The OP said:

I'm way out of my depth here so I find it hard to judge

But look at this comment's four critiques:

• The scienceblogs review is devastating

• Rossi has a history of fakery, per his Wikipedia page

• What is supposedly evidence for the claims is actually quite weak (it's not a news site, just a personal website)

• This idea was discussed before and did not fare well.

The middle two are easily accessible even to those with zero relevant domain expertise.