Re: [Vo]:Say it ain't so, Joe -- Peer Review
On Thu, Jul 3, 2014 at 5:01 PM, Lennart Thornros lenn...@thornros.com wrote: You are twisting words or make citations after your own interpretation. ***No, it's just a simple matter of a typo. I posted that you should go to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pasquino to learn more about it. I was using the derivative pasquinade when it should have been pasquino. The Pasquino is the statue. The pasquinade is the missive posted onto the pasqunino. You are the pasquino. You are a statue who cannot reason credibly, nor answer intelligently. But thank you for looking up pasquinade. It is bizarre that you think you could have been the one writing the lampoon and posting it onto the pasquino.
Re: [Vo]:Say it ain't so, Joe -- Peer Review
If you are throwing around words you do not manage you end up using them wrong and it backfires. Sorry for you. Just fyi the Swedes are not my friends - I do not even know them or know much about them. I agree with that my writing skills are less good - particularly as this is my second language. Best Regards , Lennart Thornros www.StrategicLeadershipSac.com lenn...@thornros.com +1 916 436 1899 202 Granite Park Court, Lincoln CA 95648 “Productivity is never an accident. It is always the result of a commitment to excellence, intelligent planning, and focused effort.” PJM On Fri, Jul 4, 2014 at 12:01 AM, Kevin O'Malley kevmol...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, Jul 3, 2014 at 5:01 PM, Lennart Thornros lenn...@thornros.com wrote: You are twisting words or make citations after your own interpretation. ***No, it's just a simple matter of a typo. I posted that you should go to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pasquino to learn more about it. I was using the derivative pasquinade when it should have been pasquino. The Pasquino is the statue. The pasquinade is the missive posted onto the pasqunino. You are the pasquino. You are a statue who cannot reason credibly, nor answer intelligently. But thank you for looking up pasquinade. It is bizarre that you think you could have been the one writing the lampoon and posting it onto the pasquino.
Re: [Vo]:Say it ain't so, Joe -- Peer Review
Your writing skills are good enough. It is your thinking skills that need a lot of work. You don't seem able to grasp simple concepts, you browbeat, you use assertions and call them reasons, you can't avoid straw argumentation, you put your head in the sand and shout so no one can change your mind. It appears that critical thinking is a third language for you. On Fri, Jul 4, 2014 at 8:44 AM, Lennart Thornros lenn...@thornros.com wrote: If you are throwing around words you do not manage you end up using them wrong and it backfires. Sorry for you. Just fyi the Swedes are not my friends - I do not even know them or know much about them. I agree with that my writing skills are less good - particularly as this is my second language. Best Regards , Lennart Thornros www.StrategicLeadershipSac.com lenn...@thornros.com +1 916 436 1899 202 Granite Park Court, Lincoln CA 95648 “Productivity is never an accident. It is always the result of a commitment to excellence, intelligent planning, and focused effort.” PJM On Fri, Jul 4, 2014 at 12:01 AM, Kevin O'Malley kevmol...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, Jul 3, 2014 at 5:01 PM, Lennart Thornros lenn...@thornros.com wrote: You are twisting words or make citations after your own interpretation. ***No, it's just a simple matter of a typo. I posted that you should go to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pasquino to learn more about it. I was using the derivative pasquinade when it should have been pasquino. The Pasquino is the statue. The pasquinade is the missive posted onto the pasqunino. You are the pasquino. You are a statue who cannot reason credibly, nor answer intelligently. But thank you for looking up pasquinade. It is bizarre that you think you could have been the one writing the lampoon and posting it onto the pasquino.
Re: [Vo]:Say it ain't so, Joe -- Peer Review
On Wed, Jul 2, 2014 at 7:03 PM, Kevin O'Malley kevmol...@gmail.com wrote: Kevin, yes I had to look up pasquinade . I did not think it was any satire in what I said . I would say it is life. Yes, delayed and cancelled performances happens and that is regardless if they are publicly announced. Your analogy is not bad. A pity you cannot see the message. You need to invest depending on your knowledge and assess the risk and finally decide if you can live with the conditions. There are no sure investments. Even if your stocks seems like losers today - you never know (as you have not done the homework) there may be another factor that brings the stock back or better. Let us hope so. I have no problem that you make statements about my profession. You do not know me and I have never worked with you so just go on and tell me how no good I am I hope you collect more data before you do investments. No, Kevin I do not understand that one can be so jealous that one consider stealing things. That people steal for basic need I understand but for greed - no. I have handled other peoples money and never did I feel I could / should or would 'walk away' with their checks. Best Regards , Lennart Thornros www.StrategicLeadershipSac.com lenn...@thornros.com +1 916 436 1899 202 Granite Park Court, Lincoln CA 95648 “Productivity is never an accident. It is always the result of a commitment to excellence, intelligent planning, and focused effort.” PJM
Re: [Vo]:Say it ain't so, Joe -- Peer Review
On Thu, Jul 3, 2014 at 9:59 AM, Lennart Thornros lenn...@thornros.com wrote: On Wed, Jul 2, 2014 at 7:03 PM, Kevin O'Malley kevmol...@gmail.com wrote: Kevin, yes I had to look up pasquinade . I did not think it was any satire in what I said . ***You'll need to look it up again. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pasquino When someone calls you a pasquinade, it means you're as dumb as the pasquino statue and do not have the ability to reply intelligently. I would say it is life. Yes, delayed and cancelled performances happens and that is regardless if they are publicly announced. Your analogy is not bad. ***High praise, coming from you. A pity you cannot see the message. ***The pity is in your corner because the fat lady is incompetent at best. You need to invest depending on your knowledge and assess the risk and finally decide if you can live with the conditions. There are no sure investments. Even if your stocks seems like losers today - you never know (as you have not done the homework) there may be another factor that brings the stock back or better. Let us hope so. ***Luckily for me, I decided upthread that I wouldn't be taking any advice from you. I have no problem that you make statements about my profession. You do not know me and I have never worked with you so just go on and tell me how no good I am I hope you collect more data before you do investments. ***Yup, you're the one who learned stuff from me and my creative insults, like calling you a pasquinade. No, Kevin I do not understand that one can be so jealous that one consider stealing things. ***That would explain the entire nature of our correspondence. That people steal for basic need I understand but for greed - no. I have handled other peoples money and never did I feel I could / should or would 'walk away' with their checks. ***It's an analogy. The analogy is that there's temptation. Martha Stewart had plenty of money when she engaged in insider trading. People are fallible, but you simply cannot see it if the supposed greedsters are Swedish. Best Regards , Lennart Thornros www.StrategicLeadershipSac.com lenn...@thornros.com +1 916 436 1899 202 Granite Park Court, Lincoln CA 95648 “Productivity is never an accident. It is always the result of a commitment to excellence, intelligent planning, and focused effort.” PJM
Re: [Vo]:Say it ain't so, Joe -- Peer Review
You are twisting words or make citations after your own interpretation. Most of your stuff is just polemic. Just fyi my idea about how theft can be understood or less condemned is not an analogy. You had an analogy, which was good but you did not understand the analogy. As you bring up Marta Stewart - isn't she a good example of someone who thought she was invisible. Problem was she did not understand her own social situation because she was spoiled by being treated preferably. Not the case with a few Swedish PhD's involved in a very high profile technology as unbiased examiners. I can hear you are looking for a fat incompetent lady - hope you do better with that. I did look up pasquinade and it says 'a creative work that uses sharp humor to point up the foolishness of a person'. or in another 'pas·qui·nade (pskw-nd) *n.* A satire or lampoon, especially one that ridicules a specific person, traditionally written and posted in a public place. ' I am sure yours is better. Use words that has meaning there is many of them in the English language. Best Regards , Lennart Thornros www.StrategicLeadershipSac.com lenn...@thornros.com +1 916 436 1899 202 Granite Park Court, Lincoln CA 95648 “Productivity is never an accident. It is always the result of a commitment to excellence, intelligent planning, and focused effort.” PJM On Thu, Jul 3, 2014 at 12:28 PM, Kevin O'Malley kevmol...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, Jul 3, 2014 at 9:59 AM, Lennart Thornros lenn...@thornros.com wrote: On Wed, Jul 2, 2014 at 7:03 PM, Kevin O'Malley kevmol...@gmail.com wrote: Kevin, yes I had to look up pasquinade . I did not think it was any satire in what I said . ***You'll need to look it up again. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pasquino When someone calls you a pasquinade, it means you're as dumb as the pasquino statue and do not have the ability to reply intelligently. I would say it is life. Yes, delayed and cancelled performances happens and that is regardless if they are publicly announced. Your analogy is not bad. ***High praise, coming from you. A pity you cannot see the message. ***The pity is in your corner because the fat lady is incompetent at best. You need to invest depending on your knowledge and assess the risk and finally decide if you can live with the conditions. There are no sure investments. Even if your stocks seems like losers today - you never know (as you have not done the homework) there may be another factor that brings the stock back or better. Let us hope so. ***Luckily for me, I decided upthread that I wouldn't be taking any advice from you. I have no problem that you make statements about my profession. You do not know me and I have never worked with you so just go on and tell me how no good I am I hope you collect more data before you do investments. ***Yup, you're the one who learned stuff from me and my creative insults, like calling you a pasquinade. No, Kevin I do not understand that one can be so jealous that one consider stealing things. ***That would explain the entire nature of our correspondence. That people steal for basic need I understand but for greed - no. I have handled other peoples money and never did I feel I could / should or would 'walk away' with their checks. ***It's an analogy. The analogy is that there's temptation. Martha Stewart had plenty of money when she engaged in insider trading. People are fallible, but you simply cannot see it if the supposed greedsters are Swedish. Best Regards , Lennart Thornros www.StrategicLeadershipSac.com lenn...@thornros.com +1 916 436 1899 202 Granite Park Court, Lincoln CA 95648 “Productivity is never an accident. It is always the result of a commitment to excellence, intelligent planning, and focused effort.” PJM
Re: [Vo]:Say it ain't so, Joe -- Peer Review
On Thu, Jul 3, 2014 at 5:01 PM, Lennart Thornros lenn...@thornros.com wrote: You are twisting words or make citations after your own interpretation. Most of your stuff is just polemic. ***So is yours, you're just a crappy writer. Just fyi my idea about how theft can be understood or less condemned is not an analogy. You had an analogy, which was good but you did not understand the analogy. ***There you go again, giving an assertion as if it were a reason. Of COURSE I understood the analogy, because I was the one who INTRODUCED it. But you can't see the fat lady having ulterior motives because you refuse to. Head in the sand. You're ridiculous. As you bring up Marta Stewart - isn't she a good example of someone who thought she was invisible. ***Man, are you way off here. She had millions of TV followers from her show. Where do you come up with this stuff? Problem was she did not understand her own social situation because she was spoiled by being treated preferably. ***A lot like them there your swedish friends. Not the case with a few Swedish PhD's involved in a very high profile technology as unbiased examiners. ***Umm, do we even know who they are? Talk about thinking one is invisible, getting spoiled by being treated preferably. I can hear you are looking for a fat incompetent lady - hope you do better with that. ***I can hear you are looking for a clue. Best for you to go down to the corner store and purchase one.
Re: [Vo]:Say it ain't so, Joe -- Peer Review
In short Kevin it is not a way to take care of the professor' future economic future . That is what I have said and continue saying. The personal insults would upset me if I know myself as little as I know you. I hope you learnt from this investment it is a difficult game and seldom does it follow the anticipated path. Best Regards , Lennart Thornros www.StrategicLeadershipSac.com lenn...@thornros.com +1 916 436 1899 202 Granite Park Court, Lincoln CA 95648 “Productivity is never an accident. It is always the result of a commitment to excellence, intelligent planning, and focused effort.” PJM On Tue, Jul 1, 2014 at 9:53 PM, Kevin O'Malley kevmol...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, Jul 1, 2014 at 6:15 PM, Lennart Thornros lenn...@thornros.com wrote: Kevin it does not make any difference to me if you are doing good or bad decisions. ***Then why bring it up? As you are talking about it and think others are to blame - I thought it was fair game and I do call a spade a spade. ***Then I shall call your strategic leadership and other nonsense exactly what it is as well. However, now you have made an investment and when it goes sour then the solution is to find a sinner ***How is that a solution? It solves nothing. . I understand that if it is not conspiracy then they are individually ganging up on your investments. ***You seem fundamentally incapable of arguing without using strawmen to prop up. Where did I say they're ganging up on my investments? I didn't. I said they are being selfish with the information they're hoarding. You have imagination I will admit. ***And you don't. A tragic flaw for someone who claims the mantle of strategic leadership. There is no accusation in that. Just simple fact. I have said all the time it is a dangerous time to do investment in this genre. Nothing for non-risk-takers. ***I'm glad to see that we agree. The reason why it is a dangerous time to invest in LENR is because of the selfish hoarding of information, a market cornered by 7 PhD dudes who, in your view are simply incompetent but in my view they are obviously engaging in insider trading. Education or title has nothing to do with performance. ***Now again you resort to a meaningless phrase, a cliche, rather than developing your thoughts the way a strategic leader would be doing. You stated they are 'gurus' - well educated. I simply said that does not mean anything in regards to what they have promised and should have known. ***So here you are backtracking? Are they incompetent? The things they should have known that the vast majority of vorticians knew was that there should be isotopic testing. They're just now figuring that out, and you're just now backtracking enough to start with the acknowledgement that such a thing shows tremendous incompetence. So much incompetence that it begs the question of... perhaps they're not that incompetent, just engaging in insider trading. No, Kevin you are the one talking about conspiracy. I do not think, that talk has any merit. ***I did NOT talk about conspiracy. You inserted and asserted it. No, you did not say that AR is in a cover-up. However, he ought to be more aware of what is going on than you and I. Then he is the one who has gotten a timeline. If he thought they are delaying, by pure evil and personal greed, he would not be understanding of the delay. ***And if he were in such a position as you describe, what would his post on JONP look like? Exactly like the one he posted. We can leave my leadership business out of this argument. ***As long as you're throwing zingers, zingers will be thrown back atcha. I certainly would not try to lead you. ***Good for you. Maybe you can POTO to someone else and jump on a bandwagon or two call it leadership. To negative - a hopeless case. ***I was looking to put my money where my mouth is. In your hopelessly negative case, you do not appear to have put down one red cent where your mouth is, you ain't a leader, you hide negative viewpoints out of fear, and then you try to browbeat those who disagree with you. Truly a hopeless case. Or maybe you just act? Hope so. ***If yours is an act, you need to change the tune. I do not have to exhibit any leadership in a discussion that is just a circle. ***Don't worry, you haven't exhibited any leadership in this discussion so that's one concern you can pull off your table. Just thought that you should chill if you saw that it obviously is nobody else thinking as you do. ***Gosh, you mean I'm so far ahead in strategic leadership that someone like you needs to look around for bandwagon joiners just so he can feel reassured? Maybe you should find a parade to step in front of so you can pretend to be leading it... you'll feel reassured and it will look like you're some kinda leader. I hear you can get consulting gigs that way. Did you mention accusation?
Re: [Vo]:Say it ain't so, Joe -- Peer Review
On Wed, Jul 2, 2014 at 7:13 AM, Lennart Thornros lenn...@thornros.com wrote: In short Kevin it is not a way to take care of the professor' future economic future . That is what I have said and continue saying. ***In short, you simply don't have a clue about how much temptation this represents. If you were working on a project and saw a check made out to cash for $3Billion, would you be tempted to walk away cash it? If your answer is no, you're completely disingenuine. And there's more than $3Billion on the table at stake here. Maybe more like $3T. The personal insults would upset me if I know myself as little as I know you. ***If the personal insults get to you so much, why do you hurl them? Surely it is a poor reflection of someone who claims the mantle of strategic leadership. I hope you learnt from this investment it is a difficult game and seldom does it follow the anticipated path. ***The sun has not yet set nor has the fat lady sung on that investment. But when you pay good money based upon PUBLIC information that the fat lady is DUE to sing at 6pm Tuesday and here you are at Midnight all she can say is I didn't anticipate that going out on stage is so overwhelming well, at that point you have a right to question the character, legitimacy, professionalism, and personal motives of the fat lady. And since you have proven to be so inanely feckless at grasping simple concepts, I will spell it out for you: In this analogy, the fat lady represents the 7 PhD scientists. Thank you for your interactions. It proves useful once in awhile to post against a pasquinade. Best Regards , Lennart Thornros www.StrategicLeadershipSac.com
Re: [Vo]:Say it ain't so, Joe -- Peer Review
I do not know how you defend your own greed - especially if you have made the wrong decision. Kevin you are just one of. My point was not that AR should say something els9e - he could say something less irritating to you and othersthat belive conspiracy is the issue. Reality is that you are just concerned about yourown greed. You have made another big mistake that makes me belive you are 21. Reality is that education and academical merits has no correlation to ability of making things happen - often the opposite. Observe I have never said that it is OK with not living up to ones promises, just that conspiracy does not go with the territory. AR's response isso farfrom acover up that even you . . . . On Jun 30, 2014 5:14 PM, Kevin O'Malley kevmol...@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, Jun 30, 2014 at 2:09 PM, Lennart Thornros lenn...@thornros.com wrote: Kevin, At least you have to try to believe that people are not all malicious. ***I'm not attributing malice. I'm attributing greed. He certainly could say that he is disappointed and that he feels that they have broken their promises. ***And that would help out his case exactly how? They'd just delay the report even further. He could say a lot other things instead of just throwing out a lie, which he for sure would have to pay dearly for if you are right (which you are not). ***Perhaps you are not familiar with Rossi's credibility issues regarding his past posts on JONP. There for sure are other motivational factors for people than greed. ***Yes, there are. I just find it difficult to believe that these 7 PhD's are so incompetent. I mean, the vast majority of Vorts knew that there would probably have to be isotopic analysis on the 6 month test. But these geniuses are ONLY NOW getting around to thinking about doing it? That simply does not add up. Best Regards , Lennart Thornros www.StrategicLeadershipSac.com lenn...@thornros.com +1 916 436 1899 202 Granite Park Court, Lincoln CA 95648 “Productivity is never an accident. It is always the result of a commitment to excellence, intelligent planning, and focused effort.” PJM On Mon, Jun 30, 2014 at 1:51 PM, Kevin O'Malley kevmol...@gmail.com wrote: Yeah, I read it. What else can Rossi say? You don't spit at the alligator until you're done crossing the river. On Mon, Jun 30, 2014 at 12:39 PM, Lennart Thornros lenn...@thornros.com wrote: Hi Alan, I am 100% a believer in that those statements are a true reflection of the reasons for the delay. I hope Kevin reads it. Best Regards , Lennart Thornros www.StrategicLeadershipSac.com lenn...@thornros.com +1 916 436 1899 202 Granite Park Court, Lincoln CA 95648 “Productivity is never an accident. It is always the result of a commitment to excellence, intelligent planning, and focused effort.” PJM On Mon, Jun 30, 2014 at 12:18 PM, Alan Fletcher a...@well.com wrote: - Andrea Rossi June 29th, 2014 at 9:46 AM http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=848cpage=8#comment-972594 Giuliano Bettini: I edited your text for obvious reasons, conserving the meaning of it. You must know that the peer reviewing of a scientific publication usually takes 6 months as an average. The experiment made by the Third Independent Party is important, as you correctly wrote, and the Professors, to avoid criticisms, need all the time necessary to publish results of which they need to be sure beyond any reasonable doubt, also considering all the experience and the critics made during and after the 2013 experiment. It is not just matter of patience, it is also matter of respect for serious scientific work. The reviewing must take all the time it needs on the base of a serious and exhaustive analysis of the results, positive or negative as they might be. Warm Regards, A.R. - Andrea Rossi June 29th, 2014 at 7:40 AM http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=848cpage=8#comment-972560 Angel Blume: We will give detailed public information about the 1 MW plant in operation in the factory of the Customer when the visits will start. At the moment we cannot give any specific information. It is matter of months, not years, though. Warm Regards, A.R.
Re: [Vo]:Say it ain't so, Joe -- Peer Review
Contrariwise, almost everything he's referred to has come to fruition in one form or another. (Maybe not the automated factory, but where DID all those 1MW units, in 3 different models, come from?) ***Oh really. Where's that big, well known customer he claimed to have shipped to in 2011? Do you really expect that this report is going to be peer reviewed? The last one wasn't. The test has only just ended. ***The REPORT was due in April. The tests were done by March. On Mon, Jun 30, 2014 at 6:05 PM, Alan Fletcher a...@well.com wrote: ***Perhaps you are not familiar with Rossi's credibility issues regarding his past posts on JONP. Contrariwise, almost everything he's referred to has come to fruition in one form or another. (Maybe not the automated factory, but where DID all those 1MW units, in 3 different models, come from?) ***Yes, there are. I just find it difficult to believe that these 7 PhD's are so incompetent. I mean, the vast majority of Vorts knew that there would probably have to be  isotopic analysis on the 6 month test. But these geniuses are ONLY NOW getting around to thinking about doing it? That simply does not add up. The test has only just ended. I just hope they had enough sample material to do multiple tests. That's the one aspect that could be done differently if the reviewers suggest/require it. And I repeat my wish that they'd separate the calorimetric and mass spectrometry papers.
Re: [Vo]:Say it ain't so, Joe -- Peer Review
On Mon, Jun 30, 2014 at 11:10 PM, Lennart Thornros lenn...@thornros.com wrote: I do not know how you defend your own greed - ***That has nothing to do with the issue at hand. especially if you have made the wrong decision. ***Why should it make ANY difference to you, whatsoever? Kevin you are just one of. ***You'll need to rewrite that sentence because it has no meaning. My point was not that AR should say something els9e - he could say something less irritating to you and othersthat belive conspiracy is the issue. ***So, you're back to reiterating your point. One thing to keep in mind is that a conspiracy does not necessarily have to exist for this outcome to be as late as it is. Each one of those 7 PhD's could have decided INDEPENDENTLY to take advantage of the information. Reality is that you are just concerned about yourown greed. ***Reality is you're deflecting, and now getting accusatory. You have made another big mistake that makes me belive you are 21. ***Insults now, huh? Such poorly crafted insults make me believe you are 14. You certainly have no business claiming strategic leadership as a tagline; more like strategic bandwagon joining and purely conventional, inside-the-box thinking. Reality is that education and academical merits has no correlation to ability of making things happen - often the opposite. ***Perhaps some day I might possibly care enough about what you just wrote to ask you to clarify it. Observe I have never said that it is OK with not living up to ones promises, just that conspiracy does not go with the territory. ***There you go again, with a straw argument of conspiracy. AR's response isso farfrom acover up that even you . . . . ***When did I EVER claim that Rossi is engaging in a coverup? Please try to exhibit some of that strategic leadership you lay such a claim upon. Stop using straw arguments. On Jun 30, 2014 5:14 PM, Kevin O'Malley kevmol...@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, Jun 30, 2014 at 2:09 PM, Lennart Thornros lenn...@thornros.com wrote: Kevin, At least you have to try to believe that people are not all malicious. ***I'm not attributing malice. I'm attributing greed. He certainly could say that he is disappointed and that he feels that they have broken their promises. ***And that would help out his case exactly how? They'd just delay the report even further. He could say a lot other things instead of just throwing out a lie, which he for sure would have to pay dearly for if you are right (which you are not). ***Perhaps you are not familiar with Rossi's credibility issues regarding his past posts on JONP. There for sure are other motivational factors for people than greed. ***Yes, there are. I just find it difficult to believe that these 7 PhD's are so incompetent. I mean, the vast majority of Vorts knew that there would probably have to be isotopic analysis on the 6 month test. But these geniuses are ONLY NOW getting around to thinking about doing it? That simply does not add up. Best Regards , Lennart Thornros www.StrategicLeadershipSac.com lenn...@thornros.com +1 916 436 1899 202 Granite Park Court, Lincoln CA 95648 “Productivity is never an accident. It is always the result of a commitment to excellence, intelligent planning, and focused effort.” PJM On Mon, Jun 30, 2014 at 1:51 PM, Kevin O'Malley kevmol...@gmail.com wrote: Yeah, I read it. What else can Rossi say? You don't spit at the alligator until you're done crossing the river. On Mon, Jun 30, 2014 at 12:39 PM, Lennart Thornros lenn...@thornros.com wrote: Hi Alan, I am 100% a believer in that those statements are a true reflection of the reasons for the delay. I hope Kevin reads it. Best Regards , Lennart Thornros www.StrategicLeadershipSac.com lenn...@thornros.com +1 916 436 1899 202 Granite Park Court, Lincoln CA 95648 “Productivity is never an accident. It is always the result of a commitment to excellence, intelligent planning, and focused effort.” PJM On Mon, Jun 30, 2014 at 12:18 PM, Alan Fletcher a...@well.com wrote: - Andrea Rossi June 29th, 2014 at 9:46 AM http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=848cpage=8#comment-972594 Giuliano Bettini: I edited your text for obvious reasons, conserving the meaning of it. You must know that the peer reviewing of a scientific publication usually takes 6 months as an average. The experiment made by the Third Independent Party is important, as you correctly wrote, and the Professors, to avoid criticisms, need all the time necessary to publish results of which they need to be sure beyond any reasonable doubt, also considering all the experience and the critics made during and after the 2013 experiment. It is not just matter of patience, it is also matter of respect for serious scientific work. The reviewing must take all the time it needs on the base of a
Re: [Vo]:Say it ain't so, Joe -- Peer Review
Kevin it does not make any difference to me if you are doing good or bad decisions. As you are talking about it and think others are to blame - I thought it was fair game and I do call a spade a spade. However, now you have made an investment and when it goes sour then the solution is to find a sinner. I understand that if it is not conspiracy then they are individually ganging up on your investments. You have imagination I will admit. There is no accusation in that. Just simple fact. I have said all the time it is a dangerous time to do investment in this genre. Nothing for non-risk-takers. Education or title has nothing to do with performance. You stated they are 'gurus' - well educated. I simply said that does not mean anything in regards to what they have promised and should have known. No, Kevin you are the one talking about conspiracy. I do not think, that talk has any merit. No, you did not say that AR is in a cover-up. However, he ought to be more aware of what is going on than you and I. Then he is the one who has gotten a timeline. If he thought they are delaying, by pure evil and personal greed, he would not be understanding of the delay. We can leave my leadership business out of this argument. I certainly would not try to lead you. To negative - a hopeless case. Or maybe you just act? Hope so. I do not have to exhibit any leadership in a discussion that is just a circle. Just thought that you should chill if you saw that it obviously is nobody else thinking as you do. Did you mention accusation? Heard the story about throwing rocks in glasshouse. I do not know your age. It could just as well be a compliment. My memory although cloudy by the years, let me remember that at 21 I thought everything should work. At that age I think I could have invested and blamed someone else or the cold summer of -64. At 14 there were other things but investment that interested me. Do you think I might get those hormones in that same frenzy? What is it that makes you think so? Let me know . BTW my English could be better - I knew that before you pointed it out - I guess it was pure goodwill from your side. Best Regards , Lennart Thornros www.StrategicLeadershipSac.com lenn...@thornros.com +1 916 436 1899 202 Granite Park Court, Lincoln CA 95648 “Productivity is never an accident. It is always the result of a commitment to excellence, intelligent planning, and focused effort.” PJM On Tue, Jul 1, 2014 at 1:44 PM, Kevin O'Malley kevmol...@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, Jun 30, 2014 at 11:10 PM, Lennart Thornros lenn...@thornros.com wrote: I do not know how you defend your own greed - ***That has nothing to do with the issue at hand. especially if you have made the wrong decision. ***Why should it make ANY difference to you, whatsoever? Kevin you are just one of. ***You'll need to rewrite that sentence because it has no meaning. My point was not that AR should say something els9e - he could say something less irritating to you and othersthat belive conspiracy is the issue. ***So, you're back to reiterating your point. One thing to keep in mind is that a conspiracy does not necessarily have to exist for this outcome to be as late as it is. Each one of those 7 PhD's could have decided INDEPENDENTLY to take advantage of the information. Reality is that you are just concerned about yourown greed. ***Reality is you're deflecting, and now getting accusatory. You have made another big mistake that makes me belive you are 21. ***Insults now, huh? Such poorly crafted insults make me believe you are 14. You certainly have no business claiming strategic leadership as a tagline; more like strategic bandwagon joining and purely conventional, inside-the-box thinking. Reality is that education and academical merits has no correlation to ability of making things happen - often the opposite. ***Perhaps some day I might possibly care enough about what you just wrote to ask you to clarify it. Observe I have never said that it is OK with not living up to ones promises, just that conspiracy does not go with the territory. ***There you go again, with a straw argument of conspiracy. AR's response isso farfrom acover up that even you . . . . ***When did I EVER claim that Rossi is engaging in a coverup? Please try to exhibit some of that strategic leadership you lay such a claim upon. Stop using straw arguments. On Jun 30, 2014 5:14 PM, Kevin O'Malley kevmol...@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, Jun 30, 2014 at 2:09 PM, Lennart Thornros lenn...@thornros.com wrote: Kevin, At least you have to try to believe that people are not all malicious. ***I'm not attributing malice. I'm attributing greed. He certainly could say that he is disappointed and that he feels that they have broken their promises. ***And that would help out his case exactly how? They'd just delay the report even further. He could say a lot other things instead of just throwing out a
Re: [Vo]:Say it ain't so, Joe -- Peer Review
On Tue, Jul 1, 2014 at 6:15 PM, Lennart Thornros lenn...@thornros.com wrote: Kevin it does not make any difference to me if you are doing good or bad decisions. ***Then why bring it up? As you are talking about it and think others are to blame - I thought it was fair game and I do call a spade a spade. ***Then I shall call your strategic leadership and other nonsense exactly what it is as well. However, now you have made an investment and when it goes sour then the solution is to find a sinner ***How is that a solution? It solves nothing. . I understand that if it is not conspiracy then they are individually ganging up on your investments. ***You seem fundamentally incapable of arguing without using strawmen to prop up. Where did I say they're ganging up on my investments? I didn't. I said they are being selfish with the information they're hoarding. You have imagination I will admit. ***And you don't. A tragic flaw for someone who claims the mantle of strategic leadership. There is no accusation in that. Just simple fact. I have said all the time it is a dangerous time to do investment in this genre. Nothing for non-risk-takers. ***I'm glad to see that we agree. The reason why it is a dangerous time to invest in LENR is because of the selfish hoarding of information, a market cornered by 7 PhD dudes who, in your view are simply incompetent but in my view they are obviously engaging in insider trading. Education or title has nothing to do with performance. ***Now again you resort to a meaningless phrase, a cliche, rather than developing your thoughts the way a strategic leader would be doing. You stated they are 'gurus' - well educated. I simply said that does not mean anything in regards to what they have promised and should have known. ***So here you are backtracking? Are they incompetent? The things they should have known that the vast majority of vorticians knew was that there should be isotopic testing. They're just now figuring that out, and you're just now backtracking enough to start with the acknowledgement that such a thing shows tremendous incompetence. So much incompetence that it begs the question of... perhaps they're not that incompetent, just engaging in insider trading. No, Kevin you are the one talking about conspiracy. I do not think, that talk has any merit. ***I did NOT talk about conspiracy. You inserted and asserted it. No, you did not say that AR is in a cover-up. However, he ought to be more aware of what is going on than you and I. Then he is the one who has gotten a timeline. If he thought they are delaying, by pure evil and personal greed, he would not be understanding of the delay. ***And if he were in such a position as you describe, what would his post on JONP look like? Exactly like the one he posted. We can leave my leadership business out of this argument. ***As long as you're throwing zingers, zingers will be thrown back atcha. I certainly would not try to lead you. ***Good for you. Maybe you can POTO to someone else and jump on a bandwagon or two call it leadership. To negative - a hopeless case. ***I was looking to put my money where my mouth is. In your hopelessly negative case, you do not appear to have put down one red cent where your mouth is, you ain't a leader, you hide negative viewpoints out of fear, and then you try to browbeat those who disagree with you. Truly a hopeless case. Or maybe you just act? Hope so. ***If yours is an act, you need to change the tune. I do not have to exhibit any leadership in a discussion that is just a circle. ***Don't worry, you haven't exhibited any leadership in this discussion so that's one concern you can pull off your table. Just thought that you should chill if you saw that it obviously is nobody else thinking as you do. ***Gosh, you mean I'm so far ahead in strategic leadership that someone like you needs to look around for bandwagon joiners just so he can feel reassured? Maybe you should find a parade to step in front of so you can pretend to be leading it... you'll feel reassured and it will look like you're some kinda leader. I hear you can get consulting gigs that way. Did you mention accusation? Heard the story about throwing rocks in glasshouse. ***Look back on our interactions. You'll see the accusations coming from you, and me responding. Some leader you are... I do not know your age. It could just as well be a compliment. My memory although cloudy by the years, let me remember that at 21 I thought everything should work. At that age I think I could have invested and blamed someone else or the cold summer of -64. At 14 there were other things but investment that interested me. Do you think I might get those hormones in that same frenzy? What is it that makes you think so? Let me know . ***Stream of consciousness bullshit. Look at your own glass house. BTW my English could be better - I
Re: [Vo]:Say it ain't so, Joe -- Peer Review
* Andrea Rossi June 29th, 2014 at 9:46 AM Giuliano Bettini: I edited your text for obvious reasons, conserving the meaning of it. You must know that the peer reviewing of a scientific publication usually takes 6 months as an average. The experiment made by the Third Independent Party is important, as you correctly wrote, and the Professors, to avoid criticisms, need all the time necessary to publish results of which they need to be sure beyond any reasonable doubt, also considering all the experience and the critics made during and after the 2013 experiment. It is not just matter of patience, it is also matter of respect for serious scientific work. The reviewing must take all the time it needs on the base of a serious and exhaustive analysis of the results, positive or negative as they might be. Warm Regards, A.R. * Andrea Rossi June 29th, 2014 at 7:40 AM Angel Blume: We will give detailed public information about the 1 MW plant in operation in the factory of the Customer when the visits will start. At the moment we cannot give any specific information. It is matter of months, not years, though. Warm Regards, A.R.
Re: [Vo]:Say it ain't so, Joe -- Peer Review
Hi Alan, I am 100% a believer in that those statements are a true reflection of the reasons for the delay. I hope Kevin reads it. Best Regards , Lennart Thornros www.StrategicLeadershipSac.com lenn...@thornros.com +1 916 436 1899 202 Granite Park Court, Lincoln CA 95648 “Productivity is never an accident. It is always the result of a commitment to excellence, intelligent planning, and focused effort.” PJM On Mon, Jun 30, 2014 at 12:18 PM, Alan Fletcher a...@well.com wrote: - Andrea Rossi June 29th, 2014 at 9:46 AM http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=848cpage=8#comment-972594 Giuliano Bettini: I edited your text for obvious reasons, conserving the meaning of it. You must know that the peer reviewing of a scientific publication usually takes 6 months as an average. The experiment made by the Third Independent Party is important, as you correctly wrote, and the Professors, to avoid criticisms, need all the time necessary to publish results of which they need to be sure beyond any reasonable doubt, also considering all the experience and the critics made during and after the 2013 experiment. It is not just matter of patience, it is also matter of respect for serious scientific work. The reviewing must take all the time it needs on the base of a serious and exhaustive analysis of the results, positive or negative as they might be. Warm Regards, A.R. - Andrea Rossi June 29th, 2014 at 7:40 AM http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=848cpage=8#comment-972560 Angel Blume: We will give detailed public information about the 1 MW plant in operation in the factory of the Customer when the visits will start. At the moment we cannot give any specific information. It is matter of months, not years, though. Warm Regards, A.R.
Re: [Vo]:Say it ain't so, Joe -- Peer Review
Yeah, I read it. What else can Rossi say? You don't spit at the alligator until you're done crossing the river. On Mon, Jun 30, 2014 at 12:39 PM, Lennart Thornros lenn...@thornros.com wrote: Hi Alan, I am 100% a believer in that those statements are a true reflection of the reasons for the delay. I hope Kevin reads it. Best Regards , Lennart Thornros www.StrategicLeadershipSac.com lenn...@thornros.com +1 916 436 1899 202 Granite Park Court, Lincoln CA 95648 “Productivity is never an accident. It is always the result of a commitment to excellence, intelligent planning, and focused effort.” PJM On Mon, Jun 30, 2014 at 12:18 PM, Alan Fletcher a...@well.com wrote: - Andrea Rossi June 29th, 2014 at 9:46 AM http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=848cpage=8#comment-972594 Giuliano Bettini: I edited your text for obvious reasons, conserving the meaning of it. You must know that the peer reviewing of a scientific publication usually takes 6 months as an average. The experiment made by the Third Independent Party is important, as you correctly wrote, and the Professors, to avoid criticisms, need all the time necessary to publish results of which they need to be sure beyond any reasonable doubt, also considering all the experience and the critics made during and after the 2013 experiment. It is not just matter of patience, it is also matter of respect for serious scientific work. The reviewing must take all the time it needs on the base of a serious and exhaustive analysis of the results, positive or negative as they might be. Warm Regards, A.R. - Andrea Rossi June 29th, 2014 at 7:40 AM http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=848cpage=8#comment-972560 Angel Blume: We will give detailed public information about the 1 MW plant in operation in the factory of the Customer when the visits will start. At the moment we cannot give any specific information. It is matter of months, not years, though. Warm Regards, A.R.
Re: [Vo]:Say it ain't so, Joe -- Peer Review
Kevin, At least you have to try to believe that people are not all malicious. He certainly could say that he is disappointed and that he feels that they have broken their promises. He could say a lot other things instead of just throwing out a lie, which he for sure would have to pay dearly for if you are right (which you are not). There for sure are other motivational factors for people than greed. Best Regards , Lennart Thornros www.StrategicLeadershipSac.com lenn...@thornros.com +1 916 436 1899 202 Granite Park Court, Lincoln CA 95648 “Productivity is never an accident. It is always the result of a commitment to excellence, intelligent planning, and focused effort.” PJM On Mon, Jun 30, 2014 at 1:51 PM, Kevin O'Malley kevmol...@gmail.com wrote: Yeah, I read it. What else can Rossi say? You don't spit at the alligator until you're done crossing the river. On Mon, Jun 30, 2014 at 12:39 PM, Lennart Thornros lenn...@thornros.com wrote: Hi Alan, I am 100% a believer in that those statements are a true reflection of the reasons for the delay. I hope Kevin reads it. Best Regards , Lennart Thornros www.StrategicLeadershipSac.com lenn...@thornros.com +1 916 436 1899 202 Granite Park Court, Lincoln CA 95648 “Productivity is never an accident. It is always the result of a commitment to excellence, intelligent planning, and focused effort.” PJM On Mon, Jun 30, 2014 at 12:18 PM, Alan Fletcher a...@well.com wrote: - Andrea Rossi June 29th, 2014 at 9:46 AM http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=848cpage=8#comment-972594 Giuliano Bettini: I edited your text for obvious reasons, conserving the meaning of it. You must know that the peer reviewing of a scientific publication usually takes 6 months as an average. The experiment made by the Third Independent Party is important, as you correctly wrote, and the Professors, to avoid criticisms, need all the time necessary to publish results of which they need to be sure beyond any reasonable doubt, also considering all the experience and the critics made during and after the 2013 experiment. It is not just matter of patience, it is also matter of respect for serious scientific work. The reviewing must take all the time it needs on the base of a serious and exhaustive analysis of the results, positive or negative as they might be. Warm Regards, A.R. - Andrea Rossi June 29th, 2014 at 7:40 AM http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=848cpage=8#comment-972560 Angel Blume: We will give detailed public information about the 1 MW plant in operation in the factory of the Customer when the visits will start. At the moment we cannot give any specific information. It is matter of months, not years, though. Warm Regards, A.R.
Re: [Vo]:Say it ain't so, Joe -- Peer Review
On Mon, Jun 30, 2014 at 2:09 PM, Lennart Thornros lenn...@thornros.com wrote: Kevin, At least you have to try to believe that people are not all malicious. ***I'm not attributing malice. I'm attributing greed. He certainly could say that he is disappointed and that he feels that they have broken their promises. ***And that would help out his case exactly how? They'd just delay the report even further. He could say a lot other things instead of just throwing out a lie, which he for sure would have to pay dearly for if you are right (which you are not). ***Perhaps you are not familiar with Rossi's credibility issues regarding his past posts on JONP. There for sure are other motivational factors for people than greed. ***Yes, there are. I just find it difficult to believe that these 7 PhD's are so incompetent. I mean, the vast majority of Vorts knew that there would probably have to be isotopic analysis on the 6 month test. But these geniuses are ONLY NOW getting around to thinking about doing it? That simply does not add up. Best Regards , Lennart Thornros www.StrategicLeadershipSac.com lenn...@thornros.com +1 916 436 1899 202 Granite Park Court, Lincoln CA 95648 “Productivity is never an accident. It is always the result of a commitment to excellence, intelligent planning, and focused effort.” PJM On Mon, Jun 30, 2014 at 1:51 PM, Kevin O'Malley kevmol...@gmail.com wrote: Yeah, I read it. What else can Rossi say? You don't spit at the alligator until you're done crossing the river. On Mon, Jun 30, 2014 at 12:39 PM, Lennart Thornros lenn...@thornros.com wrote: Hi Alan, I am 100% a believer in that those statements are a true reflection of the reasons for the delay. I hope Kevin reads it. Best Regards , Lennart Thornros www.StrategicLeadershipSac.com lenn...@thornros.com +1 916 436 1899 202 Granite Park Court, Lincoln CA 95648 “Productivity is never an accident. It is always the result of a commitment to excellence, intelligent planning, and focused effort.” PJM On Mon, Jun 30, 2014 at 12:18 PM, Alan Fletcher a...@well.com wrote: - Andrea Rossi June 29th, 2014 at 9:46 AM http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=848cpage=8#comment-972594 Giuliano Bettini: I edited your text for obvious reasons, conserving the meaning of it. You must know that the peer reviewing of a scientific publication usually takes 6 months as an average. The experiment made by the Third Independent Party is important, as you correctly wrote, and the Professors, to avoid criticisms, need all the time necessary to publish results of which they need to be sure beyond any reasonable doubt, also considering all the experience and the critics made during and after the 2013 experiment. It is not just matter of patience, it is also matter of respect for serious scientific work. The reviewing must take all the time it needs on the base of a serious and exhaustive analysis of the results, positive or negative as they might be. Warm Regards, A.R. - Andrea Rossi June 29th, 2014 at 7:40 AM http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=848cpage=8#comment-972560 Angel Blume: We will give detailed public information about the 1 MW plant in operation in the factory of the Customer when the visits will start. At the moment we cannot give any specific information. It is matter of months, not years, though. Warm Regards, A.R.
Re: [Vo]:Say it ain't so, Joe -- Peer Review
***Perhaps you are not familiar with Rossi's credibility issues regarding his past posts on JONP. Contrariwise, almost everything he's referred to has come to fruition in one form or another. (Maybe not the automated factory, but where DID all those 1MW units, in 3 different models, come from?) ***Yes, there are. I just find it difficult to believe that these 7 PhD's are so incompetent. I mean, the vast majority of Vorts knew that there would probably have to be  isotopic analysis on the 6 month test. But these geniuses are ONLY NOW getting around to thinking about doing it? That simply does not add up. The test has only just ended. I just hope they had enough sample material to do multiple tests. That's the one aspect that could be done differently if the reviewers suggest/require it. And I repeat my wish that they'd separate the calorimetric and mass spectrometry papers.
Re: [Vo]:Say it ain't so, Joe -- Peer Review
I don't know you people what you are seeing. That's really the most normal answer Rossi ever game. -- Daniel Rocha - RJ danieldi...@gmail.com
Re: [Vo]:Say it ain't so, Joe -- Peer Review
*not game, gave 2014-06-30 22:28 GMT-03:00 Daniel Rocha danieldi...@gmail.com: I don't know you people what you are seeing. That's really the most normal answer Rossi ever game. -- Daniel Rocha - RJ danieldi...@gmail.com -- Daniel Rocha - RJ danieldi...@gmail.com
Re: [Vo]:Say it ain't so, Joe
Maybe you are right Kevin. The Swedes are making it hard for you. Damned Swedes. I did not know the Swedes were obligated to do anything for you? Have you paid for it? Or do you think they owe it Rossi and he does not want your $250k - wonder why. Some times the best Strategy is to hurry up and wait. Just FYI if you cannot follow you cannot lead either. Good Luck. My only point is that it will never pay to suspect negative things are personal to oneself by some body who is out to 'git ' you. Try to find a positive spin instead. BTW my 'tagline' as you say is an auto signature in my email and if it disturb you I will be happy to try to eliminate it when talking to you. :0 Best Regards , Lennart Thornros On Wed, Jun 25, 2014 at 8:12 PM, Kevin O'Malley kevmol...@gmail.com wrote: On Wed, Jun 25, 2014 at 10:38 AM, Lennart Thornros lenn...@thornros.com wrote: Kevin, I just said stock prices will not improve before the big players come in and they are not going to read 'the report' and d raw conclusions. ***You're talking about big cap stocks. I'm talking about small cap stocks. CYPW Cyclone Power in particular. 'The report' will do nothing for business. ***Not for big fatcats. But CYPW aint a big fatcat. After market intro the suppliers of auxiliary equipment has a market. Then there will be competition and that will be one by the one with the best position (position is technology, management, organization, capital etc.) . Hard to predict today. ***Not really. Oil will plummet, so will solar power. Waste Heat Engine companies (like CYPW) will go up, as well as desalination companies. To blame others and circumstances is futile. Outside things can be an explanation but not the cause. ***If they are the explanation then they are the cause. These swedes are not fulfilling their obligation. I'd bet that this is exactly what Rossi thinks. They screwed up the last report, they're screwing up this one. They had six months. All of us KNEW that there should likely be isotopic analysis with the 6-month test, but lo and behold!, these swedes just discovered the need for it. Are they REALLY that incompetent? Hard to believe. Are they human, subject to human temptations? Easy to believe. They are engaging in insider trading on their knowledge. Your assessment of dealing with put options is correct. I would hesitate as I think such companies as the energy companies has capital and are well oiled machines (pun not intended). On the other hand there is a possibility to BIG gain. ***CYPW stands to have BIG gain. They shot up 100X on CONVENTIONAL news in 2007. This is black-swan-now-you're-in-the-spotlight news. But the swedes are so friggin lazy, incompetent, and morally corrupt that they have changed the situation on the ground. 2 years too short and I would wait until LENR is commercial. ***You seem not to realize that the stock market is all about future value. If you wait until LENR is commercial, EVERYONE will be clamoring to get in on the action. It will make the dotcom boom look like a lemonade stand. I think I have learned enough about your perspective not to listen to your advice. Easier to assess the situation. ***Again, you seem not to realize what the whole stock market thing is about. By the time you're taking stock tips from the bellman, it's time to get out. That's what you are promoting here. The ideas that market is cornered ***It is Absafreekinglutely cornered by these swedes. The market right now is for information. Like Gordon Gecko said, The most valuable commodity I know is information. They have it, and they are hoarding it. But you can't see that they might possibly be just a tad bit tempted to act on the $Trillion information they possess. and conspiracy is dominating should keep your money out of the market. ***Cliche, meaningless cliche, don't know what your obfuscating and going on about. If you do not believe in your own investment than nobody else will and therefor nobody wants to buy your investments. Thus your investment will decline in value. Bad spiral - not a cliche. I would not invest without a personal engagement just for that reason. That is not an advice it is a personal opinion that fits me. *** don't know what your obfuscating and going on about.again... you're pretty far afield from your initial set of assertions. I do not know how to invest in Rossi. ***Then why did you give such advice upthread? Indeed, it was heavily weighted advice from you. I think that there is a price but I think it is very high and the only one that can answer your question is Rossi. ***In other words (though YOU didn't answer the question), there are precious few ways for a common man to invest in LENR or Rossi. CYPW Cyclone Power is one of them. All your endless obfuscations haven't furthered the common man's desire to support and invest in LENR one
Re: [Vo]:Say it ain't so, Joe
I am right. And as I said earlier, I think I have learned enough about your perspective not to listen to your advice. On Thu, Jun 26, 2014 at 8:54 AM, Lennart Thornros lenn...@thornros.com wrote: Maybe you are right Kevin. The Swedes are making it hard for you. Damned Swedes. I did not know the Swedes were obligated to do anything for you? Have you paid for it? Or do you think they owe it Rossi and he does not want your $250k - wonder why. Some times the best Strategy is to hurry up and wait. Just FYI if you cannot follow you cannot lead either. Good Luck. My only point is that it will never pay to suspect negative things are personal to oneself by some body who is out to 'git ' you. Try to find a positive spin instead. BTW my 'tagline' as you say is an auto signature in my email and if it disturb you I will be happy to try to eliminate it when talking to you. :0 Best Regards , Lennart Thornros On Wed, Jun 25, 2014 at 8:12 PM, Kevin O'Malley kevmol...@gmail.com wrote: On Wed, Jun 25, 2014 at 10:38 AM, Lennart Thornros lenn...@thornros.com wrote: Kevin, I just said stock prices will not improve before the big players come in and they are not going to read 'the report' and d raw conclusions. ***You're talking about big cap stocks. I'm talking about small cap stocks. CYPW Cyclone Power in particular. 'The report' will do nothing for business. ***Not for big fatcats. But CYPW aint a big fatcat. After market intro the suppliers of auxiliary equipment has a market. Then there will be competition and that will be one by the one with the best position (position is technology, management, organization, capital etc.) . Hard to predict today. ***Not really. Oil will plummet, so will solar power. Waste Heat Engine companies (like CYPW) will go up, as well as desalination companies. To blame others and circumstances is futile. Outside things can be an explanation but not the cause. ***If they are the explanation then they are the cause. These swedes are not fulfilling their obligation. I'd bet that this is exactly what Rossi thinks. They screwed up the last report, they're screwing up this one. They had six months. All of us KNEW that there should likely be isotopic analysis with the 6-month test, but lo and behold!, these swedes just discovered the need for it. Are they REALLY that incompetent? Hard to believe. Are they human, subject to human temptations? Easy to believe. They are engaging in insider trading on their knowledge. Your assessment of dealing with put options is correct. I would hesitate as I think such companies as the energy companies has capital and are well oiled machines (pun not intended). On the other hand there is a possibility to BIG gain. ***CYPW stands to have BIG gain. They shot up 100X on CONVENTIONAL news in 2007. This is black-swan-now-you're-in-the-spotlight news. But the swedes are so friggin lazy, incompetent, and morally corrupt that they have changed the situation on the ground. 2 years too short and I would wait until LENR is commercial. ***You seem not to realize that the stock market is all about future value. If you wait until LENR is commercial, EVERYONE will be clamoring to get in on the action. It will make the dotcom boom look like a lemonade stand. I think I have learned enough about your perspective not to listen to your advice. Easier to assess the situation. ***Again, you seem not to realize what the whole stock market thing is about. By the time you're taking stock tips from the bellman, it's time to get out. That's what you are promoting here. The ideas that market is cornered ***It is Absafreekinglutely cornered by these swedes. The market right now is for information. Like Gordon Gecko said, The most valuable commodity I know is information. They have it, and they are hoarding it. But you can't see that they might possibly be just a tad bit tempted to act on the $Trillion information they possess. and conspiracy is dominating should keep your money out of the market. ***Cliche, meaningless cliche, don't know what your obfuscating and going on about. If you do not believe in your own investment than nobody else will and therefor nobody wants to buy your investments. Thus your investment will decline in value. Bad spiral - not a cliche. I would not invest without a personal engagement just for that reason. That is not an advice it is a personal opinion that fits me. *** don't know what your obfuscating and going on about.again... you're pretty far afield from your initial set of assertions. I do not know how to invest in Rossi. ***Then why did you give such advice upthread? Indeed, it was heavily weighted advice from you. I think that there is a price but I think it is very high and the only one that can answer your question is Rossi. ***In other words (though YOU didn't answer the question),
Re: [Vo]:Say it ain't so, Joe
Kevin, I just said stock prices will not improve before the big players come in and they are not going to read 'the report' and d raw conclusions. 'The report' will do nothing for business. After market intro the suppliers of auxiliary equipment has a market. Then there will be competition and that will be one by the one with the best position (position is technology, management, organization, capital etc.) . Hard to predict today. OK I understand your frustration. However, you have invested and it has turned out to be a hard journey. Are you going to cut your losses or are you going to ride it out. See last paragraph. It is your decision and investments has to be done with money you have set aside. (I have done it the other way . . .) and you are willing to gamble with. Then it all comes down to your skills and luck. To blame others and circumstances is futile. Outside things can be an explanation but not the cause. Your assessment of dealing with put options is correct. I would hesitate as I think such companies as the energy companies has capital and are well oiled machines (pun not intended). On the other hand there is a possibility to BIG gain. 2 years too short and I would wait until LENR is commercial. Easier to assess the situation. The ideas that market is cornered and conspiracy is dominating should keep your money out of the market. If you do not believe in your own investment than nobody else will and therefor nobody wants to buy your investments. Thus your investment will decline in value. Bad spiral - not a cliche. I would not invest without a personal engagement just for that reason. That is not an advice it is a personal opinion that fits me. I do not know how to invest in Rossi. I think that there is a price but I think it is very high and the only one that can answer your question is Rossi. I f you know there is a LENR product ready for the market - INVEST. (Let me know so I can buy one.) Then you say Your reasoning appears to be... I don't like it, so therefore it can't happen. That is in response too that I do not know what Jed's opinion is. Confused? I think so and full of negativism, which will take you nowhere. Yes, Enron happened. Conspiracy was perhaps a part of the game later on. I will not discuss the issue with you but that I think that some good ideas were allowed to become way too big and then illegal methods were used to camouflage the situation. My point being that the illegal actions was not a conspiracy. It was done to cover overoptimism. More common than we know and sometimes it works. Your negative and quick judgement is not conducive to catch the opportunity, in my opinion. No do not sell because Swedes are lazy or anything else to do with the Swedes. Sell if you do not think your investment is going to grow. Stop blaming others for short term disturbances in the market. Believe in your investment, get involved but stop putting blame on others. You say early in your response ; ***Well, normally I'd ask why you think such a thing, but our interaction has been a bit torturous so I'll just drop it. I did answer that above. However, I do not want you to be tortured so let us end it here. Really I think you have heard 'my two cents'. In addition I need no more opinions that are influenced by cynicism based on human behavior. In my opinion most people are meaning well. Fear and remorse are driving the negative side often without a connection to reality and never with sustainable result. Best Regards , Lennart Thornros www.StrategicLeadershipSac.com lenn...@thornros.com +1 916 436 1899 202 Granite Park Court, Lincoln CA 95648 “Productivity is never an accident. It is always the result of a commitment to excellence, intelligent planning, and focused effort.” PJM On Tue, Jun 24, 2014 at 10:53 PM, Kevin O'Malley kevmol...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, Jun 24, 2014 at 12:01 PM, Lennart Thornros lenn...@thornros.com wrote: You have identified some possible stock that might increase because of LENR. That is fine what is your problems? Make your investments and be happy. ***My problem is that these guys are unconscionably delaying the report that could boost my investment out of the clutches of penny stock delisting and bankruptcy. I might think that the stock market will react slowly to the report - I think the market introduction will be more significant and a more secure way to obtain the sought after gain. ***Well, normally I'd ask why you think such a thing, but our interaction has been a bit torturous so I'll just drop it. As you have mentioned companies that have to much invested in a LENR market might have problems to survive if the market does not evolve soon. (the report will not create business). ***Exactly what gives you that idea? It is a risk assessment situation. Good luck as they say in Vegas. ***And my assessment of the risk going in was that these guys would generate their report within a reasonable timeframe. They
Re: [Vo]:Say it ain't so, Joe
On Wed, Jun 25, 2014 at 10:38 AM, Lennart Thornros lenn...@thornros.com wrote: Kevin, I just said stock prices will not improve before the big players come in and they are not going to read 'the report' and d raw conclusions. ***You're talking about big cap stocks. I'm talking about small cap stocks. CYPW Cyclone Power in particular. 'The report' will do nothing for business. ***Not for big fatcats. But CYPW aint a big fatcat. After market intro the suppliers of auxiliary equipment has a market. Then there will be competition and that will be one by the one with the best position (position is technology, management, organization, capital etc.) . Hard to predict today. ***Not really. Oil will plummet, so will solar power. Waste Heat Engine companies (like CYPW) will go up, as well as desalination companies. To blame others and circumstances is futile. Outside things can be an explanation but not the cause. ***If they are the explanation then they are the cause. These swedes are not fulfilling their obligation. I'd bet that this is exactly what Rossi thinks. They screwed up the last report, they're screwing up this one. They had six months. All of us KNEW that there should likely be isotopic analysis with the 6-month test, but lo and behold!, these swedes just discovered the need for it. Are they REALLY that incompetent? Hard to believe. Are they human, subject to human temptations? Easy to believe. They are engaging in insider trading on their knowledge. Your assessment of dealing with put options is correct. I would hesitate as I think such companies as the energy companies has capital and are well oiled machines (pun not intended). On the other hand there is a possibility to BIG gain. ***CYPW stands to have BIG gain. They shot up 100X on CONVENTIONAL news in 2007. This is black-swan-now-you're-in-the-spotlight news. But the swedes are so friggin lazy, incompetent, and morally corrupt that they have changed the situation on the ground. 2 years too short and I would wait until LENR is commercial. ***You seem not to realize that the stock market is all about future value. If you wait until LENR is commercial, EVERYONE will be clamoring to get in on the action. It will make the dotcom boom look like a lemonade stand. I think I have learned enough about your perspective not to listen to your advice. Easier to assess the situation. ***Again, you seem not to realize what the whole stock market thing is about. By the time you're taking stock tips from the bellman, it's time to get out. That's what you are promoting here. The ideas that market is cornered ***It is Absafreekinglutely cornered by these swedes. The market right now is for information. Like Gordon Gecko said, The most valuable commodity I know is information. They have it, and they are hoarding it. But you can't see that they might possibly be just a tad bit tempted to act on the $Trillion information they possess. and conspiracy is dominating should keep your money out of the market. ***Cliche, meaningless cliche, don't know what your obfuscating and going on about. If you do not believe in your own investment than nobody else will and therefor nobody wants to buy your investments. Thus your investment will decline in value. Bad spiral - not a cliche. I would not invest without a personal engagement just for that reason. That is not an advice it is a personal opinion that fits me. *** don't know what your obfuscating and going on about.again... you're pretty far afield from your initial set of assertions. I do not know how to invest in Rossi. ***Then why did you give such advice upthread? Indeed, it was heavily weighted advice from you. I think that there is a price but I think it is very high and the only one that can answer your question is Rossi. ***In other words (though YOU didn't answer the question), there are precious few ways for a common man to invest in LENR or Rossi. CYPW Cyclone Power is one of them. All your endless obfuscations haven't furthered the common man's desire to support and invest in LENR one iota. I f you know there is a LENR product ready for the market - INVEST. (Let me know so I can buy one.) ***You appear to be a market lagger, not a market leader. Then you say Your reasoning appears to be... I don't like it, so therefore it can't happen. That is in response too that I do not know what Jed's opinion is. ***No. It was in response to this: I could not even come to think along such lines. Way to manipulative and full of no good conspiracy suspicion. ***Your reasoning appears to be... I don't like it, so therefore it can't happen. Confused? I think so and full of negativism, which will take you nowhere. ***your free advice is duly noted and taken into account how much I paid for it. Yes, Enron happened. Conspiracy was perhaps a part of the game later on. I will not discuss the issue with you but
Re: [Vo]:Say it ain't so, Joe
Kevin I think you know my opinions. I will not reiterate them. I will answer what I think is new and if I was unclear before in some cases. No, in no way am I making any statements about certain races or nationalities. I am aware of that there is no big differences when you add everything together. It is just a situation, which I think I have the 'instruments' to assess. You have identified some possible stock that might increase because of LENR. That is fine what is your problems? Make your investments and be happy. I might think that the stock market will react slowly to the report - I think the market introduction will be more significant and a more secure way to obtain the sought after gain. As you have mentioned companies that have to much invested in a LENR market might have problems to survive if the market does not evolve soon. (the report will not create business). It is a risk assessment situation. Good luck as they say in Vegas. In general you are talking about investing in small companies in an early stage and that is hard (but sometimes very rewarding). I mentioned BP and Shell as I have heard how some people think they will suffer dramatically because of deployment of LENR. I just think they are strong enough to be part of any significant change and therefore a 'negative' investment is even harder than investing in small companies with some ties to LENR. I have given you reasons. You just have not read them. The environment is not conducive to your conspiracy theory. Way too negative. I said that investing with Rossi would be good. I also said I did not think he was looking for a partner now. In which way does that make you lose respect for me? Your $250k example just tell me we have the same opinion. Not? No, I have no information exceeding yours. I am a Swede but I have no affiliation with anybody involved with this report/test. I am actually not interested investing in LENR affiliated companies. I am too much of a doer and do not like passive investments. In no way is any progress in LENR 'terrible ' for me. On the contrary I would like to see LENR deployed rather sooner than later. I have a few ideas how and a general interest as I think it would be beneficial for us all and coming generations. I said that; 'if YOU know they are ready to offer me an address for my PO (then you should) invest'. PO stands for purchase order, which I mentioned previous as my goal to get my hands on an early working, commercial LENR unit for personal use. I do not know what Jed has said about how long time it takes to invest. I say it takes rather a day than months. Yes, you need to have the funds so if you mean that the people doing the test is out collecting money than I understand your point. I could not even come to think along such lines. Way to manipulative and full of no good conspiracy suspicion. I would advice to forget your idea of conspiracy. Concentrate on finding the right investment for yourself and make sure it stays right or change 'horse'. I hope you see this as betting in a horse race because it is early and the outcome is rather difficult to assess - rewards are great if you can. The report we talk about is a very insignificant factor, in my opinion. We all would like to know where to invest. If I knew I would also look for sending some investment money that way. Best Regards , Lennart Thornros www.StrategicLeadershipSac.com lenn...@thornros.com +1 916 436 1899 202 Granite Park Court, Lincoln CA 95648 “Productivity is never an accident. It is always the result of a commitment to excellence, intelligent planning, and focused effort.” PJM On Mon, Jun 23, 2014 at 8:17 PM, Kevin O'Malley kevmol...@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, Jun 23, 2014 at 7:46 AM, Lennart Thornros lenn...@thornros.com wrote: I agree with you Kevin. Just keep in mind that sometimes there is too much risk and it is reasons to take what I say as another factor. ***I cannot keep it in mind because it is underdeveloped. It is a simple assertion. I think that given the opportunity a few people will take advantage in a small scale - totally of no significance. Maybe $thousands. ***If it were on the order of $Thousands, the report would have been published in May, a month after it was due. If it were on the order of $millions, it would be published by the end of June. And if the scale of human weakness is on the order of $Billions, the report will be published in September. Perhaps you see where I'm coming from. That is something we cannot avoid. Remember that I am not claiming that Swedes are more honest/fair in general. ***To be candid, that is exactly what you appear to be claiming, in a roundabout and obfuscating manner. Reality is that you also have the opportunity to take advantage of the knowledge you have. I hope you invest and will become a $billionaire. ***You and me both. I have invested in CYPW Cyclone Power, where Y.E. Kim is a consultant. I've had prior correspondence
Re: [Vo]:Say it ain't so, Joe
On Tue, Jun 24, 2014 at 12:01 PM, Lennart Thornros lenn...@thornros.com wrote: You have identified some possible stock that might increase because of LENR. That is fine what is your problems? Make your investments and be happy. ***My problem is that these guys are unconscionably delaying the report that could boost my investment out of the clutches of penny stock delisting and bankruptcy. I might think that the stock market will react slowly to the report - I think the market introduction will be more significant and a more secure way to obtain the sought after gain. ***Well, normally I'd ask why you think such a thing, but our interaction has been a bit torturous so I'll just drop it. As you have mentioned companies that have to much invested in a LENR market might have problems to survive if the market does not evolve soon. (the report will not create business). ***Exactly what gives you that idea? It is a risk assessment situation. Good luck as they say in Vegas. ***And my assessment of the risk going in was that these guys would generate their report within a reasonable timeframe. They are beyond a reasonable timeframe. They are now into the timeframe where the most probable reason for delay is they're trying to get their friends family rich. In general you are talking about investing in small companies in an early stage and that is hard (but sometimes very rewarding). I mentioned BP and Shell as I have heard how some people think they will suffer dramatically because of deployment of LENR. ***I think those companies would suffer dramatically but I do not know how to take advantage of it. Here on Vortex we had Blaze Spinnaker talking about 2 stocks where you could short oil. I pointed out that if it requires a 2 year put option, what happens in 2 years + one day? Even if LENR breaks out, you gain nothing and lose it all. I just think they are strong enough to be part of any significant change and therefore a 'negative' investment is even harder than investing in small companies with some ties to LENR. ***A bit far off the main original point of our interaction. I have given you reasons. You just have not read them. ***You have not given reasons. You have given assertions. The environment is not conducive to your conspiracy theory. Way too negative. ***$billions on the table has a way of generating conduciveness. Way too negative is just a cliche. I said that investing with Rossi would be good. I also said I did not think he was looking for a partner now. In which way does that make you lose respect for me? Your $250k example just tell me we have the same opinion. Not? ***Then answer the contention of exactly how is a small investor supposed to invest in Rossi? You're obfuscating. I said that; 'if YOU know they are ready to offer me an address for my PO (then you should) invest'. PO stands for purchase order, which I mentioned previous as my goal to get my hands on an early working, commercial LENR unit for personal use. ***Then explain how that helps a small investor to invest in LENR or even in Rossi. I do not know what Jed has said about how long time it takes to invest. I say it takes rather a day than months. Yes, you need to have the funds so if you mean that the people doing the test is out collecting money than I understand your point. I could not even come to think along such lines. Way to manipulative and full of no good conspiracy suspicion. ***Your reasoning appears to be... I don't like it, so therefore it can't happen. I would advice to forget your idea of conspiracy. ***It would be a small conspiracy. 7 professors or even less. I would advise you to familiarize yourself with what happens when humans are tempted. Conspiracies HAVE happened in the energy space, over smaller amounts of money and with wider numbers of people: Look at Enron, for goodness sakes. Concentrate on finding the right investment for yourself and make sure it stays right or change 'horse'. ***You mean, sell at a loss just because these Swedes are greedy and lazy at the same time? I hope you see this as betting in a horse race because it is early and the outcome is rather difficult to assess - rewards are great if you can. The report we talk about is a very insignificant factor, in my opinion. We all would like to know where to invest. If I knew I would also look for sending some investment money that way. ***That is why I set up a contract at BetMoose where you can bet DIRECTLY on the report, on Rossi, on various things. If I could figure out a way to write a contract that skeptopaths will accuse these 7 scientists of not being independent, I'd put all my money there. Even at a loss from where I'm currently invested -- CYPW Cyclone Power. .
Re: [Vo]:Say it ain't so, Joe
What about Naturwissenschaften, or Jounal of electroanalythical chemistry ? If I was the LENR community i would ask all scientist to boycott nature, Science and alike, for publication and for citation... that would be fair. Scientist will quickly and rationally know that if they try to publish there they won't be cited... absolutely monstruous, but no worse than what Nature and Science organize with somme scientific communities against dissenters to kill dissenting journals. OFF WITH THEIR HEAD like after occupation and collaboration, those who collaborated with the invader, are blacklisted if not punished. that is the way to treat pathological consensus... same as their treat the others. 2014-06-22 23:33 GMT+02:00 Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com: Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote: “Nature” would be a fool’s errand for sure. European Physical Journal B would be the wiser choice. True. But they have not published anything about cold fusion for many years, as I recall. - Jed
RE: [Vo]:Say it ain't so, Joe
From: alain.coetm...@gmail.com What about Naturwissenschaften, or Journal of electroanalythical chemistry ? FWIW an article turned up on J. Elec. Chem. which could have some relevance to LENR. Check the latest issue for: “Electrochemical supercapacitor behavior of α-Ni(OH)2 nanoparticles” for this tidbit of info: Ni(OH)2 nanoparticles exhibit specific capacitance of over 500 F g−1 ! (paywall prohibits more detail) Imagine that - in the context of LENR. Ni-O coated nanospheres are widely available (HUD group has some under test) and would form nickel hydroxide on hydrogen exposure. You can imagine what happens to any small capacitor when overloaded and transpose that to LENR. He is an image of a 10 uF cap exploding (10 microfarad) http://i591.photobucket.com/albums/ss355/bill2009_photos/cap1.jpg Presumably, a microgram of Ni hydroxide would have 50 times greater explosive power than this, but of greater interest would be the overloading individual excitons in a way that does not result in failure of the structure. AFAIK no one has ever proposed before now that one form of LENR consists of sequential overloading of capacitive nanoparticles. In an exciton there is a “free electron” and a “hole”. A positively-charged electron hole is generally considered to be an abstraction for the location from which an electron was moved. However, perhaps the electron hole is something more than abstraction, in LENR. You heard it first on vortex :-) attachment: winmail.dat
Re: [Vo]:Say it ain't so, Joe
I agree with you Kevin. Just keep in mind that sometimes there is too much risk and it is reasons to take what I say as another factor. I think that given the opportunity a few people will take advantage in a small scale - totally of no significance. Maybe $thousands. That is something we cannot avoid. Remember that I am not claiming that Swedes are more honest/fair in general. Reality is that you also have the opportunity to take advantage of the knowledge you have. I hope you invest and will become a $billionaire. You do not need any extra months to do so. A day is enough. I am trying to tell you that I think your alternative reason for the delay is wrong. You may have the opposite opinion. You are just now in a decision making situation and if you are sure that this is the time when it is possible /easy to invest and be paid $billions on a dollar invested it is easy. I think there are at least two big problems one has to overcome: 1. I doubt that a positive result (which we all expect) is going to move any stocks significantly in the immediate future. There is no hurry to invest. 2. I do not think there are any stock to buy that is clearly connected. To buy futures (puts) in BP or Shell is risky as they will quickly be part of any energy business of significance, if their CEOs is not asleep. The only thing that will increase in value is a partnership with Rossi. I am not so sure he is interested in a partner just now. His US partners can be a good investment but even that is difficult. Of course if you know they are ready to offer me an address for my PO - invest. However, the risk is that other players have something in the pipeline - better or faster. I wish you luck in your investment decision. You know almost as much as the people who are performing the test. Best Regards , Lennart Thornros www.StrategicLeadershipSac.com lenn...@thornros.com +1 916 436 1899 202 Granite Park Court, Lincoln CA 95648 “Productivity is never an accident. It is always the result of a commitment to excellence, intelligent planning, and focused effort.” PJM On Sun, Jun 22, 2014 at 10:20 PM, Kevin O'Malley kevmol...@gmail.com wrote: Keep in mind that a few $billion buys a lot of mai tais. Swedes are no exception to temptation. On Sun, Jun 22, 2014 at 10:18 PM, Lennart Thornros lenn...@thornros.com wrote: Ok kevin I am guilty. I doo express myself poorly in English. There are fewer payphones in Sweden than here. On Jun 22, 2014 10:08 PM, Kevin O'Malley kevmol...@gmail.com wrote: On Sun, Jun 22, 2014 at 4:14 PM, Lennart Thornros lenn...@thornros.com wrote: There is no room for insider preferred treatment. That is because of that I responded to your post. It is not that kind of environment. Too easy to find and too hard to absorb (the critic afterwards). ***Just ONE phone call on a payphone could have triggered this: Money is moving into this space. From a SKEPTIC who calls himself greenwin: This friggin guy over at Barclays Bank (Brits most snooty bank) Y. C. Koh, is still makin our ecletric utilities look bad. Couple weeks ago he told clients to “underweight” the whole sector. That means SELL! Now, he says: “We expect utilities to continue to play an important (albeit…diminished) role in the nation’s power markets in the long term. But history has shown that transition periods can be painful, occur rapidly and cause considerable value destruction before renewed stability sets in.” Y.C. Koh, Barclays Bank Values destruction? Hey, skeps is just tryin’ to make a buck over here!
Re: [Vo]:Say it ain't so, Joe
One of the challenges that the testers of the Rossi reactor will have will be the intense EMF that radiates from the reactor. Due to NMR effects, this EMF radiation will blow out the instrumentation and communication equipment within some meters of the reactor. The Reactor might take out the phone system in the test location. Measurement using direct wire connections to the reactor might be affected. This may have been the reason for the laser temperature measurement process undertaken in the last reactor test. Testing the NiH reactor will be a real challenge due to its tremendous capacity to produce RF radiation. On Sat, Jun 21, 2014 at 10:27 AM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote: E-Cat world reporting another delay from the TIP testers... early autumn Soon we will probably know a little bit more. The group of scientists from Uppsala and KTH has expanded with more scientists from other countries and the second independent test is about to get published early autumn. The test has been going on for months on neutral premises in Lugano, Switzerland... ... sounding like a scratched vinyl record
Re: [Vo]:Say it ain't so, Joe
Axil, I am sure it is my lack of understanding. However, I cannot see why it is so hard to measure input and output of the Ecat. I am fine receiving a correction of my simple thinking as I am sure I am missing something. I do not know anything about the RF situation and if I had the thought (or experience) thereof I would put my watt-meter or volt-meter and ampere-meter at distance from the Ecat. That way I would have guaranteed good data for my incoming energy. I understand there are many ways to measure the output. To be sure and to be simple I would take a cooling liquid and with a simple temperature probe make sure that outgoing coolant from the Ecat was constant (a simple regulator to regulate the flow of coolant). Then it seems straight forward to me to measure temperature difference and amount of coolant being used to keep the temperature even at the Ecat. It seems simple to me so I probably do not see the issues. The Rf issue can be solved I am sure with not too much headache if all measurement take place at a distance from the Ecat, screening? Best Regards , Lennart Thornros www.StrategicLeadershipSac.com lenn...@thornros.com +1 916 436 1899 202 Granite Park Court, Lincoln CA 95648 “Productivity is never an accident. It is always the result of a commitment to excellence, intelligent planning, and focused effort.” PJM On Mon, Jun 23, 2014 at 10:25 AM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote: One of the challenges that the testers of the Rossi reactor will have will be the intense EMF that radiates from the reactor. Due to NMR effects, this EMF radiation will blow out the instrumentation and communication equipment within some meters of the reactor. The Reactor might take out the phone system in the test location. Measurement using direct wire connections to the reactor might be affected. This may have been the reason for the laser temperature measurement process undertaken in the last reactor test. Testing the NiH reactor will be a real challenge due to its tremendous capacity to produce RF radiation. On Sat, Jun 21, 2014 at 10:27 AM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote: E-Cat world reporting another delay from the TIP testers... early autumn Soon we will probably know a little bit more. The group of scientists from Uppsala and KTH has expanded with more scientists from other countries and the second independent test is about to get published early autumn. The test has been going on for months on neutral premises in Lugano, Switzerland... ... sounding like a scratched vinyl record
Re: [Vo]:Say it ain't so, Joe
Alain Sepeda alain.sep...@gmail.com wrote: What about Naturwissenschaften, or Jounal of electroanalythical chemistry ? They have not published anything in a long time, as far as I know. OFF WITH THEIR HEAD like after occupation and collaboration, those who collaborated with the invader, are blacklisted if not punished. that is the way to treat pathological consensus... same as their treat the others. As I have often quoted: If one were dependent on the people who had been right in the last few years, what a tiny handful one would have to depend on. - Winston Churchill, 1940 - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Say it ain't so, Joe
Any report on the before-and-after products is going to raise more (pathoskeptical) questions than it answers. I would prefer it if they just covered the black-box calorimetry, as soon as possible, with a second paper on products when it's ready.
Re: [Vo]:Say it ain't so, Joe
Alan Fletcher a...@well.com wrote: I would prefer it if they just covered the black-box calorimetry, as soon as possible, with a second paper on products when it's ready. That would be a good idea. In fact, even if they had a section on calorimetry and another on mass spectroscopy ready today, I would recommend publishing them separately. The claims are related of course, but they should stand on their own merits. They call for different instruments and techniques, and a different area of expertise. The calorimetry people should present their case, and the mass spec people should present their case in another paper. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Say it ain't so, Joe
On Mon, Jun 23, 2014 at 7:46 AM, Lennart Thornros lenn...@thornros.com wrote: I agree with you Kevin. Just keep in mind that sometimes there is too much risk and it is reasons to take what I say as another factor. ***I cannot keep it in mind because it is underdeveloped. It is a simple assertion. I think that given the opportunity a few people will take advantage in a small scale - totally of no significance. Maybe $thousands. ***If it were on the order of $Thousands, the report would have been published in May, a month after it was due. If it were on the order of $millions, it would be published by the end of June. And if the scale of human weakness is on the order of $Billions, the report will be published in September. Perhaps you see where I'm coming from. That is something we cannot avoid. Remember that I am not claiming that Swedes are more honest/fair in general. ***To be candid, that is exactly what you appear to be claiming, in a roundabout and obfuscating manner. Reality is that you also have the opportunity to take advantage of the knowledge you have. I hope you invest and will become a $billionaire. ***You and me both. I have invested in CYPW Cyclone Power, where Y.E. Kim is a consultant. I've had prior correspondence with Dr. Kim. But it is your erstwhile 'friends', the Swedes who are giving their best friends the advice to short oil and buy LENR stocks, those guys are the ones who are holding things up with my investment. So, yes, I have a vested interest here. More than what is involved in defending a small group of my own countrymen. You do not need any extra months to do so. A day is enough. ***How? Where? Jed Rothwell would like to know. He's explicitly stated it. I am trying to tell you that I think your alternative reason for the delay is wrong. ***And other than the fact that you backed up this attempt with simple assertions, your attempt is valid. You should have been providing REASONS behind your ASSERTIONS. You may have the opposite opinion. ***I have a skewed opinion. You are just now in a decision making situation and if you are sure that this is the time when it is possible /easy to invest and be paid $billions on a dollar invested it is easy. I think there are at least two big problems one has to overcome: 1. I doubt that a positive result (which we all expect) is going to move any stocks significantly in the immediate future. There is no hurry to invest. ***You obviously haven't been following CYPW. Maybe even CPST and Blaze Spinnaker's notorious baloney about shorting oil. 2. I do not think there are any stock to buy that is clearly connected. ***CYPW. Cyclone Power. CPST, Capstone Turbine. There are others. To buy futures (puts) in BP or Shell is risky as they will quickly be part of any energy business of significance, if their CEOs is not asleep. ***What??? Again, you obfuscate. The only thing that will increase in value is a partnership with Rossi. ***And exactly HOW is a small investor supposed to do that? I know someone who approached Rossi more than a decade ago with $250k, and Rossi said no, he'd go it alone. I am losing my respect for you. I am not so sure he is interested in a partner just now. His US partners can be a good investment but even that is difficult. Of course if you know they are ready to offer me an address for my PO - invest. ***So, you have some kind of offer, but us lowly LENR minions have zip, other than perhaps CYPW or CPSt or Shorting Oil. And it is exactly THOSE plays which are hurting due to your 'friends' dragging their feet and engaging in insider trading. However, the risk is that other players have something in the pipeline - better or faster. ***Well, that must be 'terrible' for YOU. I wish you luck in your investment decision. You know almost as much as the people who are performing the test. ***You are correct here. The people performing the test are engaging in selfish behavior regarding this information and it qualifies as insider trading. Best Regards , Lennart Thornro ***Best regards to you. I wish I had an offer like yours or anything similar -- they are ready to offer me an address for my PO - invest.
Re: [Vo]:Say it ain't so, Joe
Ahmen Axil :) On Jun 21, 2014 8:32 PM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote: I believe that LENR is many centuries ahead of its time. Let us understand this paradigm changing device through an like example. Let us put ourselves back to the year 1014 AD. Imagine that a smart phone was given to a monk who toiled for most of his cloistered life coping one book and you told him to prove that with this device he could now copy and sent that book to someone across the world in 5 seconds. Even this monk who accepts the concept of miracles might be somewhat confused and call in some additional members of his order to help him with the test. When looking more deeply into the physical principles that make this smart phone work, the monk and his fellows might need some additional time to research new physical concepts in more depth than their collective knowledge base may be expected to support. This could take some additional time. Maybe the time it takes this monk and his fellows to test the smart phone would extent a longer than was originally expected. After all they are dealing with understanding a miracle. On Sat, Jun 21, 2014 at 11:18 PM, Lennart Thornros lenn...@thornros.com wrote: Hello Kevin, No Swedes are not immune to any bad things. I was hesitating before I wrote my post as I could hear that protest. However, it is a small and homogeneous country where the head of (the CIA of Sweden) is forced to explain himself. He is criticized for having collaborated with the US intelligence (CIA) and he says I am sorry on national TV. BTW I have said that smaller entities are easier to handle than larger.:) Of course lies exist. It is a great country to be a journalist as you have so much access. The people we talk about would not take any chances. They for certain are not entrepreneurial or risk takers in any form or shape. I am saying I believe - your opinion is as good as mine just my believe - that there is a conflict between people and that some say 'let us publish', while other say we get the question xyz- what are we saying. Conclusion let us find out and delay, which is better than showing an unprofessional behavior in the mind of those guys. I agree they did not sign up to answer the theory. However, I think they want to have theory that support the findings. It would be covering that special part we all are concerned about. To make another test to find out exactly how much CU and Fe and Ni that has been involved and the isotopes must be of value as I think they listen to you guys who are providing theories and ask questions all the time. Good of course but making the people involved feeling they need answers to the different ideas they did not answered before - and for which they found themselves without clear answers. You can say that given the situation it is bullshit behavior. OK I can see that point it does not change what I think and I do not know nor communicate with either one of them. Your insider idea is not possible, Yes, I agree that they should have lived up to their promises about timeline. However, I have been in many situations where you just cannot get anywhere by saying it is no good, when people say they need more time. They are in no hurry - but for the purpose of insider trading - no way. Sorry Kevin you need to meet with more people. They mostly protest about the missing pickles. Most often such issues take size not proportional to their roles in the whole - just look on our political debate. I understand that people are suffering from poor performance or lack of personal accountability for promises made. That does not change anything. I have often been in that situation when lack of decisions have cost me. I think most business leaders have been there. No fun I agree. I am not defending the lack of accountability - I merely tried to give you the internal reasons I think they have and combined with their environmental situation. It is still 3 out of 300 month - 1%.
Re: [Vo]:Say it ain't so, Joe
My guess is that Levi et al. are trying to get this published in a journal. Maybe a major journal such as Nature. That is a fool's errand. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Say it ain't so, Joe
If true, this might mean that Nature has input into how the test is run to meet it own high scientific standards. On Sun, Jun 22, 2014 at 12:20 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote: My guess is that Levi et al. are trying to get this published in a journal. Maybe a major journal such as Nature. That is a fool's errand. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Say it ain't so, Joe
I forget where I read it, but Levi was not involved this time. Harry On Sun, Jun 22, 2014 at 12:20 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote: My guess is that Levi et al. are trying to get this published in a journal. Maybe a major journal such as Nature. That is a fool's errand. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Say it ain't so, Joe
The extreme limitation on access to the magic box upon which this report is founded is an impediment to its credibility. Larding on top of that impediment associations with Rossi, such as Levi, is (unlike the limited access) unnecessary and synergistically damaging to the report's credibility. So if Levi and others previously associated with Rossi are excluded, then it is good news. On Sun, Jun 22, 2014 at 11:26 AM, H Veeder hveeder...@gmail.com wrote: I forget where I read it, but Levi was not involved this time. Harry On Sun, Jun 22, 2014 at 12:20 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote: My guess is that Levi et al. are trying to get this published in a journal. Maybe a major journal such as Nature. That is a fool's errand. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Say it ain't so, Joe
Alain Jed-- I agree with Jed. Fear of the unknown is hard wired in the human/animal response in general. Only rational thought process or repeated safe experiences can overcome this built-in fear. Its the risk takers like Rossi who look fear in the face and ignore her/him that cause change in themselves as well as the rest of timid society. And in many cases the risk takers are very principled people--unscarred by dogma. They become the heroes in the long run. Bob Sent from Windows Mail From: Jed Rothwell Sent: Saturday, June 21, 2014 4:30 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Alain Sepeda alain.sep...@gmail.com wrote: just a nasty question ... who opposed Cold Fusion research ? DoD,Navy ? Commercial/Military Nuke labs ? or rather : APS, , DoE, NYT, Swedish Public Radio, INFN, CERN, scientific journals... All of them opposed it, and they still do. See, for example: http://pages.csam.montclair.edu/~kowalski/cf/293wikipedia.html http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/MalloveEclassicnas.pdf I ascribe this opposition to human nature, not a conspiracy. People opposed most innovation, great and small. They fought to prevent the development of the laser, and before that they fought against buttons (threatening to burn people at the stake), and zippers (because they thought zippers promote sexual immorality). - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Say it ain't so, Joe
I might add to Eric’s suggestion that we all take a sip once in a while. Bob Sent from Windows Mail From: Eric Walker Sent: Saturday, June 21, 2014 6:35 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com On Sat, Jun 21, 2014 at 7:27 AM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote: E-Cat world reporting another delay from the TIP testers... I feel that someone should volunteer to write a Vortex beerhall song. We can while away the time to the TIP report by loudly singing the song and clinking beer steins. Eric
Re: [Vo]:Say it ain't so, Joe
Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote: If true, this might mean that Nature has input into how the test is run to meet it own high scientific standards. I do not think Nature editors make suggestions about how to conduct an experiment. With one exception: they made suggestions when their own editor, Maddox, took part in an experiment to debunk homeopathy. Other than that, their role begins when the experiment is finished and the researchers have written a paper. The editors begin by accepting the paper for review, and then they circulate it. In this case, they would never accept it for review. Not at Nature, and probably not at any other major journal. Peer review takes a few months for most papers. In the case of cold fusion, it takes years, according to Mike McKubre. If the Swedish researchers want to see this peer-reviewed it will not be published for 3 to 5 years, and probably never. As I said, this is a fool's errand. They should upload it to arXiv and have done with it. - Jed
RE: [Vo]:Say it ain't so, Joe
“Nature” would be a fool’s errand for sure. European Physical Journal B would be the wiser choice. From: Jed Rothwell My guess is that Levi et al. are trying to get this published in a journal. Maybe a major journal such as Nature. That is a fool's errand. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Say it ain't so, Joe
Physics Letters A published a replication of Arata's pycnodeuterium paper. This could easily be called a replication of earlier Ni/H papers. On Sun, Jun 22, 2014 at 10:59 AM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote: “Nature” would be a fool’s errand for sure. European Physical Journal B would be the wiser choice. *From:* Jed Rothwell My guess is that Levi et al. are trying to get this published in a journal. Maybe a major journal such as Nature. That is a fool's errand. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Say it ain't so, Joe
Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote: “Nature” would be a fool’s errand for sure. European Physical Journal B would be the wiser choice. True. But they have not published anything about cold fusion for many years, as I recall. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Say it ain't so, Joe
On Sat, Jun 21, 2014 at 8:18 PM, Lennart Thornros lenn...@thornros.com wrote: I am saying I believe - your opinion is as good as mine just my believe - that there is a conflict between people and that some say 'let us publish', while other say we get the question xyz- what are we saying. ***They should have known that stuff GOING IN. This is, after all, the 2nd round of testing. Conclusion let us find out and delay, which is better than showing an unprofessional behavior in the mind of those guys. ***Then that goes back to what I said on another thread, how this report is a form of saving face for the earlier researchers. They screwed up then. They're screwing up now. I agree they did not sign up to answer the theory. ***And yet that is likely the holdup. Rossi has far more time on point with these devices and he obviously ran isotopic analysis at some point. Yet he says that he doesn't know how this thing works. Running the analysis isn't what takes so much time. It is the act of pulling their heads out, that's what's taking so much time. However, I think they want to have theory that support the findings. It would be covering that special part we all are concerned about. To make another test to find out exactly how much CU and Fe and Ni that has been involved and the isotopes must be of value as I think they listen to you guys who are providing theories and ask questions all the time. Good of course but making the people involved feeling they need answers to the different ideas they did not answered before - and for which they found themselves without clear answers. You can say that given the situation it is bullshit behavior. OK I can see that point it does not change what I think and I do not know nor communicate with either one of them. ***Basically, Rossi claimed to have an excess heat generator. They found that this device generates excess heat. Rossi already did isotope analysis. They now believe Rossi that he has an excess heat generator because they've seen it for themselves, but DON'T believe Rossi on the isotope analysis? Bullshit. Your insider idea is not possible, ***It is not only possible it is probable. And the longer this goes, such probability increases each day. Yes, I agree that they should have lived up to their promises about timeline. However, I have been in many situations where you just cannot get anywhere by saying it is no good, when people say they need more time. They are in no hurry - but for the purpose of insider trading - no way. ***And your argument for this is...??? Sorry Kevin you need to meet with more people. They mostly protest about the missing pickles. ***What??? Most often such issues take size not proportional to their roles in the whole - just look on our political debate. ***Again, what? I am not defending the lack of accountability - I merely tried to give you the internal reasons I think they have ***Actually, you didn't give the internal reasons. You simply reiterated your stance that this insider thing isn't possible. and combined with their environmental situation. It is still 3 out of 300 month - 1%. ***What?
Re: [Vo]:Say it ain't so, Joe
Kevin, I understand your frustration. I can see that it is one thing what should take place and another what is taking place. There is no room for insider preferred treatment. That is because of that I responded to your post. It is not that kind of environment. Too easy to find and too hard to absorb (the critic afterwards). You are the one who suggested pickles. I suppose you meant less important fact overall and something should have been dealt with long before. So my comments is that is how people mostly react when pressure is on. Pressure is on so better postpone. I would also like that to be untrue but that is mankind in most cases. I said this so common that it is not hard to find examples. Look on our political process. Regardless of political preference I think we all think it is stupid to have large number of people going to different state capitals and to DC to decide about things they do not understand and make no impact on. Decision is already made so now the job becomes to talk about the pickles missing from last years sausage. You might think I only defend an impossible stance. However, I do know the environment and it is not conducive to what you say and the people involved are far too experienced to take silly chances. Once again I can see your frustration. I just say that your explanation is far-fetched. Best Regards , Lennart Thornros www.StrategicLeadershipSac.com lenn...@thornros.com +1 916 436 1899 202 Granite Park Court, Lincoln CA 95648 “Productivity is never an accident. It is always the result of a commitment to excellence, intelligent planning, and focused effort.” PJM On Sun, Jun 22, 2014 at 2:36 PM, Kevin O'Malley kevmol...@gmail.com wrote: On Sat, Jun 21, 2014 at 8:18 PM, Lennart Thornros lenn...@thornros.com wrote: I am saying I believe - your opinion is as good as mine just my believe - that there is a conflict between people and that some say 'let us publish', while other say we get the question xyz- what are we saying. ***They should have known that stuff GOING IN. This is, after all, the 2nd round of testing. Conclusion let us find out and delay, which is better than showing an unprofessional behavior in the mind of those guys. ***Then that goes back to what I said on another thread, how this report is a form of saving face for the earlier researchers. They screwed up then. They're screwing up now. I agree they did not sign up to answer the theory. ***And yet that is likely the holdup. Rossi has far more time on point with these devices and he obviously ran isotopic analysis at some point. Yet he says that he doesn't know how this thing works. Running the analysis isn't what takes so much time. It is the act of pulling their heads out, that's what's taking so much time. However, I think they want to have theory that support the findings. It would be covering that special part we all are concerned about. To make another test to find out exactly how much CU and Fe and Ni that has been involved and the isotopes must be of value as I think they listen to you guys who are providing theories and ask questions all the time. Good of course but making the people involved feeling they need answers to the different ideas they did not answered before - and for which they found themselves without clear answers. You can say that given the situation it is bullshit behavior. OK I can see that point it does not change what I think and I do not know nor communicate with either one of them. ***Basically, Rossi claimed to have an excess heat generator. They found that this device generates excess heat. Rossi already did isotope analysis. They now believe Rossi that he has an excess heat generator because they've seen it for themselves, but DON'T believe Rossi on the isotope analysis? Bullshit. Your insider idea is not possible, ***It is not only possible it is probable. And the longer this goes, such probability increases each day. Yes, I agree that they should have lived up to their promises about timeline. However, I have been in many situations where you just cannot get anywhere by saying it is no good, when people say they need more time. They are in no hurry - but for the purpose of insider trading - no way. ***And your argument for this is...??? Sorry Kevin you need to meet with more people. They mostly protest about the missing pickles. ***What??? Most often such issues take size not proportional to their roles in the whole - just look on our political debate. ***Again, what? I am not defending the lack of accountability - I merely tried to give you the internal reasons I think they have ***Actually, you didn't give the internal reasons. You simply reiterated your stance that this insider thing isn't possible. and combined with their environmental situation. It is still 3 out of 300 month - 1%. ***What?
Re: [Vo]:Say it ain't so, Joe
On Sun, Jun 22, 2014 at 4:14 PM, Lennart Thornros lenn...@thornros.com wrote: There is no room for insider preferred treatment. That is because of that I responded to your post. It is not that kind of environment. Too easy to find and too hard to absorb (the critic afterwards). ***I doubt it's easy to find. Highly doubtful. You are the one who suggested pickles. ***You appear to be using some Swedish expression. AFAIK, it has no meaning in english. Please just explain it plainly. Explaining the phrase pickles using the phrase pickles does nothing. I suppose you meant less important fact overall and something should have been dealt with long before. So my comments is that is how people mostly react when pressure is on. Pressure is on so better postpone. I would also like that to be untrue but that is mankind in most cases. ***We KNOW they're postponing, delaying, procrastinating. The report was due in April, it's now June. What happens from now onwards is beyond procrastination. It is insider trading. I said this so common that it is not hard to find examples. Look on our political process. Regardless of political preference I think we all think it is stupid to have large number of people going to different state capitals and to DC to decide about things they do not understand and make no impact on. Decision is already made so now the job becomes to talk about the pickles missing from last years sausage. ***You are still not making sense at all. You might think I only defend an impossible stance. However, I do know the environment and it is not conducive to what you say and the people involved are far too experienced to take silly chances. ***We're talking about a $Trillion money movement due to this information. The chances wouldn't be silly. Once again I can see your frustration. I just say that your explanation is far-fetched. ***Horse manure. Any normal person who saw a few $billion cash (cashable -- you couldn't carry it) on the table with the chance to walk out the door would be tempted. They can scream all they want while you're drinking Mai Tais in some country with no extradition treaty. And there's far more than just a few $billion on the table here, figuratively speaking.
Re: [Vo]:Say it ain't so, Joe
On Sun, Jun 22, 2014 at 4:14 PM, Lennart Thornros lenn...@thornros.com wrote: There is no room for insider preferred treatment. That is because of that I responded to your post. It is not that kind of environment. Too easy to find and too hard to absorb (the critic afterwards). ***Just ONE phone call on a payphone could have triggered this: Money is moving into this space. From a SKEPTIC who calls himself greenwin: This friggin guy over at Barclays Bank (Brits most snooty bank) Y. C. Koh, is still makin our ecletric utilities look bad. Couple weeks ago he told clients to “underweight” the whole sector. That means SELL! Now, he says: “We expect utilities to continue to play an important (albeit…diminished) role in the nation’s power markets in the long term. But history has shown that transition periods can be painful, occur rapidly and cause considerable value destruction before renewed stability sets in.” Y.C. Koh, Barclays Bank Values destruction? Hey, skeps is just tryin’ to make a buck over here!
Re: [Vo]:Say it ain't so, Joe
Ok kevin I am guilty. I doo express myself poorly in English. There are fewer payphones in Sweden than here. On Jun 22, 2014 10:08 PM, Kevin O'Malley kevmol...@gmail.com wrote: On Sun, Jun 22, 2014 at 4:14 PM, Lennart Thornros lenn...@thornros.com wrote: There is no room for insider preferred treatment. That is because of that I responded to your post. It is not that kind of environment. Too easy to find and too hard to absorb (the critic afterwards). ***Just ONE phone call on a payphone could have triggered this: Money is moving into this space. From a SKEPTIC who calls himself greenwin: This friggin guy over at Barclays Bank (Brits most snooty bank) Y. C. Koh, is still makin our ecletric utilities look bad. Couple weeks ago he told clients to “underweight” the whole sector. That means SELL! Now, he says: “We expect utilities to continue to play an important (albeit…diminished) role in the nation’s power markets in the long term. But history has shown that transition periods can be painful, occur rapidly and cause considerable value destruction before renewed stability sets in.” Y.C. Koh, Barclays Bank Values destruction? Hey, skeps is just tryin’ to make a buck over here!
Re: [Vo]:Say it ain't so, Joe
Keep in mind that a few $billion buys a lot of mai tais. Swedes are no exception to temptation. On Sun, Jun 22, 2014 at 10:18 PM, Lennart Thornros lenn...@thornros.com wrote: Ok kevin I am guilty. I doo express myself poorly in English. There are fewer payphones in Sweden than here. On Jun 22, 2014 10:08 PM, Kevin O'Malley kevmol...@gmail.com wrote: On Sun, Jun 22, 2014 at 4:14 PM, Lennart Thornros lenn...@thornros.com wrote: There is no room for insider preferred treatment. That is because of that I responded to your post. It is not that kind of environment. Too easy to find and too hard to absorb (the critic afterwards). ***Just ONE phone call on a payphone could have triggered this: Money is moving into this space. From a SKEPTIC who calls himself greenwin: This friggin guy over at Barclays Bank (Brits most snooty bank) Y. C. Koh, is still makin our ecletric utilities look bad. Couple weeks ago he told clients to “underweight” the whole sector. That means SELL! Now, he says: “We expect utilities to continue to play an important (albeit…diminished) role in the nation’s power markets in the long term. But history has shown that transition periods can be painful, occur rapidly and cause considerable value destruction before renewed stability sets in.” Y.C. Koh, Barclays Bank Values destruction? Hey, skeps is just tryin’ to make a buck over here!
[Vo]:Say it ain't so, Joe
E-Cat world reporting another delay from the TIP testers... early autumn Soon we will probably know a little bit more. The group of scientists from Uppsala and KTH has expanded with more scientists from other countries and the second independent test is about to get published early autumn. The test has been going on for months on neutral premises in Lugano, Switzerland... ... sounding like a scratched vinyl record attachment: winmail.dat
Re: [Vo]:Say it ain't so, Joe
Well, this is a good sign. -- Daniel Rocha - RJ danieldi...@gmail.com
Re: [Vo]:Say it ain't so, Joe
A few weeks ago, Jed Rothwell said that professors have a very casual relationship with deadlines. A better round of adjectives would be thoughtless, supercilious, aloof. There is not much doubt in my mind that this report will eventually be positive. If it had been a blowout, they'd have published loudly and quickly. And in this interim period after April when the report was DUE, the delays (now very extended delays) are more likely due to the fact that these scientists, their family friends are using this information selfishly. Cyclone Power (CYPW) could easily be bankrupt by the time these guys finally get off their butts. But these professors are very likely all giving their friends the heads up that LENR is real, how to invest accordingly, and taking this stolen time to move their own money advantageously. On Sat, Jun 21, 2014 at 7:27 AM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote: E-Cat world reporting another delay from the TIP testers... early autumn Soon we will probably know a little bit more. The group of scientists from Uppsala and KTH has expanded with more scientists from other countries and the second independent test is about to get published early autumn. The test has been going on for months on neutral premises in Lugano, Switzerland... ... sounding like a scratched vinyl record
Re: [Vo]:Say it ain't so, Joe
I'm a little disappointed, but as Daniel and others have suggested, at the very least, this seems to suggest that nuclear levels of excess heat have been measured yet again. Why bother with delaying the report for the sake of isotopic analysis otherwise? On Sat, Jun 21, 2014 at 10:49 AM, Kevin O'Malley kevmol...@gmail.com wrote: A few weeks ago, Jed Rothwell said that professors have a very casual relationship with deadlines. A better round of adjectives would be thoughtless, supercilious, aloof. There is not much doubt in my mind that this report will eventually be positive. If it had been a blowout, they'd have published loudly and quickly. And in this interim period after April when the report was DUE, the delays (now very extended delays) are more likely due to the fact that these scientists, their family friends are using this information selfishly. Cyclone Power (CYPW) could easily be bankrupt by the time these guys finally get off their butts. But these professors are very likely all giving their friends the heads up that LENR is real, how to invest accordingly, and taking this stolen time to move their own money advantageously. On Sat, Jun 21, 2014 at 7:27 AM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote: E-Cat world reporting another delay from the TIP testers... early autumn Soon we will probably know a little bit more. The group of scientists from Uppsala and KTH has expanded with more scientists from other countries and the second independent test is about to get published early autumn. The test has been going on for months on neutral premises in Lugano, Switzerland... ... sounding like a scratched vinyl record
Re: [Vo]:Say it ain't so, Joe
On Sat, Jun 21, 2014 at 7:52 AM, Foks0904 . foks0...@gmail.com wrote: Why bother with delaying the report for the sake of isotopic analysis otherwise? ***For exactly the reason I just detailed: they are using this information selfishly.
Re: [Vo]:Say it ain't so, Joe
Kevin, maybe you're right, who knows, but for the most part that suggestion is pure innuendo. It's like making the argument that Gamberle has some shadowy partner who wants to steal DGT's technology, and so he broke his NDA and issued a fraudulent statement to make DGT look bad. Possibly, but that's quite the story with very little evidence to back it up. It's also similar in a way to pathological skeptics who immediately rush to the most negative conclusion and suggest all kinds of nefarious behavior behind the scenes (i.e. Levi, Essen, Hoistad, et al, are all in on the scam, etc.), even though there's no good reason to think so, beyond the fact it might satisfy one's own biases. Obviously we're all theory crafting to an extent, but I'd put your speculation pretty low on the probability scale. On Sat, Jun 21, 2014 at 11:01 AM, Kevin O'Malley kevmol...@gmail.com wrote: On Sat, Jun 21, 2014 at 7:52 AM, Foks0904 . foks0...@gmail.com wrote: Why bother with delaying the report for the sake of isotopic analysis otherwise? ***For exactly the reason I just detailed: they are using this information selfishly.
Re: [Vo]:Say it ain't so, Joe
Andrea Rossi June 21st, 2014 at 9:18 AM http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=848cpage=7#comment-969885Giuliano Bettini and Gentle Readers: Please disregard any rumor, whisper, noise, voice, whistle, chant, music or whatsoever acoustic waves vibration regarding the date of publishing of the report, because nobody knows anything of it. Until I do not know anything about it, you can be sure nobody knows anything about it. All the acoustic waves vibrations about it are groundless virtualities, whatever the frequency. Warm Regards, A.R. On Sat, Jun 21, 2014 at 9:27 AM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote: E-Cat world reporting another delay from the TIP testers... early autumn Soon we will probably know a little bit more. The group of scientists from Uppsala and KTH has expanded with more scientists from other countries and the second independent test is about to get published early autumn. The test has been going on for months on neutral premises in Lugano, Switzerland... ... sounding like a scratched vinyl record
RE: [Vo]:Say it ain't so, Joe
Jones sez: ... sounding like a scratched vinyl record Perhaps so. However I'm inclined to speculate that two inescapable conclusions have been drawn: (1) Spurious anomalous heat continues to be recorded. (2) They can not accurately predict and/or control the generation of spurious anomalous heat. When it comes to conducting scientific investigations where highly controversial claims of anomalous heat have been alleged, precise AND PREDICTABLE calorimetric data must be recorded repeatedly. The unpredictability of the heat measurements - I could see how this is likely to drive a lot of researchers who have had had little or no exposure to the LENR field, up the wall. By nature most of these researchers are going to be pre-disposed to assume that a measurement mistake had been made. I suspect many are baffled that they have not found such a definitive mistake. It sticks in their craw. Combine this with the likely fact that the recorded data is often unpredictable. Such unpredictability is likely feed off of their suspicions that something is just not right here. It continues to breed a sense that a lack of proper scientific control is the most likely explanation. So... what do you do? Call in more troops and advisors. Prepare to conduct another surge test in a final attempt to root out what is assumed to be pesky insurgency of bad elements that they haven't been able to eliminate. Regards, Steven Vincent Johnson svjart.orionworks.com zazzle.com/orionworks attachment: winmail.dat
RE: [Vo]:Say it ain't so, Joe
Steven, Yes ... and there could be a third and more important inescapable conclusion. You do not delay a report for an isotopic analysis if there has been no excess heat ! You simply issue a negative report. IOW if the report was indeed delayed for this reason, it is a slam-dunk that they have seen excess heat. From: Orionworks - Jones sez: ... sounding like a scratched vinyl record Perhaps so. However I'm inclined to speculate that two inescapable conclusions have been drawn: (1) Spurious anomalous heat continues to be recorded. (2) They can not accurately predict and/or control the generation of spurious anomalous heat. When it comes to conducting scientific investigations where highly controversial claims of anomalous heat have been alleged, precise AND PREDICTABLE calorimetric data must be recorded repeatedly. The unpredictability of the heat measurements - I could see how this is likely to drive a lot of researchers who have had had little or no exposure to the LENR field, up the wall. By nature most of these researchers are going to be pre-disposed to assume that a measurement mistake had been made. I suspect many are baffled that they have not found such a definitive mistake. It sticks in their craw. Combine this with the likely fact that the recorded data is often unpredictable. Such unpredictability is likely feed off of their suspicions that something is just not right here. It continues to breed a sense that a lack of proper scientific control is the most likely explanation. So... what do you do? Call in more troops and advisors. Prepare to conduct another surge test in a final attempt to root out what is assumed to be pesky insurgency of bad elements that they haven't been able to eliminate. Regards, Steven Vincent Johnson svjart.orionworks.com zazzle.com/orionworks attachment: winmail.dat
RE: [Vo]:Say it ain't so, Joe
Sorry to sound like that scratched record myself - as I see others have said the same thing. Steven, Yes ... and there could be a third and more important inescapable conclusion. You do not delay a report for an isotopic analysis if there has been no excess heat ! You simply issue a negative report. IOW if the report was indeed delayed for this reason, it is a slam-dunk that they have seen excess heat. From: Orionworks - Jones sez: ... sounding like a scratched vinyl record Perhaps so. However I'm inclined to speculate that two inescapable conclusions have been drawn: (1) Spurious anomalous heat continues to be recorded. (2) They can not accurately predict and/or control the generation of spurious anomalous heat. When it comes to conducting scientific investigations where highly controversial claims of anomalous heat have been alleged, precise AND PREDICTABLE calorimetric data must be recorded repeatedly. The unpredictability of the heat measurements - I could see how this is likely to drive a lot of researchers who have had had little or no exposure to the LENR field, up the wall. By nature most of these researchers are going to be pre-disposed to assume that a measurement mistake had been made. I suspect many are baffled that they have not found such a definitive mistake. It sticks in their craw. Combine this with the likely fact that the recorded data is often unpredictable. Such unpredictability is likely feed off of their suspicions that something is just not right here. It continues to breed a sense that a lack of proper scientific control is the most likely explanation. So... what do you do? Call in more troops and advisors. Prepare to conduct another surge test in a final attempt to root out what is assumed to be pesky insurgency of bad elements that they haven't been able to eliminate. Regards, Steven Vincent Johnson svjart.orionworks.com zazzle.com/orionworks attachment: winmail.dat
Re: [Vo]:Say it ain't so, Joe
On Sat, Jun 21, 2014 at 7:52 AM, Foks0904 . foks0...@gmail.com wrote: I'm a little disappointed, but as Daniel and others have suggested, at the very least, this seems to suggest that nuclear levels of excess heat have been measured yet again. Why bother with delaying the report for the sake of isotopic analysis otherwise? I agree. My guess is that they're seeing something that will be hard to square with current scientific opinion, and they want to take as long as is needed and bring in as many people as needed to cross all of their t's and dot all of their i's. As should have happened with the faster-than-light neutrinos and the BICEP2 results. Eric
Re: [Vo]:Say it ain't so, Joe
let us imagine the unimaginable... It work. now, the swedish scientist have measured heat... positive. they re mesure... delay...positive... impossible. so the look for nuclear ashes... delay... interesting but uncmmon... they remeasure... delay... they prepare a paper a report... since it is impossible all the review ask for more... delays... new cross checking, DC ofset , alien conspiracy, inverted swpped clamps, complicities, russian KGB, NSA manipulation... many things to chech, thus delays... the testers are accused by swedish public radio, by DoE, by INFN, APS, CEA, SciAm, , La Recherche, nature, Science, to be accomplice, to be scammer, deluded, ... so they rewrite the paper with more check, ... delays... now imagine it does not work because Rossi is deluded the tester makes a test it does not work they ask him to explain... he cannot... they test another reactor... it does not work... they recheck.. nothing to say... rossi's moan that the measurement is wrong... they recheck... after 3 weeks the scientist are convinced the 3 reactors are borke... they write a paper... rossi ask for correction. they do the minimum. 2 weeks. they publish the paper, warn Elforsk to stop defending that technology. end of the story Now imagine rossi try to fool them (how? with pu238? with inverted clamps ? with DC ?) they launche the test, after few minustes, hours, days they make a cross check, see something strange, re check, have an hypothesis, test its, understand the trick, reproduce it... 3 weeks, they write a report... Rossi moan, they don't hear him, and tell to the planet rossi is a scammer... now what have happened ? in which world are we ? we are in the world where: - the heat is big enough to justify the test continuation - rossi reactor works for 4 month (or they would have used another of their spare reactor) without breakdown (it can have faded however) - the scientist are very skeptic in the positive meaning (they want more evidences) - they scientist make many cross check, including isotopic analysis... (for proving nuclear nature or even for proposing a Nobel theory paper) Hey guys, imagine that those physicist prepare a paper for the Nobel... maybe you are right Kevin, scientist are using that time for their own interest ... to make a Nobel paper. at least to save their butt from the SR radio and S Coyaud rascals. 2014-06-21 17:51 GMT+02:00 Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net: Sorry to sound like that scratched record myself - as I see others have said the same thing. Steven, Yes ... and there could be a third and more important inescapable conclusion. You do not delay a report for an isotopic analysis if there has been no excess heat ! You simply issue a negative report. IOW if the report was indeed delayed for this reason, it is a slam-dunk that they have seen excess heat. From: Orionworks - Jones sez: ... sounding like a scratched vinyl record Perhaps so. However I'm inclined to speculate that two inescapable conclusions have been drawn: (1) Spurious anomalous heat continues to be recorded. (2) They can not accurately predict and/or control the generation of spurious anomalous heat. When it comes to conducting scientific investigations where highly controversial claims of anomalous heat have been alleged, precise AND PREDICTABLE calorimetric data must be recorded repeatedly. The unpredictability of the heat measurements - I could see how this is likely to drive a lot of researchers who have had had little or no exposure to the LENR field, up the wall. By nature most of these researchers are going to be pre-disposed to assume that a measurement mistake had been made. I suspect many are baffled that they have not found such a definitive mistake. It sticks in their craw. Combine this with the likely fact that the recorded data is often unpredictable. Such unpredictability is likely feed off of their suspicions that something is just not right here. It continues to breed a sense that a lack of proper scientific control is the most likely explanation. So... what do you do? Call in more troops and advisors. Prepare to conduct another surge test in a final attempt to root out what is assumed to be pesky insurgency of bad elements that they haven't been able to eliminate. Regards, Steven Vincent Johnson svjart.orionworks.com zazzle.com/orionworks
Re: [Vo]:Say it ain't so, Joe
On Sat, Jun 21, 2014 at 10:49 AM, Kevin O'Malley kevmol...@gmail.com wrote: A few weeks ago, Jed Rothwell said that professors have a very casual relationship with deadlines. Douglas Adams: “I love deadlines. I love the whooshing noise they make as they go by.” On the other hand, imagine you are a ranked, tenured professor presented with game-changing scientific evidence and you don't have a single viable explanation that doesn't require a miracle. http://star.psy.ohio-state.edu/coglab/Miracle.html
Re: [Vo]:Say it ain't so, Joe
On Sat, Jun 21, 2014 at 8:16 AM, Foks0904 . foks0...@gmail.com wrote: Kevin, maybe you're right, who knows, but for the most part that suggestion is pure innuendo. ***No, it's not pure innuendo, it is partial innuendo. If I had posted that on April 3rd because the report was due in April, then it would be pure innuendo. And if I posted it after seeing internal correspondences between several members of the testing committee with their own families about how to take advantage of this upcoming report, it would be less than 1% innuendo. My stance is mixed innuendo, maybe 33%. Because Rossi said there is a commitment from that team to generate a report regardless of the outcome. To be this far down the road with no report but indications that they're looking into nuclear isotopes means that they have allowed bullshit into the equation. It's like making the argument that Gamberle has some shadowy partner who wants to steal DGT's technology, and so he broke his NDA and issued a fraudulent statement to make DGT look bad. Possibly, but that's quite the story with very little evidence to back it up. ***Maybe it's like that, maybe it isn't. But the analogy is useless. You'd want to find some other analogy where there was a perfectly good reason for inexcusable delays in generating a report. Something like the space shuttle disaster in 1984, why was the report so late. Richard Feynmann hinted that it was due to internal bickering over a bullshit statement that absolved NASA management. And sure enough, there was similar bickering in the 2nd space shuttle disaster. People act in their own selfish interest. Pointing that out is NOT pure innuendo. It's also similar in a way to pathological skeptics who immediately ***No, immediately would have been April. Now it's June, with indications of a September release, which will likely be delayed even further. rush to the most negative conclusion ***HOw is this the most negative conclusion possible? I can think of several other possibilities that are far more negative than what I postulated. and suggest all kinds of nefarious behavior behind the scenes ***I'm suggesting that people act in selfish ways. Perhaps you would take issue with that? (i.e. Levi, Essen, Hoistad, et al, are all in on the scam, etc.), ***That happens to be one of the several other possibilities that are far more negative than what I postulated. even though there's no good reason to think so, ***If there is good reason to think so, then why do you call it pure innuendo? At the very least you should be saying innuendo mixed with bias. beyond the fact it might satisfy one's own biases. Obviously we're all theory crafting to an extent, but I'd put your speculation pretty low on the probability scale. ***So... then... what is your speculation? You spent a bunch of energy using exaggeration fallacies to knock mine down. Where's yours? On Sat, Jun 21, 2014 at 11:01 AM, Kevin O'Malley kevmol...@gmail.com wrote: On Sat, Jun 21, 2014 at 7:52 AM, Foks0904 . foks0...@gmail.com wrote: Why bother with delaying the report for the sake of isotopic analysis otherwise? ***For exactly the reason I just detailed: they are using this information selfishly.
Re: [Vo]:Say it ain't so, Joe
***So... then... what is your speculation? You spent a bunch of energy using exaggeration fallacies to knock mine down. Where's yours? Kevin, you were the one who responded to my original post -- which had nothing to do with your speculations whatsoever. You decided to initiate this conversation, and now you seem to be taking some sort of offense over it. I'm not going to argue over this because none of it's all that important. Let's just attach a big Maybe to the whole thing and move on with our lives. On Sat, Jun 21, 2014 at 12:41 PM, Kevin O'Malley kevmol...@gmail.com wrote: On Sat, Jun 21, 2014 at 8:16 AM, Foks0904 . foks0...@gmail.com wrote: Kevin, maybe you're right, who knows, but for the most part that suggestion is pure innuendo. ***No, it's not pure innuendo, it is partial innuendo. If I had posted that on April 3rd because the report was due in April, then it would be pure innuendo. And if I posted it after seeing internal correspondences between several members of the testing committee with their own families about how to take advantage of this upcoming report, it would be less than 1% innuendo. My stance is mixed innuendo, maybe 33%. Because Rossi said there is a commitment from that team to generate a report regardless of the outcome. To be this far down the road with no report but indications that they're looking into nuclear isotopes means that they have allowed bullshit into the equation. It's like making the argument that Gamberle has some shadowy partner who wants to steal DGT's technology, and so he broke his NDA and issued a fraudulent statement to make DGT look bad. Possibly, but that's quite the story with very little evidence to back it up. ***Maybe it's like that, maybe it isn't. But the analogy is useless. You'd want to find some other analogy where there was a perfectly good reason for inexcusable delays in generating a report. Something like the space shuttle disaster in 1984, why was the report so late. Richard Feynmann hinted that it was due to internal bickering over a bullshit statement that absolved NASA management. And sure enough, there was similar bickering in the 2nd space shuttle disaster. People act in their own selfish interest. Pointing that out is NOT pure innuendo. It's also similar in a way to pathological skeptics who immediately ***No, immediately would have been April. Now it's June, with indications of a September release, which will likely be delayed even further. rush to the most negative conclusion ***HOw is this the most negative conclusion possible? I can think of several other possibilities that are far more negative than what I postulated. and suggest all kinds of nefarious behavior behind the scenes ***I'm suggesting that people act in selfish ways. Perhaps you would take issue with that? (i.e. Levi, Essen, Hoistad, et al, are all in on the scam, etc.), ***That happens to be one of the several other possibilities that are far more negative than what I postulated. even though there's no good reason to think so, ***If there is good reason to think so, then why do you call it pure innuendo? At the very least you should be saying innuendo mixed with bias. beyond the fact it might satisfy one's own biases. Obviously we're all theory crafting to an extent, but I'd put your speculation pretty low on the probability scale. ***So... then... what is your speculation? You spent a bunch of energy using exaggeration fallacies to knock mine down. Where's yours? On Sat, Jun 21, 2014 at 11:01 AM, Kevin O'Malley kevmol...@gmail.com wrote: On Sat, Jun 21, 2014 at 7:52 AM, Foks0904 . foks0...@gmail.com wrote: Why bother with delaying the report for the sake of isotopic analysis otherwise? ***For exactly the reason I just detailed: they are using this information selfishly.
Re: [Vo]:Say it ain't so, Joe
On Sat, Jun 21, 2014 at 8:41 AM, Orionworks - Steven Vincent Johnson orionwo...@charter.net wrote: . However I'm inclined to speculate that two inescapable conclusions have been drawn: (1) Spurious anomalous heat continues to be recorded. (2) They can not accurately predict and/or control the generation of spurious anomalous heat. ***Why should that make one whit of difference? If they record anomalous heat, it is their duty to report it. It is not their duty to control nor predict it. When it comes to conducting scientific investigations where highly controversial claims of anomalous heat have been alleged, precise AND PREDICTABLE calorimetric data must be recorded repeatedly. ***Why? This is a scientific report, not an industrial qualification. The unpredictability of the heat measurements - I could see how this is likely to drive a lot of researchers who have had had little or no exposure to the LENR field, up the wall. ***I can see it as well. But their duty as scientists is to generate the report in the timeframe they committed to. All the rest is just additional stuff. They've had MONTHS. By nature most of these researchers are going to be pre-disposed to assume that a measurement mistake had been made. ***That is why they were given MONTHS to look into it. I suspect many are baffled that they have not found such a definitive mistake. ***Then they were not the right guys to be involved in this report. It is no wonder Rossi has a low view of scientists. It sticks in their craw. Combine this with the likely fact that the recorded data is often unpredictable. ***Predictability is for industrial testing. This is scientific testing. Such unpredictability is likely feed off of their suspicions that something is just not right here. ***And they drag their feet rather than report what they see. They stopped being scientists when they dragged their feet past a certain point. It continues to breed a sense that a lack of proper scientific control is the most likely explanation. ***They knew that going in. It is unconscionable that they would hang their hats on such a thing at this point in the endeavor. So... what do you do? ***You start ringing the bell loudly that these guys aint doing their jobs, and they are very likely being selfish with the information. Call in more troops and advisors. ***That's their problem, they had months to deal with it, and they're going past the point where their competence is presumed. Prepare to conduct another surge test in a final attempt to root out what is assumed to be pesky insurgency of bad elements that they haven't been able to eliminate. ***If that's what they're doing, they are incompetent. Regards, Steven Vincent Johnson svjart.orionworks.com zazzle.com/orionworks
Re: [Vo]:Say it ain't so, Joe
On Sat, Jun 21, 2014 at 8:49 AM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote: You do not delay a report for an isotopic analysis if there has been no excess heat ! You simply issue a negative report. ***And conversely, you simply issue a positive report ask Rossi publicly for permission to do isotopic analysis and all that other bullshit.
Re: [Vo]:Say it ain't so, Joe
On Sat, Jun 21, 2014 at 9:51 AM, Foks0904 . foks0...@gmail.com wrote: Kevin, you were the one who responded to my original post -- which had nothing to do with your speculations whatsoever. ***That is simply not the case. Your post was a response to mine, and included a wholesale copy of my post. So you try to knock down my speculation without posting your own, saying alluvasuddenlike, that it doesn't matter. Bowlsheet. Not pure bowlsheet, but plenty of it. If God had intended for Texans to ski, He'd have made bullshit white.
Re: [Vo]:Say it ain't so, Joe
Kevin -- My very first message was a response to Jones' OP. Here it is again in case you forgot: I'm a little disappointed, but as Daniel and others have suggested, at the very least, this seems to suggest that nuclear levels of excess heat have been measured yet again. Why bother with delaying the report for the sake of isotopic analysis otherwise? Clearly there is no mention of you nor reference to your argument here. I hadn't even read your post. Then you decided take me on by stating: Why bother with delaying the report for the sake of isotopic analysis otherwise? ***For exactly the reason I just detailed: they are using this information selfishly. The wholesale copy of your post was that sometimes when you respond to a thread on these forums, it copies the most recent responses on top of the OP. You're misinterpreting and getting indignant over nothing. To restate, let's move on with our lives. On Sat, Jun 21, 2014 at 1:03 PM, Kevin O'Malley kevmol...@gmail.com wrote: On Sat, Jun 21, 2014 at 9:51 AM, Foks0904 . foks0...@gmail.com wrote: Kevin, you were the one who responded to my original post -- which had nothing to do with your speculations whatsoever. ***That is simply not the case. Your post was a response to mine, and included a wholesale copy of my post. So you try to knock down my speculation without posting your own, saying alluvasuddenlike, that it doesn't matter. Bowlsheet. Not pure bowlsheet, but plenty of it. If God had intended for Texans to ski, He'd have made bullshit white.
RE: [Vo]:Say it ain't so, Joe
Jones, I have little reason to disagree with you assessment. It will be interesting to see what happens when they finally get around to reporting on their findings. Well... ahem... What we have here is a failure to analyze the data properly... Uh, well, that is my professional opinion on this matter. Can I go now? Regards, Steven Vincent Johnson svjart.orionworks.com zazzle.com/orionworks
Re: [Vo]:Say it ain't so, Joe
Oh ye with little patience: A WATCHED POT NEVER BOILS. Bob On Sat, Jun 21, 2014 at 9:51 AM, Foks0904 . foks0...@gmail.com wrote: Kevin, you were the one who responded to my original post -- which had nothing to do with your speculations whatsoever. ***That is simply not the case. Your post was a response to mine, and included a wholesale copy of my post. So you try to knock down my speculation without posting your own, saying alluvasuddenlike, that it doesn't matter. Bowlsheet. Not pure bowlsheet, but plenty of it. If God had intended for Texans to ski, He'd have made bullshit white.
Re: [Vo]:Say it ain't so, Joe
Kevin O'Malley kevmol...@gmail.com wrote: A few weeks ago, Jed Rothwell said that professors have a very casual relationship with deadlines. A better round of adjectives would be thoughtless, supercilious, aloof. I agree. They know that people are waiting anxiously. They should publish an interim report now. But these professors are very likely all giving their friends the heads up that LENR is real, how to invest accordingly, and taking this stolen time to move their own money advantageously. I doubt that. Knowing professors as I do, I expect they are procrastinating and attending to a dozen other projects. I expect they have no sense of priority. In the middle of a project they will go off somewhere to do something unimportant. I have seen cold fusion researchers publish years late, or never publish at all. That is why the ICCF proceedings are so slow. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Say it ain't so, Joe
Here's the first few lines of your post. Re: [Vo]:Say it ain't so, Joe http://www.mail-archive.com/search?l=vortex-l@eskimo.comq=subject:%22Re%3A+%5BVo%5D%3ASay+it+ain%27t+so%2C+Joe%22 Foks0904 . http://www.mail-archive.com/search?l=vortex-l@eskimo.comq=from:%22Foks0904+.%22 Sat, 21 Jun 2014 07:53:25 -0700 http://www.mail-archive.com/search?l=vortex-l@eskimo.comq=date:20140621 I'm a little disappointed, but as Daniel and others have suggested, at the very least, this seems to suggest that nuclear levels of excess heat have been measured yet again. Why bother with delaying the report for the sake of isotopic analysis otherwise? On Sat, Jun 21, 2014 at 10:49 AM, Kevin O'Malley kevmol...@gmail.com wrote: A few weeks ago, Jed Rothwell said that professors have a very casual relationship with deadlines.
Re: [Vo]:Say it ain't so, Joe
Or another possibility: some men in black suits and mirror shades told them you can't publish this as written, matter of National, NATO, EU, World security, top secret ( pick one or more). We will tell you what you can say, and when, or else...and don't tell Rossi we were here. That's how it would go in the novel anyway. AlanG On 6/21/2014 9:32 AM, Alain Sepeda wrote: let us imagine the unimaginable... It work. now, the swedish scientist have measured heat... positive. they re mesure... delay...positive... impossible. so the look for nuclear ashes... delay... interesting but uncmmon... they remeasure... delay... they prepare a paper a report... since it is impossible all the review ask for more... delays... new cross checking, DC ofset , alien conspiracy, inverted swpped clamps, complicities, russian KGB, NSA manipulation... many things to chech, thus delays... the testers are accused by swedish public radio, by DoE, by INFN, APS, CEA, SciAm, , La Recherche, nature, Science, to be accomplice, to be scammer, deluded, ... so they rewrite the paper with more check, ... delays... now imagine it does not work because Rossi is deluded the tester makes a test it does not work they ask him to explain... he cannot... they test another reactor... it does not work... they recheck.. nothing to say... rossi's moan that the measurement is wrong... they recheck... after 3 weeks the scientist are convinced the 3 reactors are borke... they write a paper... rossi ask for correction. they do the minimum. 2 weeks. they publish the paper, warn Elforsk to stop defending that technology. end of the story Now imagine rossi try to fool them (how? with pu238? with inverted clamps ? with DC ?) they launche the test, after few minustes, hours, days they make a cross check, see something strange, re check, have an hypothesis, test its, understand the trick, reproduce it... 3 weeks, they write a report... Rossi moan, they don't hear him, and tell to the planet rossi is a scammer... now what have happened ? in which world are we ? we are in the world where: - the heat is big enough to justify the test continuation - rossi reactor works for 4 month (or they would have used another of their spare reactor) without breakdown (it can have faded however) - the scientist are very skeptic in the positive meaning (they want more evidences) - they scientist make many cross check, including isotopic analysis... (for proving nuclear nature or even for proposing a Nobel theory paper) Hey guys, imagine that those physicist prepare a paper for the Nobel... maybe you are right Kevin, scientist are using that time for their own interest ... to make a Nobel paper. at least to save their butt from the SR radio and S Coyaud rascals. 2014-06-21 17:51 GMT+02:00 Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net mailto:jone...@pacbell.net: Sorry to sound like that scratched record myself - as I see others have said the same thing. Steven, Yes ... and there could be a third and more important inescapable conclusion. You do not delay a report for an isotopic analysis if there has been no excess heat ! You simply issue a negative report. IOW if the report was indeed delayed for this reason, it is a slam-dunk that they have seen excess heat. From: Orionworks - Jones sez: ... sounding like a scratched vinyl record Perhaps so. However I'm inclined to speculate that two inescapable conclusions have been drawn: (1) Spurious anomalous heat continues to be recorded. (2) They can not accurately predict and/or control the generation of spurious anomalous heat. When it comes to conducting scientific investigations where highly controversial claims of anomalous heat have been alleged, precise AND PREDICTABLE calorimetric data must be recorded repeatedly. The unpredictability of the heat measurements - I could see how this is likely to drive a lot of researchers who have had had little or no exposure to the LENR field, up the wall. By nature most of these researchers are going to be pre-disposed to assume that a measurement mistake had been made. I suspect many are baffled that they have not found such a definitive mistake. It sticks in their craw. Combine this with the likely fact that the recorded data is often unpredictable. Such unpredictability is likely feed off of their suspicions that something is just not right here. It continues to breed a sense that a lack of proper scientific control is the most likely explanation. So... what do you do? Call in more troops and advisors. Prepare to conduct another surge test in a final attempt to root out what is assumed to be pesky insurgency of bad elements that they haven't been able to eliminate. Regards, Steven Vincent Johnson svjart.orionworks.com
Re: [Vo]:Say it ain't so, Joe
just a nasty question ... who opposed Cold Fusion research ? DoD,Navy ? Commercial/Military Nuke labs ? or rather : APS, , DoE, NYT, Swedish Public Radio, INFN, CERN, scientific journals... was the aggression like commando and killing, or academic execution, insults, peer-review blocking, nasty biased articles and books, ... our society treat the academic like religious people in the traditional societies, thei mean they can do what they want without being punished, and they don't even feel guilty because they do the good, and the good is them. Scientific method, classic quantum physics, is probably absloutely respected and working in that story. what have been broken is: - academic - scientific press - mainstream press and scientific journalism - government advisors in scientific and engineering domain - theory as physicist imagine it is on the opposite : - scientific method - physics - chemistry - calorimetry - thermodynamic laws - business ability to fund research and developement (with many failures as usual) - inventors ability to develop application (with many failures as usual) are still unchallenged (until new evidence ). 2014-06-21 22:03 GMT+02:00 AlanG a...@magicsound.us: Or another possibility: some men in black suits and mirror shades told them you can't publish this as written, matter of National, NATO, EU, World security, top secret ( pick one or more). We will tell you what you can say, and when, or else...and don't tell Rossi we were here. That's how it would go in the novel anyway. AlanG On 6/21/2014 9:32 AM, Alain Sepeda wrote: let us imagine the unimaginable... It work. now, the swedish scientist have measured heat... positive. they re mesure... delay...positive... impossible. so the look for nuclear ashes... delay... interesting but uncmmon... they remeasure... delay... they prepare a paper a report... since it is impossible all the review ask for more... delays... new cross checking, DC ofset , alien conspiracy, inverted swpped clamps, complicities, russian KGB, NSA manipulation... many things to chech, thus delays... the testers are accused by swedish public radio, by DoE, by INFN, APS, CEA, SciAm, , La Recherche, nature, Science, to be accomplice, to be scammer, deluded, ... so they rewrite the paper with more check, ... delays... now imagine it does not work because Rossi is deluded the tester makes a test it does not work they ask him to explain... he cannot... they test another reactor... it does not work... they recheck.. nothing to say... rossi's moan that the measurement is wrong... they recheck... after 3 weeks the scientist are convinced the 3 reactors are borke... they write a paper... rossi ask for correction. they do the minimum. 2 weeks. they publish the paper, warn Elforsk to stop defending that technology. end of the story Now imagine rossi try to fool them (how? with pu238? with inverted clamps ? with DC ?) they launche the test, after few minustes, hours, days they make a cross check, see something strange, re check, have an hypothesis, test its, understand the trick, reproduce it... 3 weeks, they write a report... Rossi moan, they don't hear him, and tell to the planet rossi is a scammer... now what have happened ? in which world are we ? we are in the world where: - the heat is big enough to justify the test continuation - rossi reactor works for 4 month (or they would have used another of their spare reactor) without breakdown (it can have faded however) - the scientist are very skeptic in the positive meaning (they want more evidences) - they scientist make many cross check, including isotopic analysis... (for proving nuclear nature or even for proposing a Nobel theory paper) Hey guys, imagine that those physicist prepare a paper for the Nobel... maybe you are right Kevin, scientist are using that time for their own interest ... to make a Nobel paper. at least to save their butt from the SR radio and S Coyaud rascals. 2014-06-21 17:51 GMT+02:00 Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net: Sorry to sound like that scratched record myself - as I see others have said the same thing. Steven, Yes ... and there could be a third and more important inescapable conclusion. You do not delay a report for an isotopic analysis if there has been no excess heat ! You simply issue a negative report. IOW if the report was indeed delayed for this reason, it is a slam-dunk that they have seen excess heat. From: Orionworks - Jones sez: ... sounding like a scratched vinyl record Perhaps so. However I'm inclined to speculate that two inescapable conclusions have been drawn: (1) Spurious anomalous heat continues to be recorded. (2) They can not accurately predict and/or control the generation of spurious anomalous heat. When it comes to conducting scientific investigations where highly controversial claims of anomalous heat have been
Re: [Vo]:Say it ain't so, Joe
They could have decided they just wanted to put some time and space between the swedish radio thing and their report. On Sat, Jun 21, 2014 at 7:27 AM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote: E-Cat world reporting another delay from the TIP testers... early autumn Soon we will probably know a little bit more. The group of scientists from Uppsala and KTH has expanded with more scientists from other countries and the second independent test is about to get published early autumn. The test has been going on for months on neutral premises in Lugano, Switzerland... ... sounding like a scratched vinyl record
Re: [Vo]:Say it ain't so, Joe
On Sat, Jun 21, 2014 at 5:28 PM, Alain Sepeda alain.sep...@gmail.com wrote: just a nasty question ... who opposed Cold Fusion research ? M.I.T. for one. Read Dr. Mallove's extensive report: http://www.infinite-energy.com/images/pdfs/mitcfreport.pdf
Re: [Vo]:Say it ain't so, Joe
Has anyone done a more complete job of chronicling the institutional incompetence http://jimbowery.blogspot.com/2011/07/institutional-incompetence-conspiracy.html than Charles Beaudette in Excess Heat http://www.amazon.com/Excess-Heat-Research-Prevailed-Edition/dp/0967854830 ? On Sat, Jun 21, 2014 at 4:44 PM, Terry Blanton hohlr...@gmail.com wrote: On Sat, Jun 21, 2014 at 5:28 PM, Alain Sepeda alain.sep...@gmail.com wrote: just a nasty question ... who opposed Cold Fusion research ? M.I.T. for one. Read Dr. Mallove's extensive report: http://www.infinite-energy.com/images/pdfs/mitcfreport.pdf
Re: [Vo]:Say it ain't so, Joe
Hi guys I am a Swede at least I lived there until 1988. There are no black suits in Sweden. There are nobody informing friends to make them rich. It is a small and relatively homogeneous country no big lies survive for long. I am absolutely sure that it is a combination of inconclusive result and lack of explanations that causes the delay. I mentioned it is a small community (population of the bay area (San Francisco). I am sure they are out double checking and searching for a theory to support there findings because it is very hard to repair a mistake or come back from having made a mistake. Yes, I am disappointed as well. However, I have been dealing with similar situations and I know that nobody want to risk their reputation. Victory would be a full understanding. To report a result from a hit and miss performance and then be proven to have failed in basic scientific procedure would be losing ones reputation for good. Those guys know what happened to P and F. BTW what is 3 month after 25 years? Best Regards , Lennart Thornros www.StrategicLeadershipSac.com lenn...@thornros.com +1 916 436 1899 202 Granite Park Court, Lincoln CA 95648 “Productivity is never an accident. It is always the result of a commitment to excellence, intelligent planning, and focused effort.” PJM On Sat, Jun 21, 2014 at 2:48 PM, James Bowery jabow...@gmail.com wrote: Has anyone done a more complete job of chronicling the institutional incompetence http://jimbowery.blogspot.com/2011/07/institutional-incompetence-conspiracy.html than Charles Beaudette in Excess Heat http://www.amazon.com/Excess-Heat-Research-Prevailed-Edition/dp/0967854830 ? On Sat, Jun 21, 2014 at 4:44 PM, Terry Blanton hohlr...@gmail.com wrote: On Sat, Jun 21, 2014 at 5:28 PM, Alain Sepeda alain.sep...@gmail.com wrote: just a nasty question ... who opposed Cold Fusion research ? M.I.T. for one. Read Dr. Mallove's extensive report: http://www.infinite-energy.com/images/pdfs/mitcfreport.pdf
Re: [Vo]:Say it ain't so, Joe
Alain Sepeda alain.sep...@gmail.com wrote: just a nasty question ... who opposed Cold Fusion research ? DoD,Navy ? Commercial/Military Nuke labs ? or rather : APS, , DoE, NYT, Swedish Public Radio, INFN, CERN, scientific journals... All of them opposed it, and they still do. See, for example: http://pages.csam.montclair.edu/~kowalski/cf/293wikipedia.html http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/MalloveEclassicnas.pdf I ascribe this opposition to human nature, not a conspiracy. People opposed most innovation, great and small. They fought to prevent the development of the laser, and before that they fought against buttons (threatening to burn people at the stake), and zippers (because they thought zippers promote sexual immorality). - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Say it ain't so, Joe
It is so. Even now, they will not turn the Hubble telescope on the active galaxies that need the most study, instead wasting time pointing it at the Moon and Pluto. (A spacecraft will soon be at Pluto.) HST has a limited lifetime and capabilities that no Earth-bound telescope will ever have. Every wasted second is a tragedy for science. There is no explanation for this other than to conclude that they imagine they have already figured out the entire Universe and no further looking is required. --- I write a little. I erase a lot. - Chopin From: Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Saturday, June 21, 2014 8:29 PM Subject: Re: [Vo]:Say it ain't so, Joe Alain Sepeda alain.sep...@gmail.com wrote: just a nasty question ... who opposed Cold Fusion research ? DoD,Navy ? Commercial/Military Nuke labs ? or rather : APS, , DoE, NYT, Swedish Public Radio, INFN, CERN, scientific journals... All of them opposed it, and they still do. See, for example: http://pages.csam.montclair.edu/~kowalski/cf/293wikipedia.html http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/MalloveEclassicnas.pdf I ascribe this opposition to human nature, not a conspiracy. People opposed most innovation, great and small. They fought to prevent the development of the laser, and before that they fought against buttons (threatening to burn people at the stake), and zippers (because they thought zippers promote sexual immorality). - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Say it ain't so, Joe
On Sat, Jun 21, 2014 at 7:27 AM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote: E-Cat world reporting another delay from the TIP testers... I feel that someone should volunteer to write a Vortex beerhall song. We can while away the time to the TIP report by loudly singing the song and clinking beer steins. Eric
Re: [Vo]:Say it ain't so, Joe
On Sat, Jun 21, 2014 at 5:05 PM, Lennart Thornros lenn...@thornros.com wrote: Hi guys I am a Swede at least I lived there until 1988. There are no black suits in Sweden. There are nobody informing friends to make them rich. ***Then are Swedes somehow immune to the human condition? It is a small and relatively homogeneous country no big lies survive for long. ***But they do exist. I am absolutely sure that it is a combination of inconclusive result ***What gives you the idea the result is inconclusive? The result is, by your standard, absolutely sure to be conclusive and hard to explain, otherwise they would have quickly published. and lack of explanations that causes the delay. ***They did not sign up to explain the results. No one has a handle on that after 25 years, it would be extreme hubris for them to expect they can do it in a matter of a few months. Their job is to produce the report and publish their results, not explain them. I mentioned it is a small community (population of the bay area (San Francisco). I am sure they are out double checking and searching for a theory to support there findings ***They knew GOING IN that there was a distinct possibility that Rossi's device was real. For them to hang their hats on that NOW and suggest they're hung up due to lack of theory is bullshit. because it is very hard to repair a mistake or come back from having made a mistake. ***They had 6 MONTHS. If they're worried about a mistake, get Rossi's permission to publish at 3 months and then again at 7 months when all the feedback comes in about where they might have screwed up. I'm no PhD and I can do that. What is their friggin problem? It leads one to believe that human nature is at work, including the insider trading innuendo. Yes, I am disappointed as well. However, I have been dealing with similar situations and I know that nobody want to risk their reputation. ***They KNEW about this possibility GOING IN. Victory would be a full understanding. ***Defining victory at this point is an attempt to define the terms. Chinese proberb says he who defines the terms wins the argument. But these guys knew the terms GOING IN. To report a result from a hit and miss performance and then be proven to have failed in basic scientific procedure would be losing ones reputation for good. ***That is what they signed up for, and why they were given the extra several months. Hanging their hats on that now is like saying you don't wanna pay for the hamburger you already ate because it shoulda had 2 pickles instead of just 1. Those guys know what happened to P and F. BTW what is 3 month after 25 years? ***Based upon publicly available information, 3 months is life or death for Cyclone Power CYPW that needs this report to be generated. Public information, public comments, public results. That means that if CYPW fails, these guys are opening themselves to a public lawsuit.
Re: [Vo]:Say it ain't so, Joe
Vortex Beerhall song. IN MERCATU VERITAS by Matt Robinson * Composed with contingency dependent on the positive outcome of a certain report allegedly being prepared for publication, and a slight nod to T. S. Eliot’s ‘Macavity’ A word of caution ‘fore you read, this is based on supposition That certain tests, we hear complete, could bolster my position. I feel that we are getting near the day the news will break I’m hoping that it’s positive, for all our children’s sake. The Rossi Cat ‘s a mystery cat, but some have claimed they saw The undeniable evidence that truth defies the ‘Law’. Unmentioned in the media, by others ‘t is denied But Rossi says, in all due time, the people will decide. The news that’s been kept hidden from the Wall Street’s opening bell Is going to be released quite soon, Confidently, I foretell. But I wish that they would hurry up and get the data written So then I can prepare my home for my new domestic kitten. The day is fast approaching when to all ‘t will be revealed The book of evidence, held ‘loft, and publicly unsealed. Yet once again we’ll hear the cry, ‘A hoax!’-'They all have lied!’ But now’s the time that truth will out, the people will decide. So what if Big Financiers plot, and try to keep it hidden And Big Science and the media do whatever they are bidden? Well, if it’s mass-produced in China, there’ll be a thousand on each tide And Rossi says, in all due time, the people will decide. Health and Safety staff, and Customs men, will intercept and frisk her They’ll scrutinize the paws and ears, and in between each whisker. The ones that know, that’s you and I, will regard this all as fickle For all that they will find inside is a small amount of Nickel. There’ll be Cats in every quarter, from Beijing to Peru You’ll even find them purring in far off Kathmandu. They’ll heat our homes, desalinate, and go on to power our flight And the people will decide for sure, ‘t was Rossi that was right! And when she’s all fired up and hot, and the steam begins to flow ‘Tis then that we can stand up proud, and say ‘We told you so’. The Rossi cat will shake the world, all tests have been applied Released unto each continent, the market will decide. At the closing peal of Wall Street’s bell on that day of great renown The Bulls and Bears will pull their hair, their world turned upside down. The Cat becomes a Lion, and she’ll stalk the world with pride It won’t have taken very long for the people to decide. We’ll owe him a great indebtitude, his name will be revered Long after all detractors and the snakes have disappeared. Our children will be born into a future warm and bright The mystery? It’s history, the E-Cat works, alright! We’re telling you that times have changed, the future’s in our hands- The wheel has turned full circle, the past buried in the sands. Empires have all come and gone, that’s plain to one who thinks Tomorrow has a bright new dawn- all thanks to Rossi’s ‘Sphinx’. * (with suggestions from Giuliano Bettini and Joseph Fine) On Sat, Jun 21, 2014 at 7:35 PM, Eric Walker eric.wal...@gmail.com wrote: On Sat, Jun 21, 2014 at 7:27 AM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote: E-Cat world reporting another delay from the TIP testers... I feel that someone should volunteer to write a Vortex beerhall song. We can while away the time to the TIP report by loudly singing the song and clinking beer steins. Eric
Re: [Vo]:Say it ain't so, Joe
Hello Kevin, No Swedes are not immune to any bad things. I was hesitating before I wrote my post as I could hear that protest. However, it is a small and homogeneous country where the head of (the CIA of Sweden) is forced to explain himself. He is criticized for having collaborated with the US intelligence (CIA) and he says I am sorry on national TV. BTW I have said that smaller entities are easier to handle than larger.:) Of course lies exist. It is a great country to be a journalist as you have so much access. The people we talk about would not take any chances. They for certain are not entrepreneurial or risk takers in any form or shape. I am saying I believe - your opinion is as good as mine just my believe - that there is a conflict between people and that some say 'let us publish', while other say we get the question xyz- what are we saying. Conclusion let us find out and delay, which is better than showing an unprofessional behavior in the mind of those guys. I agree they did not sign up to answer the theory. However, I think they want to have theory that support the findings. It would be covering that special part we all are concerned about. To make another test to find out exactly how much CU and Fe and Ni that has been involved and the isotopes must be of value as I think they listen to you guys who are providing theories and ask questions all the time. Good of course but making the people involved feeling they need answers to the different ideas they did not answered before - and for which they found themselves without clear answers. You can say that given the situation it is bullshit behavior. OK I can see that point it does not change what I think and I do not know nor communicate with either one of them. Your insider idea is not possible, Yes, I agree that they should have lived up to their promises about timeline. However, I have been in many situations where you just cannot get anywhere by saying it is no good, when people say they need more time. They are in no hurry - but for the purpose of insider trading - no way. Sorry Kevin you need to meet with more people. They mostly protest about the missing pickles. Most often such issues take size not proportional to their roles in the whole - just look on our political debate. I understand that people are suffering from poor performance or lack of personal accountability for promises made. That does not change anything. I have often been in that situation when lack of decisions have cost me. I think most business leaders have been there. No fun I agree. I am not defending the lack of accountability - I merely tried to give you the internal reasons I think they have and combined with their environmental situation. It is still 3 out of 300 month - 1%.
Re: [Vo]:Say it ain't so, Joe
I believe that LENR is many centuries ahead of its time. Let us understand this paradigm changing device through an like example. Let us put ourselves back to the year 1014 AD. Imagine that a smart phone was given to a monk who toiled for most of his cloistered life coping one book and you told him to prove that with this device he could now copy and sent that book to someone across the world in 5 seconds. Even this monk who accepts the concept of miracles might be somewhat confused and call in some additional members of his order to help him with the test. When looking more deeply into the physical principles that make this smart phone work, the monk and his fellows might need some additional time to research new physical concepts in more depth than their collective knowledge base may be expected to support. This could take some additional time. Maybe the time it takes this monk and his fellows to test the smart phone would extent a longer than was originally expected. After all they are dealing with understanding a miracle. On Sat, Jun 21, 2014 at 11:18 PM, Lennart Thornros lenn...@thornros.com wrote: Hello Kevin, No Swedes are not immune to any bad things. I was hesitating before I wrote my post as I could hear that protest. However, it is a small and homogeneous country where the head of (the CIA of Sweden) is forced to explain himself. He is criticized for having collaborated with the US intelligence (CIA) and he says I am sorry on national TV. BTW I have said that smaller entities are easier to handle than larger.:) Of course lies exist. It is a great country to be a journalist as you have so much access. The people we talk about would not take any chances. They for certain are not entrepreneurial or risk takers in any form or shape. I am saying I believe - your opinion is as good as mine just my believe - that there is a conflict between people and that some say 'let us publish', while other say we get the question xyz- what are we saying. Conclusion let us find out and delay, which is better than showing an unprofessional behavior in the mind of those guys. I agree they did not sign up to answer the theory. However, I think they want to have theory that support the findings. It would be covering that special part we all are concerned about. To make another test to find out exactly how much CU and Fe and Ni that has been involved and the isotopes must be of value as I think they listen to you guys who are providing theories and ask questions all the time. Good of course but making the people involved feeling they need answers to the different ideas they did not answered before - and for which they found themselves without clear answers. You can say that given the situation it is bullshit behavior. OK I can see that point it does not change what I think and I do not know nor communicate with either one of them. Your insider idea is not possible, Yes, I agree that they should have lived up to their promises about timeline. However, I have been in many situations where you just cannot get anywhere by saying it is no good, when people say they need more time. They are in no hurry - but for the purpose of insider trading - no way. Sorry Kevin you need to meet with more people. They mostly protest about the missing pickles. Most often such issues take size not proportional to their roles in the whole - just look on our political debate. I understand that people are suffering from poor performance or lack of personal accountability for promises made. That does not change anything. I have often been in that situation when lack of decisions have cost me. I think most business leaders have been there. No fun I agree. I am not defending the lack of accountability - I merely tried to give you the internal reasons I think they have and combined with their environmental situation. It is still 3 out of 300 month - 1%.
