The “Six Independent Validations” — Are They Real? The papers cited are real.
But none of them validate Texatron.
They validate: General physics constraints General confinement scaling General REBCO coil performance General economics of fusion General neutronics of D–He3 General p-B11 feasibility
The document uses these papers to imply:
“These papers prove Texatron works.”
But the papers never mention Texatron, Kepler Fusion, AMFN, RTP, or any similar architecture.
This is a classic OTC pattern to scam folks with a bunch of mumbo jumbo they don't understand.
Use real citations to create the appearance of validation.
5. Regulatory Red Flags (SEC / NRC / FTC) Red Flag 1 — Implied scientific validation The document repeatedly implies that peer-reviewed papers validate Texatron. None do.
Red Flag 2 — Unsupported performance claims Examples:
“Q_circuit = 261x” “EBITDA margin 80%+” “1 GW by 2028”
These are not supported by any experimental data at all. These scammers don't even have the equipment to collect and record it.
Red Flag 3 — Commercial revenue claims “$54M per year from a single 100 MW unit.”
No such unit exists. No prototype is shown. No test data is provided.
Red Flag 4 — Fuel supply (He-3) The document claims:
No experimental data No neutron counts No spectroscopy No confinement measurements No pulse traces No oscilloscope captures No magnetic probe data No vacuum chamber photos No coil test data No engineering drawings No NRC filings No Texas DSHS filings No facility address No vendor list No supply chain No prototype status No test campaign schedule
A fusion company claiming 100 MW commercial units without showing any of the above is how lying scammers would do it.
The Texatron is a very obvious scam run by a bunch of scammers...