They have been trumped by a government document and know their previous
positions are now all compromised. They built a house of cards and here comes
the wind :_)
-Fran
- Original Message -
From: Esa Ruoho esaru...@gmail.com
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Thursday,
Yes, but it would be better if that document could be downloaded and/or
referenced from a goverment site. I searched and couldn't find any
official reference. If it's an unclassified document, it must be published
by the agency that unclassified it.
In my opninion, if this reference is not
Harry Veeder wrote:
- Original Message
From: Steven Krivit stev...@newenergytimes.com
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Tue, November 17, 2009 4:07:53 PM
Subject: Re: [Vo]:New Energy Times News Flash: DoD Report Released
At 07:37 AM 11/17/2009, you wrote:
Is the DIA a parody
Mauro Lacy wrote:
Yes, but it would be better if that document could be downloaded and/or
referenced from a goverment site.
Yes, it would be better, but the DIA does not do that. So that's not an
option.
I searched and couldn't find any
official reference. If it's an unclassified document,
okay, WHERE was it published, is the big question.
On Thu, Nov 19, 2009 at 7:41 AM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote:
Mauro Lacy wrote:
Yes, but it would be better if that document could be downloaded and/or
referenced from a goverment site.
Yes, it would be better, but the DIA does
Mauro Lacy wrote:
Yes, but it would be better if that document could be downloaded and/or
referenced from a goverment site.
Yes, it would be better, but the DIA does not do that. So that's not an
option.
I searched and couldn't find any
official reference. If it's an unclassified
Jed sez:
...
It was published by the Agency. Just not on the Internet. It was released on
Friday the 13th. Do you think I would upload unpublished material?!? Do you
think I want to get in trouble with a Federal agency?
I presume not! ;-)
...but that does not answer the principal question:
Steven V Johnson wrote:
...but that does not answer the principal question: How does one
verify its pedigree?
For those of us (particularly me!) who may not be as quick witted as
you appear to be can you clarify how you went about verifying the
presumed legitimacy of this report?
Ask the
Jed sez:
Steven V Johnson wrote:
...but that does not answer the principal question: How does one
verify its pedigree?
For those of us (particularly me!) who may not be as quick witted as
you appear to be can you clarify how you went about verifying the
presumed legitimacy of this report?
Alexander Hollins wrote:
okay, WHERE was it published, is the big question.
At the Defense Intelligence Agency, document DIA-08-0911-003, like it
says. Maybe I misunderstand this comment.
I suppose you mean WHERE on the web was it published. Nowhere as far
as I know. We have lots of
Jed sez:
(By the way, they said they can't provide it in Acrobat text format.
A shame.)
Another fine example of our tax dollars working for our benefit!
Regards,
Steven Vincent Johnson
www.orionworks.com
www.zazzle.com/orionworks
Thanks Jed for the clarification.
There's a new comment by V now on wikipedia, stating that
public(unclassified) documents are, erm, public. So, no take down is
legally enforceable.
And also raising the question of how to deal with government documents
which are unclassified, but not published on
Steven V Johnson wrote:
Ask the authors, I guess.
You guess???
How else?
I guess you could ask the Agency but I expect your request would be
lost in the shuffle.
I am sure of the pedigree because the authors sent me the document.
That's a good point. Thanks for revealing that little
Mauro Lacy wrote:
And also raising the question of how to deal with government documents
which are unclassified, but not published on the internet. A good point to
be made in Wikipedia, I think, for this and future cases.
As far as I know, the ERAB report is not available on any government
Jed sed:
I guess you could ask the Agency but I expect your request would be
lost in the shuffle.
and...
I am sure of the pedigree because the authors sent me the document.
For which I sed:
That's a good point. Thanks for revealing that little tidbit.
For which Jed sed:
I said that a
At 06:47 AM 11/19/2009, you wrote:
okay, WHERE was it published, is the big question.
This is a good question. Here is the answer: Beverly Barnhart distributed
it on Monday with the following note:
OK folks,
The LENR paper (below) finally got released on Friday and should have
gone into
At 07:21 AM 11/19/2009, you wrote:
Steven V Johnson wrote:
...but that does not answer the principal question: How does one
verify its pedigree?
For those of us (particularly me!) who may not be as quick witted as
you appear to be can you clarify how you went about verifying the
presumed
okay, so when they publish the read books, there is an actual printed
volume to go with it, yes? so get the name of it, if not simply OSD
Read Book, and the volume number. boom, proper citation.
On Thu, Nov 19, 2009 at 10:43 AM, Steven Krivit
stev...@newenergytimes.com wrote:
At 06:47 AM
Did anyone ever test Brightsen's ideas about transmutation using NMR?
There have been similar claims, as http://www.rexresearch.com/meyernmr/meyer.htm
or the Colman/Seddon-Gillespie 'battery'. I think Brightsen passed away before
he could pursue his theories.
Steven Krivit quoted the distribution letter that I also quoted:
OK folks,
The LENR paper (below) finally got released on Friday and should have
gone into the OSD (at least the ATL) read books this morning. The paper is
unclassified so feel free to forward it to whomever you think would be
This is a sad footnote . . .
The DIA report lists Andrei Lipson as a major Russian researcher, on
page 5. Lipson deserved to be signaled out. Several people including
me told the DIA authors that Andrei died on November 1, 13 days
before the paper was issued. The DIA said they heard that sad
My posts are not making it as of 10 AM AKST.
Best regards,
Horace Heffner
http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/
I wrote:
Lipson deserved to be signaled out.
SINGLED out, for goodness sake.
- Jed
Several people including me told the DIA authors that Andrei died
on November 1, 13 days before the paper was issued. The DIA said
they heard that sad news but the paper has already been through the
http://www.boingboing.net/2009/11/15/alternate-star-trek.html
Soon to be released. Even has different theme and lead in by Kirk.
Terry
On Thu, Nov 19, 2009 at 2:09 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote:
In my experience, you can always distribute government documents of this
nature.
And why not . . . we paid for it. :-)
Terry
People here raised this question in earnest, and
I have been mulling it over. It is a legitimate concern after all.
From time to time, skeptics have asked me to
prove that a document is real or that I actually
have permission to upload it by providing them
with an e-mail. I have told them I
http://asunews.asu.edu/20091118_moore
Best regards,
Horace Heffner
http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/
Steven V Johnson wrote:
Surely you realize the DIA report is NOT about to be ignored.
It is not being ignored but it may not have a big impact. So far, 136
people have downloaded it from LENR-CANR.org. That is not much
considering the fact that I have featured it on the front page, where
Jed sez:
...
I can understand why mass media outlets such as CBS 60 Minutes would have
a large impact on public opinion. It is because many people watch
television, and because the mass media -- especially broadcast media -- has
a certain cachet or glamour that makes people believe whatever
I wrote:
Surely you realize the DIA report is NOT about to be ignored.
It is not being ignored but it may not have a big impact. So far,
136 people have downloaded it from LENR-CANR.org.
I realize that it may be having an impact inside the government. I
wouldn't know anything about that.
This is a good summary.
Maybe you could publish a version of it somewhere at lenr-canr.org. It
surely will not hurt, and could help first comers with doubts about the
validity of the sources and the information presented.
I never doubted the document was legit. In the name of truth, what
happened
Mauro sez:
This is a good summary.
Maybe you could publish a version of it somewhere at lenr-canr.org. It
surely will not hurt, and could help first comers with doubts about the
validity of the sources and the information presented.
...
I agree!
Write it up, Jed!
That is, during one of
Some typos corrected below.
On Nov 18, 2009, at 5:02 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote:
I wrote:
The reactions appear to be completely independent of one another. I
base that on the patterns of heat shown in IR cameras. Also the
damage and the autoradiographs. . . .
The point I meant to make is
At 10:08 AM 11/18/2009, Jed Rothwell wrote:
To my knowledge, there have been no cold fusion experiments at
cryogenic temperatures.
Muon-catalyzed fusion. Alvarez used a liquid hydrogen bubble chamber,
didn't he?
Does heat speed up the rate the muon does it's job freeing it up sooner? Of
course that goes against the cryogenic thing.
On Fri, Nov 20, 2009 at 4:17 PM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax
a...@lomaxdesign.comwrote:
At 10:08 AM 11/18/2009, Jed Rothwell wrote:
To my knowledge, there have been no cold
At 08:24 AM 11/19/2009, froarty...@comcast.net wrote:
They have been trumped by a government document and know their
previous positions are now all compromised. They built a house of
cards and here comes the wind :_)
They have been trumped by a government document and know their
previous
At 09:24 AM 11/19/2009, Mauro Lacy wrote:
In my opninion, if this reference is not presented, an skeptic can still
argument, with a reasonable level of doubt, that the document is a
fake/it's not official.
It's certainly desirable to have a direct reference, but, in fact,
anyone who trusts
At 09:41 AM 11/19/2009, Jed Rothwell wrote:
It was published by the Agency. Just not on the Internet. It was
released on Friday the 13th. Do you think I would upload unpublished
material?!? Do you think I want to get in trouble with a Federal agency?
How did you get a copy? The copy I saw was
Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote:
To my knowledge, there have been no cold fusion experiments at cryogenic
temperatures.
Muon-catalyzed fusion. Alvarez used a liquid hydrogen bubble chamber,
didn't he?
I meant the metal lattice Fleischmann-Pons effect.
But as it happens, I was wrong. I forgot
At 10:47 AM 11/19/2009, OrionWorks - Steven V Johnson wrote:
I certainly do not dispute this. However, and as I'm sure you know,
many skeptics use circuitous reasoning. They will refuse to accept the
basis of such information because they have already banned the
original sources of these
At 10:56 AM 11/19/2009, Jed Rothwell wrote:
Valid, schmalid. It is just silly. If they don't want to believe
this is a genuine document, that's their problem. They will never
allow a link to a document like this anyway. They can't link to my
copy (Wikipedia automatically rejects links to
On Fri, Nov 20, 2009 at 5:07 PM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax
a...@lomaxdesign.comwrote:
At 09:41 AM 11/19/2009, Jed Rothwell wrote:
It was published by the Agency. Just not on the Internet. It was released
on Friday the 13th. Do you think I would upload unpublished material?!? Do
you think I want
At 11:28 AM 11/19/2009, Jed Rothwell wrote:
Mauro Lacy wrote:
And also raising the question of how to deal with government documents
which are unclassified, but not published on the internet. A good point to
be made in Wikipedia, I think, for this and future cases.
As far as I know, the ERAB
At 02:20 PM 11/19/2009, you wrote:
This is a sad footnote . . .
The DIA report lists Andrei Lipson as a major Russian researcher, on
page 5. Lipson deserved to be signaled out. Several people including
me told the DIA authors that Andrei died on November 1, 13 days
before the paper was
RE: the discussion about chain reactions in LENR-type experiments...
Not sure if I got the below reference from vortex-l or not, but, in a general
sense, it seems that
it is saying that under certain conditions, normally incoherent behavior can
suddenly become
coherent... i.e., the behavior of
45 matches
Mail list logo
