On Tue, Jan 3, 2012 at 9:50 AM, Akira Shirakawa
<shirakawa.ak...@gmail.com>wrote:

>
> Therefore, putting aside the actual content of the talks (which could have
> ended either positively or not), this news must in my opinion be regarded
> as a good one, because the more people and entities get involved, the
> bigger are the chances that we'll know soon if all of this is either the
> biggest scam ever conceived or the next big revolution in energy.
>

Agreed up until the above.  If this is an investor scam, it's probably not
the biggest.  It depends on definitions.  Without question, it won't rival
Bernard Madoff's performance.  In terms of attention from the scientific
community, I don't know how big it really is.  There are a lot of web sites
but how many reputable scientists and technologists are following Rossi and
Defkalion isn't clear.  I suspect a lot of the following is pretty casual
at this point.  And how many believe Rossi based on the evidence provided
thus far is probably even fewer.  It's just that those folks are very vocal
and many critics and skeptics tend not to bother.

As to whether or not we will know soon, it depends.  If Rossi is
legitimate, we might.  If he's conducting an investor scam, perhaps we
won't.  Steorn equivocated and gave lousy "demos" for more than five years
and they are still going.  What is really going on at BLP and Eestor is
still unknown.  Mark Goldes still makes big claims all over the internet
and has never delivered a single thing.  Sterling Allan's web site is
always full of promises of free energy, magnetic and gravity motors, and
the like and it's the same silly ones over and over again -- Bedini, Dennis
Lee, Bearden, Aviso and so on.

As time passes, more and more people acknowledge that Steorn is probably
scamming but there are still holdouts.  And nobody has been able to get
iron clad proof, as in a court of law.  So I wouldn't count on resolution
of the issues around Defkalion and Rossi any time soon.  Of course, the
more time passes without a single incontrovertible independent test of
either of their devices, the more it will appear to be a fraud.  But when
will we *know* for sure what it is?  Don't hold your breath!

Reply via email to