems.

5. Was it difficult finding funding or investors (if that’s the route you took for financing) due to the controversial nature of Cold Fusion technology?

We have no investors, since documentaries don’t make a great deal of money. As well, documentaries must remain neutral so we don’t accept investors who might expect a certain story to be told. Funding is always a challenge, and as always we are continually writing grants. The controversial nature of Cold Fusion hasn’t really been an issue because we are not making a documentary that promotes cold fusion, but rather tells a fascinating story that takes place in the world of science. Our mission as a company is to raise science literacy through storytelling, and this film definitely falls within that mission because it raises some complex and compelling questions about science and scientists.

6. Who are a few of the key people interviewed in the film? Where did you travel to?

We have interviewed Martin Fleischmann, Mike McKubre, Ed Storms, George Miley, Robert Parks, George Lubell, Chase Peterson, two graduate students of Stan Pons, Mike Melich, Peter Hagelstein, James Martinez, Irving Dardik, Gary Taubes, and many others, both supporters and detractors of Cold Fusion. We’ve traveled to both coasts, Salt Lake City, the midwest, and to Rome, Italy. We’ve earned some travel miles!

7. How was investigating this topic different from your last film, The Atom Smashers?

The Atom Smashers was largely centered around Fermilab, located just 40 miles from us. We spend hundreds of hours at that facility with several physicists, becoming familiar with their work and their lives. It was a story that unfolded in real time and one which we had very little control over. The Believers has a key component that occurred in the past with quite a bit of historical and archival footage, which is different. As well, the science in The Atom Smashers was very esoteric and within the realm of mainstream science. The science of Cold Fusion, on the other hand, is immediately relevant, but debated by many people. However, both involve the intersection of science, media, and culture and have fascinating characters and high stakes, which we are drawn to.

8. Was filming completed before Andrea Rossi came out with his announcement of the E-Cat device, or did you get a chance to touch on the latest news of his invention due out later this year?

Filming is still not completed, so we are in the midst of trying to integrate that development into the film. It is helpful in that it answers the question many film distributors and broadcasters have: “why this story, and why now?”

9. I’m sure you knew going in the interesting possibilities and potential realities for Cold Fusion, upon completing the film did your feelings/viewpoint change? Did your excitement for the possibilities grow?

As filmmakers telling this story, we have remained neutral as best we can. As I mentioned earlier, our intention with this film is neither to promote nor debunk Cold Fusion. Our feelings about it haven’t changed, because we feel that it is a very important story with lots to say about America’s relationship with science. Anyone who hears about the obvious benefits of Cold Fusion is hopeful about what it would mean for the world. However, as filmmakers and documentary storytellers, our mission is to remain skeptical. So it might be more accurate to say that we knew about the excitement that many people had for cold fusion when we started, but we also knew the resolute certainty many others had about its impossibility. As filmmakers the collision of those two viewpoints interests us very much.

10. You also included James Martinez in the film who studies media and the effects technology has on society. Does The Believers go into this sometimes conflicting, oftentimes infuriating intersection of culture and technology; how this incredible energy discovery’s biggest opponent seems to have been the established cultural memes of media and science?

Yes, we explore that. Ed Storms describes mainstream science as having a certain orthodoxy that is governed in many ways by physicists. Historically, there has always been a rivalry between chemistry and physics. With the announcement of Cold Fusion in 1989, two electro-chemists claimed to have made an incredible discovery in the field of nuclear energy, the arena of physicists. Some people believe the physicists reacted with particular aggression to refute such a discovery because the chemists were playing in the physicists sandbox, to paraphrase one of the subjects in our film. However, physicists to this day strongly believe that what Pons and Fleischman claim was impossible according to the laws of nature. It is telling that most of the physicists we talk to, when they hear that people are still pursuing cold fusion, blink in surprise and say “why? We debunked that 20 years ago.” Needless to say they haven’t paid any attention to more recent developments. One difficulty with this type of research is that, unlike the work we explored in The Atom Smashers, which has no patents or secrecy involved, so it’s difficult to come to a conclusion about the validity of science in the absence of readily available documentation (one of the fundamental complications of the Pons and Fleischman story). However, mainstream science often denies the importance of mavericks who challenge orthodoxy, and that fascinates us too. History is full of them: some Cold Fusion believers point to Galileo as a genius who defied the currently established “laws of nature” with a greater truth. Yet some physicists point to the legion of so-called discoveries that have proven to be mistakes. So, in short, rather than finding that intersection you mention as infuriating, we in fact find it fascinating! We hope our film generates questions and discussions on all sides and gets skeptics and believers talking to each other.

– Clayton Brown and Monica Ross, co-directors of The Believers

Visit www.137films.org

Here’s the trailer for THE BELIEVERS

The Believers trailer from 137 Films on Vimeo.