On Sat, Nov 19, 2011 at 11:26 PM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote:
If you do, you certainly must draw your paycheck from CERN.
God! I wish!
Please someone, PAY ME! I will tell you where to send the check. Just
don't contact me from Nigeria!
On Sun, Nov 20, 2011 at 2:16 AM, Joshua Cude joshua.c...@gmail.com wrote:
Right, because hot fusion is known to work.
High energy nuclear reactions work. Low energy nuclear reactions
work. Medium energy nuclear reactions work.
Ain't nature wonderful?!
T
On Fri, Nov 18, 2011 at 1:28 PM, Terry Blanton hohlr...@gmail.com wrote:
Had MIT correctly reported their
positive results at the time, we could be will within a LENR energy
society.
You want someone to blame because your hopes of cold fusion have not been
realized. But pinning it on MIT is
On Sat, Nov 19, 2011 at 2:25 PM, Joshua Cude joshua.c...@gmail.com wrote:
After 1989, PF got tens of millions to fund their research;
You are so unaware of the history of LENR.
T
On Sat, Nov 19, 2011 at 1:36 PM, Terry Blanton hohlr...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sat, Nov 19, 2011 at 2:25 PM, Joshua Cude joshua.c...@gmail.com
wrote:
After 1989, PF got tens of millions to fund their research;
You are so unaware of the history of LENR.
You mean PF didn't receive lots of
2011/11/19 Mary Yugo maryyu...@gmail.com
I really do want to see them. I have no axe to grind and as hard as it
is for some believers to believe, I have never worked for an energy
producing industry or company.
Rossy says, MY says, and the pot calls the kettle black, etc...
On Sat, Nov 19, 2011 at 2:27 PM, Daniel Rocha danieldi...@gmail.com wrote:
2011/11/19 Mary Yugo maryyu...@gmail.com
I really do want to see them. I have no axe to grind and as hard as it
is for some believers to believe, I have never worked for an energy
producing industry or company.
No, you are just polite. But you are extremely repetitve. You make
request that know will not be fullfilled, at least according to your
tastes, you do that all the time. That repetition is annoying.
And, why wouldn`t I think that you work for an energy company? You say that
Rossi has all signs of
On Sat, 2011-11-19 at 14:21 -0800, Mary Yugo wrote:
'm still looking for that one killer paper that shows long
sustained, well measured, clearly presented, plots of excess energy vs
time that could not possibly have come from some other place -- say by
three orders of magnitude or so (nuclear
On Sat, Nov 19, 2011 at 2:59 PM, Daniel Rocha danieldi...@gmail.com wrote:
No, you are just polite. But you are extremely repetitve. You make
request that know will not be fullfilled, at least according to your
tastes, you do that all the time. That repetition is annoying.
Perhaps but I
On Sat, Nov 19, 2011 at 3:10 PM, Craig Haynie cchayniepub...@gmail.comwrote:
On Sat, 2011-11-19 at 14:21 -0800, Mary Yugo wrote:
'm still looking for that one killer paper that shows long
sustained, well measured, clearly presented, plots of excess energy vs
time that could not possibly
People pay attention to whatever you write because you are confrontational
with other people point of view. Thats all. But your arguments are
repetitive, but people get the bait, trying to make you shut up by also
being confrontational. It is just all noise.
2011/11/19 Mary Yugo
I started by the papers from some guys with the surname Chubb. These are
theoretical papers, mostly. But it made LENR make a little bit more of
sense to me since it makes it the same as hot fusion, but in disguise. That
is, LENR is just an electromagnetic pinch, which causes atoms to collide at
On Sat, Nov 19, 2011 at 4:02 PM, Daniel Rocha danieldi...@gmail.com wrote:
I started by the papers from some guys with the surname Chubb. These are
theoretical papers, mostly. But it made LENR make a little bit more of
sense to me since it makes it the same as hot fusion, but in disguise. That
On Sat, Nov 19, 2011 at 3:50 PM, Daniel Rocha danieldi...@gmail.com wrote:
People pay attention to whatever you write because you are confrontational
with other people point of view. Thats all. But your arguments are
repetitive, but people get the bait, trying to make you shut up by also
On Sat, Nov 19, 2011 at 5:21 PM, Mary Yugo maryyu...@gmail.com wrote:
I'm still looking for that one killer paper that shows long sustained,
well measured, clearly presented, plots of excess energy vs time that could
not possibly have come from some other place -- say by three orders of
to be
falsified, so I am OK with research in LENR.
-- Forwarded message --
From: Mary Yugo maryyu...@gmail.com
Date: 2011/11/19
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Gain from the cold side
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
I'm sorry but if the above information is for me, I don't care about
theoretical papers
maryyu...@gmail.com
Date: 2011/11/19
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Gain from the cold side
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
I'm sorry but if the above information is for me, I don't care about
theoretical papers very much. I have no problem with the potential
feasibility of comparatively low temperature nuclear
From: Mary Yugo
I'm still looking for that one killer paper that shows long sustained,
well measured, clearly presented, plots of excess energy vs time that could
not possibly have come from some other place -- say by three orders of
magnitude or so (nuclear processes could most likely produce
On Sat, Nov 19, 2011 at 4:36 PM, Terry Blanton hohlr...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sat, Nov 19, 2011 at 2:25 PM, Joshua Cude joshua.c...@gmail.com wrote:
After 1989, PF got tens of millions to fund their research;
You are so unaware of the history of LENR.
I'll start with Dr. Mallove's conclusion:
On Sat, Nov 19, 2011 at 7:34 PM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote:
A fair question is why a top notch high tech company (the people who
invented the heat pipe) did not follow up on this work, all the way to a
commercial product.
Jones,
Do you think Randell will ever bang his head
On Sat, Nov 19, 2011 at 4:34 PM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote:
From: Mary Yugo
I'm still looking for that one killer paper that shows long sustained,
well measured, clearly presented, plots of excess energy vs time that could
not possibly have come from some other place -- say by
On Sat, Nov 19, 2011 at 4:34 PM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote:
A fair question is why a top notch high tech company (the people who
invented the heat pipe) did not follow up on this work, all the way to a
commercial product.
Some of that history of that can be found in the Vortex
On Sat, Nov 19, 2011 at 4:36 PM, Terry Blanton hohlr...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sat, Nov 19, 2011 at 2:25 PM, Joshua Cude joshua.c...@gmail.com wrote:
After 1989, PF got tens of millions to fund their research;
You are so unaware of the history of LENR.
For those who are really interested in the
From: Mary Yugo
* Have you seen such a paper for hot fusion? They have run through almost
$20
billion by last count, so why no 'killer paper' or even a convincing
experiment that points to financial justification? LOL.
MY: Let me see if I understand this. If hot fusion doesn't work that
On Sat, Nov 19, 2011 at 5:49 PM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote:
*From:* Mary Yugo
** **
Are you always this flippant with your logical deductions - when faced
with the inadequacy of the same old lame argument that we have been hearing
for weeks? I suppose you realize that
]:Gain from the cold side
People pay attention to whatever you write because you are confrontational with
other people point of view. Thats all. But your arguments are repetitive, but
people get the bait, trying to make you shut up by also being confrontational.
It is just all noise.
2011/11/19
It is only a matter of time before you will be proven wrong MY. We will all
celebrate on that day.
-Original Message-
From: Mary Yugo maryyu...@gmail.com
To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Sat, Nov 19, 2011 7:15 pm
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Gain from the cold side
On Sat, Nov 19
On Sat, Nov 19, 2011 at 6:49 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote:
It is only a matter of time before you will be proven wrong MY. We will
all celebrate on that day.
LOL... me too!! But please don't hold your breath!
On Sat, Nov 19, 2011 at 8:49 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote:
It is only a matter of time before you will be proven wrong MY. We will
all celebrate on that day.
You should carry a sign. You'd fit right in with the ones carrying signs
about The End is Near.
On Sat, Nov 19, 2011 at 6:34 PM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote:
Have you seen such a paper for hot fusion?
Why yes. Have a look at http://www.progressive.org/images/pdf/1179.pdf.
It's an article from 1979 in The Progressive on the H-Bomb secret. I guess
there are many earlier papers,
On Sat, Nov 19, 2011 at 6:51 PM, Terry Blanton hohlr...@gmail.com wrote:
I'll start with Dr. Mallove's conclusion:
What it boils down to is this: By studying the history MIT and cold
fusion, one learns that paradigm-paralyzed and unethical scientists
have the motive and means to wreck
On Sat, Nov 19, 2011 at 7:49 PM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote:
*
*
What it means, of course, is that getting clean cost effective energy from
non-combustion, non fission sources is extremely difficult, and requires
proper funding levels.
That's obviously true of hot fusion. You
On Sun, Nov 20, 2011 at 1:38 AM, Joshua Cude joshua.c...@gmail.com wrote:
It's very unlikely that support from MIT would have attracted much more
interest in cold fusion.
As MIT attracted little research in hot fusion. And received little
funding. Crude, Cude.
T
On Sun, Nov 20, 2011 at 1:08 AM, Terry Blanton hohlr...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, Nov 20, 2011 at 1:38 AM, Joshua Cude joshua.c...@gmail.com
wrote:
It's very unlikely that support from MIT would have attracted much more
interest in cold fusion.
As MIT attracted little research in hot
If cold fusion is ever properly demonstrated, thousands of scientists will
want to investigate it just as thousands turned to PF when they made their
initial announcement.
Excess heat, wet steam, and the other legions of nonsense offered to
degrade the term cold fusion are not the issue. At the
On Fri, Nov 18, 2011 at 9:40 AM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote:
I put a smiley there to alert people like Mary, who seldom carefully read
the posts of others before spouting out a new dose of ignorance ...
My understanding was that ad hominems are frowned upon and precluded from
this
Yes. The restriction on ad hominems only applies to skeptics.
A Rossi-believer can call you ignorant, blind, lacking in a seventh grade
education, unable to understand elementary science, pseudo-skeptic,
pathological skeptic, an agent of big oil, LENR-denier, even accuse you of
intentionally
From: Mary Yugo
* My understanding was that ad hominems are frowned upon and precluded from
this email list. Does that only apply to skeptics?
No - all such attacks are frowned on and precluded, but is my criticism over
your habit of posting of dozens of repetitive and shallow
On Fri, Nov 18, 2011 at 11:07 AM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote:
*From:* Mary Yugo
** **
**Ø **My understanding was that ad hominems are frowned upon and
precluded from this email list. Does that only apply to skeptics?
** **
No – all such attacks are frowned on
On Fri, Nov 18, 2011 at 2:07 PM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote:
As for the scammed investors: fools and their money will always be parted –
with or without our help. Rossi represents chump-change compared to Enron or
Madoff – or especially the hot fusion swindle.
Hah! If you look at
I agree with what you say Terry.
Dave
-Original Message-
From: Terry Blanton hohlr...@gmail.com
To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Fri, Nov 18, 2011 2:30 pm
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Gain from the cold side
On Fri, Nov 18, 2011 at 2:07 PM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote
you say Terry.
Dave
-Original Message-
From: Terry Blanton hohlr...@gmail.com
To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Fri, Nov 18, 2011 2:30 pm
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Gain from the cold side
On Fri, Nov 18, 2011 at 2:07 PM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote:
As for the scammed
: Friday, November 18, 2011 2:28 PM
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Gain from the cold side
On Fri, Nov 18, 2011 at 2:07 PM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote:
As for the scammed investors: fools and their money will always be parted –
with or without our help. Rossi represents chump-change compared to Enron
44 matches
Mail list logo
