Re: [Vo]:Ampenergo's email is disabled
On Sun, Jan 22, 2012 at 11:26 PM, Mark Iverson-ZeroPoint zeropo...@charter.net wrote: Thank you Susan for triggering a major point about the so-called skeptics, now obviously fitting the definition of ‘trolls’, that have been spewing their BS for that last several days… Trolls? Really? For suggesting Rossi's operations have many hallmarks of the run of the mill investor scams like Steorn is? I don't think so. If you guys and gals are s concerned about helping prevent people who might invest in this scam, don’t you think your time would have been better spent trying to get in contact with Ampenergo to alert them to the big mistake that they have made?? Why you’re at it, why don’t you contact Rossi’s licensee that is in the UK??? Yeah, warn them too! That way, you could save untold numbers of brainless dupes who might be contacted by these other licensees!!! You’d be heros!!! But NO, you’d rather waste your time spewing ridicule and accusations about business/personality issues on a technical/scientific discussion forum…. Now that makes a whole sh*tload of sense, doesn’t it. I don't know and can't say what Ampenergo is. If I had to guess, it's a shill for Rossi and it's a shill that has collected money from THEIR investors. In that case, they are possibly scammers, not scammees. But I admit there is no evidence for that. It's just curious that they gave Rossi money at a time in which he was vociferously claiming he not taken any money from any investors. It's also curious they share offices with other Rossi related concerns, IIRC. There's so much of this stuff, it's hard to keep it all straight. As to preventing investor fraud, it's probably too late for most of it. And we wouldn't have a clue who to contact. I can tell you for sure that if someone asked on a forum whether to invest in Rossi, I'd give him or her an ear full but then maybe even you would.
Re: [Vo]:Ampenergo's email is disabled
On Sun, Jan 22, 2012 at 11:32 PM, Shaun Taylor shauntaylor...@gmail.comwrote: Mark why are you so defensive of Rossi? Do you have skin in this game? I bet he's like Jed. He so badly wants Rossi and Defkalion to be real, he gets his feelings hurt when anyone suggests they may in fact be lying criminals,.
Re: [Vo]:University testing of the E-cat question asked on Rossi blog
On Sat, Jan 21, 2012 at 11:45 PM, Shaun Taylor shauntaylor...@gmail.comwrote: Rossi faked the 6 Oct data and fooled all the Experts that attended the demo. Some BIG names there. Hey, do me a favor. I agree that thermocouple (T-out) placement is critical and you can get almost any temp you want with incorrect placement. I also agree Rossi should have put the 'couple into the stream. But I don't quite see the trail of goop that tells you where it was originally before the insulation was moved. I hate to make work because this is an almost dead horse, but is there some way to make a clearer graphic about where the thermocouple tip was during the run with respect to the manifold and why? I see goop (probably silicon grease) on the brass fitting in the third image but I'm not sure what it tells us. When this all went down, I mentioned that the way to do away with measurement errors was to use Joule heating to calibrate the entire system used to measure output energy. The believers poopoo'd it but it's still true that such methodology also should have been used by Rossi (and by everyone who promotes LENR).
Re: [Vo]:The Rossi Paradox
On Sun, Jan 22, 2012 at 1:21 AM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote: Motive is at the root of all rational crime. Without motive, crime is pathological and therefore the inconsequential act of a madman. In this riddle lies the horns of the Rossi paradox. So what is Rossi’s motive for his lies? What was the motive for Petroldragon lies? For thermo-electric device lies to DOD? Occam says money. Occam says most probable: fraud on early investors to make millions just like Steorn and many other have done. It doesn't have to be anything like the complicated web just woven.
Re: [Vo]:The 1MW container is not from old footage.
On Sun, Jan 22, 2012 at 6:14 AM, John Milstone john_sw_orla...@yahoo.comwrote: As for Focardi and Levi, I notice that they never corrected any of the various lies about the University of Bologna actually performing independent testing of the E-Cat. If they didn't bother correcting that, I don't see why they would correct this. The really annoying thing about Levi's performance in Rossi's fiasco is that he supposedly performed the only test (Feb 2011 with liquid coolant) which would have been valid except that it wasn't run with a blank and calibration. And Levi would not defend the test when interviewed, he would not provide the raw data and calculations, and worst and most damning of all, he would not repeat it in public with proper controls and data recording. That would have been easy and cheap and safe for Rossi IP and Levi would not press Rossi to let him perform it. He would not discuss this failure with reporters. Unconscionable, IMHO.
Re: [Vo]:Greg Watson is VERY rude!
On Sun, Jan 22, 2012 at 8:45 AM, Stephen A. Lawrence sa...@pobox.comwrote: ** Eff: I don't need this kind of garbage from you, or anyone else on this list. The occasional worthwhile content of your semi-literate contributions isn't sufficient to justify digging through the offensive and repetitious attacks which constitute most of what you have to say. *plonk* Well, while it may be a bit much, I think exposure of Greg Watson/Aussie Guy is more than warranted by the extravagant and now clearly likely to be imaginary claims he made on this forum. If this is the sort of person Rossi entrusts with his time, talks, promises of custom work and detailed specifications, we should know about it.
Re: [Vo]:The 1MW container is not from old footage.
On Sun, Jan 22, 2012 at 9:06 AM, Alain Sepeda alain.sep...@gmail.comwrote: this behavior is coherent with the thermoelectric story, as told by his opponents... optimistic, betting all on a small lab success, lying, making failures disappear by frauds, trying to make it desperately works despite problems... I have looked fairly intensively for any evidence that Rossi **ever** had a working device that he showed to DOD and was properly tested by U of NH or any other U and I could not find it. I think it was all entirely a lie from the start. Additional evidence for that hypothesis is that if it were real, it could have been duplicated by Rossi using the same methods he originally used to make the device, perhaps with additional help and support from DOD which would have been easy to get at the time. The other issue about this mess is why Rossi submitted the non-working samples to start with. Didn't he ever test them? Was he so incompetent or negligent that he didn't know the devices didn't work when they were in fact more than 2 orders of magnitude (100X) off the target? I think the TE devices were deliberate fraud not unlike what the E-cat is likely to end up being and for the same motive: money up front and excuses later. I am surprised, Alain, that you overlook those facts. I think the same reasoning applies in kind to Petroldragon but it's much more complex an affair and I have not studied that. I did spend a bit of time with the TE device story. It's damning in my opinion. Both for DOD which did not do due diligence and of course for Rossi who almost certainly defrauded them. Of course if someone can point me to data from a reputable and credible source showing that those TE device samples did what Rossi said, then the whole thing is a big mystery: why have those methods not been pursued since the 2004 fiasco?
Re: [Vo]:Russian Nuclear Kurchatov Lectures in St. Petersburg Will Include LENR
On Sun, Jan 22, 2012 at 9:13 AM, Robert Leguillon robert.leguil...@hotmail.com wrote: Even if he doesn't have a secret catalyst that enhances his reaction, he may inadvertently become the catalyst that brings LENR into the mainstream... I disagree with that reasoning. If Rossi is a fraud, legitimate but subtle claims of LENR will be even more ignored by the public and by funding sources than they already were. Probably with a comment of the nature of that's probably another Rossi! On the other hand, any *valid* robust claim can easily be tested independently and everyone will be interested if it is verified, just as they were (and many still are) in Rossi. Rossi got considerable main line press such as Forbes and various network news mentions even though he's an obvious flake. Imagine the coverage if someone ever really has robust LENR power and can prove it properly.It won't be because of Rossi that they get coverage but in spite of him.
Re: [Vo]:University testing of the E-cat question asked on Rossi blog
On Sun, Jan 22, 2012 at 6:00 AM, Hotmail jth...@hotmail.com wrote: ** Shaun, you are in error. I have examined your pictures and like Mary, I do not see the significance of the goop you are referring to. I didn't say I didn't see the significance-- I do. I am not that good at pattern recognition. I was asking for assistance in interpreting the pattern that suggests where the thermocouple head was and the trail of its withdrawal. I think I see it better now but not as well as Shaun does. I have little doubt that the thermocouple placement in the October 6 experiment was a calculated deception on the part of Rossi. Probably, it was one of several, including one inside the large E-cat, which created an illusion of excess power. Why else would Rossi change the design with almost no increase in power output from a device ten times or more the size of the original? Levi's notoriously undocumented and unrepeated experiment provided probably the largest power density surge of any E-cat ever claimed -130 kW, if you believe it, in a core about the size of a tennis ball. It's been downhill in power density every since. That's Rossi-progress, I guess.
Re: [Vo]:The 1MW container is not from old footage.
On Sun, Jan 22, 2012 at 9:35 AM, John Milstone john_sw_orla...@yahoo.comwrote: Perhaps. I don't see what this theory offers that makes it more likely than Rossi is a con man. It offers that there is no evidence Rossi ever showed a working device. No evidence of proper tests anywhere-- EVER. Yet he told DOD they had been tested by the University of New Hampshire. That's how he got the contract. That makes him a lying con man if no such tests occurred. I wonder if his original proposal still exists anywhere we could see it?
Re: [Vo]:The 1MW container is not from old footage.
On Sun, Jan 22, 2012 at 9:49 AM, John Milstone john_sw_orla...@yahoo.comwrote: I was going to suggest that you were mistaken, since the DOD report states that a small-scale model was tested for 7 days at the University of New Hampshire. However, in re-reading it, I see that it was Rossi who apparently conducted the test. Since he lied about conducting E-Cat tests at the University of Bologna, I guess it's just a reasonable to assume that he lied about conducting TE tests at the University of New Hampshire! Yes. I looked for evidence that those tests existed. They were, for example, NOT referenced in the extensive bibliography of the DOD writeup of their measurements on Rossi's failed devices. Why not? The parallel with the claims of E-cat testing at U of B is irresistible (to me, anyway). I'd love to see Rossi's original proposal to DOD but I do not know if that is available. And it's not worth a whole lot of work. Rossi's track record as a respecter of truth is already well established and it's dismal.
Re: [Vo]:Rumors, lies and big lies
On Sun, Jan 22, 2012 at 9:58 AM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote: Vorticians, My bad. I came under a fair amount of criticism for reporting a rumor that lead to both of the twin comedic episodes here last week - of 1) the outing of Greg Watson, masquerading as AussiGuy, and 2) the BBB not leaving Bologna (the big lie). Unfair critique-- it was an excellent job! My prediction is that AR will finally understand the sorry state that his reputation has sunk to, from the high in October to the pits in January, and that he will be forced to do the real test, with real independent scientists. If he does not, will you raise your estimate of the probability that it's all a scam? And how long are you willing to wait for anything new and persuasive or compelling from Rossi? Or Defkalion? Or Jed Rothwell, LOL? My second prediction is that he will pass the real test, almost with flying colors but only for 8-12 hours, and then the E-Cat will go into quiescence mode, as always happens. But the scientists observing this will be absolutely blown away by hours of infinite COP. I hope you're right but I really doubt it. If it turns out that way, it will probably be only an engineering and development issue requiring some research. But I am predicting the test will never happen for obvious reasons. Maybe Rossi will do another contrived and deceptive test under his total control or another anonymous test but I doubt that he will try those silly gambits again.
Re: [Vo]:Opponents should please go away and form your own group
On Sun, Jan 22, 2012 at 10:16 AM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.comwrote: Of course we welcome your contributions to the technical discussion here. Perhaps you could take a moment to explain how citing sources which can't be named, which supposedly make claims in support of Rossi, and which you claim told you they did independent tests but can't reveal materials, methods and results -- maybe you can explain how that constitutes a part of a technical discussion. If it isn't, why are you doing it?
Re: [Vo]:Opponents should please go away and form your own group
On Sun, Jan 22, 2012 at 11:18 AM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.comwrote: There is plenty of blame to go around. There certainly is. And most should go to investigators who don't provide clear and unequivocal, independently replicated and properly controlled and calibrated studies using the best state of the art methodology. You've been asked again and again to provide a SINGLE credible paper which shows robust heat production for a long period without the introduction of Joule heating or fresh fuel, thus proving without a doubt a nuclear process. I have yet to see such a paper. You expect critics to believe that LENR is real because of large volumes of papers which are convoluted, often badly written and always needlessly complex. That won't help LENR research. A single properly conducted experiment with robust results and no question of deception would have convinced everyone about Rossi or Defkalion specifically and LENR in general long ago. We're still waiting for it while you say it happened but you can't say who, what and where. We're still waiting for it while you make excuses for obvious tangential responses and evasive posts by Rossi and Defkalion. That is not what they and you should do to make the field credible. You should attack them and not the critics. The critics are the only ones who make sense. A single good result in LENR could not possibly be suppressed. In this internet age, there is no way it could happen. Look at all the attention and acclaim given to Rossi and for what?
Re: [Vo]:Opponents should please go away and form your own group
On Sun, Jan 22, 2012 at 11:55 AM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote: Mary, there are serious problems with Rossi's demonstrations that we are all aware of. It is apparent to me that he has a very difficult problem trying to maintain stability of the power output and I have been doing some interesting simulation that tends to support this claim. The October 6 test data shows a clear fingerprint of LENR heat production which I hope to explain soon. All of the other models that I have seen thus far do not respond in a manner that comes even close to explaining the anomaly. These models have been based upon energy storage and release from a large mass of material inside the smaller cube. A better explanation for the curve can be obtained by assuming that a large peak of excess thermal energy is released at the end of the drive cycle due to an inherently unstable thermal run away process that is quenched just before it becomes unstoppable. If so, shouldn't Rossi be telling us that? Do you think he told his anonymous customer who supposedly bought **13** power plants consisting of some 600+ individual modular units? Do you believe there is such a customer? Is someone really that dense? What would 13 such things possibly be used for?
Re: [Vo]:Another lie from Rossi: 1MW plant was at bologna in the first day of november
On Sun, Jan 22, 2012 at 11:58 AM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.comwrote: Try to make sense of his claims based mainly on independent observations and replications That would be ever so much easier if you would bother to say who they are and have them tell what they did and where they published the results. He will never allow tests. There's a confidence builder for sure.
Re: [Vo]:Opponents should please go away and form your own group
On Sun, Jan 22, 2012 at 12:15 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.comwrote: I see you are using several other time-tested techniques. You have carefully described a test that would be difficult or impossible to meet. Joule heating or electrolysis power is necessary for most experiments. In most cases, fuel is consumed in such microscopic amounts, it would be impossible to avoid introducing thousands or millions of times more than is needed. You persist in misunderstanding me. OK, if Joule heating or electrolysis power is necessary, then measure it with a precision wide band instrument and deduct the electrical power from the output thermal power. And there is no problem with putting in fuel. Just don't keep adding anything like nickel and hydrogen during the test -- nothing which is known to have exothermic reactions with hydrogen. And run much longer than necessary at respectable excess power -- generally a watt or more is thought to be respectable. Weeks are respectable. You have been asked again and again to read the literature. You refuse. So you know nothing about it. It is absolutely inane to ask critics to read the literature. You think we have nothing better to do than to spend time with unlimited quantities of inadequate and difficult to understand papers? It's your job as proponent of this technology to choose the few papers, in any exist, maybe two or three best ones, for us to read. It should be papers that show at least a watt of CLEARLY and PROPERLY measured excess heat with no infusion of fresh fuel, running vastly longer -- orders of magnitude longer -- than a chemical reaction or stored heat could provide. THAT is what Rossi failed to do. THAT is what you have failed to point us to. And it's your job as the proponent to do the pointing. It is not our job to go rummaging through all the stuff. You have no idea how many papers describe the results you say have never been published. Anyone who has read the literature can see that you are wrong. Really? You think it's some sort of universal stupidity or pernicious viciousness that prevents the majority of nuclear scientists and physicists from believing that robust energy production has been achieved with LENR? That would be simple paranoia.
Re: [Vo]:Opponents should please go away and form your own group
On Sun, Jan 22, 2012 at 2:29 PM, Craig Brown cr...@overunity.co wrote: This is not what we are discussing. We are talking about the forum and how it was overtaken by abusive posters. Steorn's claim is not relevant to this discussion. Quoting Wikipedia is of no value when it comes to exotic energy claims simply because of their establishment bias and the bias of the Wikipedia editors. The Steorn forum was not taken over by anyone. In fact, it was ruthlessly moderated by two old biddies who knew nothing about science and the scientific method. They tended delete posts and entire threads at will and often without explanation and to ban anyone who raised the obvious issue that Steorn was (and still is) an obvious investor scam. Eventually, Steorn did a totally worthless and contrived demo, much more blatant even than anything Rossi ever did, at the Waterways Museum. When good questions were asked, video'd and put on Youtube, Steorn had them removed because Steorn's (Sean's) own responses were moronic. When Steorn claimed they did calorimetry, they wouldn't say who did or where it was done. They didn't show calorimetry results but instead they put up a couple of unlabelled and unattributed temperature vs time curves. When called on that and all of their continued and consistent failures and unfulfilled promises, they simply closed the forum and permanently ERASED the entire forum site and all messages. So much for Steorn. If we are going to discuss what they did, then let's get it correct. The reason some posters ridiculed Steorn on their own forum is the same reason people ridicule and ask difficult questions of Defkalion on their forum. They claim they have an open forum and what they post on it is absurd and worthy of nothing *but* ridicule. Steorn's claims and methods are very similar in style to Rossi's and Defkalion. Even their sarcasm is reflected in Defkalion's responses. And their tangentiality and non-responses in the guise of responses is typical of what Rossi does on his blog when he's not simply refusing to publish perfectly legitimate questions. If you like Rossi and Defkalion, you must have loved Steorn!
Re: [Vo]:Opponents should please go away and form your own group
On Sun, Jan 22, 2012 at 4:16 PM, Craig Brown cr...@overunity.co wrote: I think you are misreading the situation. The problem here is the accusatory and pathalogical scepticism displayed by posters such as yourself which is based on attacking the character of anyone and everyone who is keeping an open mind regarding Rossi's claims. Not at all. The skeptics have no influence on results. Rossi has repeatedly refused to use the methods which could actually show whether the E-cat works or not. He refused all independent tests and repeatedly lied about working with the Universities of Bologna and Uppsala who both say they have done no work for Rossi and have never tested an E-cat. Those are the facts. Accusatory and pathalogical [sic] scepticism is your invention and that of people like Sterling Allan who link to sites saying Obama went to Mars. I suppose critics of that are pathalogical also?
Re: [Vo]:The 1MW container is not from old footage.
On Sun, Jan 22, 2012 at 4:35 PM, Craig Brown cr...@overunity.co wrote: I would not be surprised if Eff Wivakeef and Shaun Taylor are fake pseudonyms and that they are posters from the moletrap forum. MaryYugo regularly tells everyone over on Moletrap how stupid and gullible she thinks everyone on Vortex is, then she comes over here to have a go. Really Brown? 007? NewsEditor? And how many other nicknames do you use. I do *not* say that about Vortex in general and I defy you to post a quote with a link that shows that I ever did. You made it up just as you make up the garbage on your moronic web site. The fact Yugo and her entourage hide behind fake identities says it all. They don't have the courage to stand behind the accusations they so often publicly make. And who precisely do they think they are saving from the Rossi monster? If lying, cheating and immoral and unjust financial irregularities are their primary concern then surely they would be better served disrupting a forum belonging to one of the private banks. Nobody is disrupting anything. Hundreds if not thousands of people who don't have the time to do due diligence would be easy marks for Rossi and related investment schemes if it were not for skeptics. Who we are and our real names are not issues. What we say and assert are indeed the issues and you have never cogently addressed our facts and probabilities. In fact, I have never seen you make a single material contribution to any forum anywhere about any subject and that includes this one and Steorn's. When asked to demonstrate that you even understand a technical issue, you simply slink away.
Re: [Vo]:The 1MW container is not from old footage.
On Sun, Jan 22, 2012 at 5:28 PM, Mark Iverson-ZeroPoint zeropo...@charter.net wrote: Shaun, Picking data apart is one thing, but when you choose to state, AS A FACT, that Rossi is knowingly working with Millin, you damn well better have direct evidence (e.g., a contract with Rossi's sig, or video of Rossi interacting with Millin). I am also not clear on whether someone is taking money (or was proposing to) for Rossi or for themselves. It's pretty nasty either way but one of the ways doesn't implicate Rossi. Rossi did get money from Ampenergo --that's a fact as per an interview in NyTeknik. And it was substantial. How many other people and places he got money from, I know of no evidence about but I betcha it's many and plenty most likely. NyTeknik interview about Ampenergo: http://www.nyteknik.se/nyheter/energi_miljo/energi/article3179019.ece From the article: *How much do you pay for the agreement?* Cassarino: Unfortunately that’s confidential. *Have you paid anything to Rossi yet?* Cassarino: Yes we have. *How much?* Cassarino: Let’s put it like this, it was an important piece of the equation. *Have you searched new funding?* Cassarino: Absolutely, we are in current conversations with some very large companies here in the US and South America, some investment companies, because it’s not just a technology we’re creating in the industry here. There are a lot of pieces that really need to come together to build this matrix, lots of pieces of the puzzle that need to have some strategic thinking done, as how we transition into a new energy source. That’s what makes this very exciting. *So you know there’s never enough money to make everything happen.* (sorry, formatting of the quote may be off and WYS is not WYG)... gmail is weird that way. If there is emphasis on there's never enough money it's mine.
Re: [Vo]:A hypothesis about the Rossi reactor and Rossi
On Sun, Jan 22, 2012 at 5:55 PM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax a...@lomaxdesign.comwrote: A LENR device that produces power for a few hours or a few days isn't practical. It might indeed be of interest, and someone, someday, might figure out how to make something like this reliable, but Rossi might not even be close. His approach might be too crude. But, he'd think, it's just around the corner, if he just tweaks this or that, surely it will work. This is just a hypothesis, but it does explain a lot, if true. I always find this sort of assertion amazing. Sure, it's possible but it's a very distant possibility! Just finding robust (kilowatt level) LENR for ANY period of time more than can be accounted for by chemical or other non-nuclear methods would be a spectacular demonstration of the principle and worthy of acclaim, perhaps a Nobel, and tons of research money, patents and other prizes. It's never been claimed by anyone credible, much less demonstrated! It is beyond reasonable belief that someone could do robust and crystal clear LENR like Rossi claims even for a few hours and would not research, exploit, and demonstrate it. And if Rossi didn't out it, one of his assistants or professor friends would almost certainly do so. It's a very remote possibility in my view.
Re: [Vo]:Opponents should please go away and form your own group
On Sun, Jan 22, 2012 at 6:02 PM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax a...@lomaxdesign.comwrote: I don't believe Rossi, but I do believe that Eff Vivakeef is acting beyond the pale for Vortex. Convicted fraudster is libel. I don't think that's libel. It may not be the whole story but you can find in several reports from mainline newspapers that Rossi was indeed convicted of fraud and sentenced to 8 years in jail. Like so many things Rossi, I can't find any discussion of any credible nature about how long he actually served in jail if any and where and when. Maybe someone can find that. Rossi was also charged with money laundering and gold smuggling in addition to the Petroldragon Affair. There was a long list of charges, some leading to convictions, some of which were repealed on appeal or on technicalities IIRC but Mr. Rossi was indeed convicted of at least one felony for fraud at least one time-- probably more. I'm not seeing any victims of Rossi show up. Know of any? Somebody had to clean up hundreds or thousands of tons of what amounted to sewage and environmental toxins due to Rossi. It was described in the press as a major environmental catastrophe -- all due to Rossi. The DOD lost a lot of money in the TE debacle due to Rossi. None of those folks are likely to complain here. As to victims of his current caper if it's fraud? That will take a lot of time. Steorn's victims are obvious (the investors) but have not filed complaints anyone knows of to this day, about 6 years after the start. Maybe they signed clever and misleading disclaimers and decided the court battle is not worth the trouble. They were clearly defrauded though -- by public record, Steorn spent 21 million Euros in about four years. By the same records, they have made nothing which has ever been independently found to work or sold for profit to anyone anywhere ever. There were a few independent tests by fan-people and they were uniformly non supportive of the slightest claim to the so-called technology. Facts welcome. Libelous polemic, not. Calling Rossi a convicted felon is not libelous-- it seems to be fact.
Re: [Vo]:Opponents should please go away and form your own group
On Sun, Jan 22, 2012 at 6:17 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote: Shaun Taylor shauntaylor...@gmail.com wrote: Of course we welcome your contributions to the technical discussion here. - Jed Oh so now Vortex is only a PRO Rossi discussion group? No, it is pro-science. Your claims of anonymous people seeing undescribed demonstrations at unknown locations and of unknown result which however are said to be supportive of Rossi's truthfulness are science?
Re: [Vo]:Opponents should please go away and form your own group
On Sun, Jan 22, 2012 at 7:02 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote: Shaun Taylor shauntaylor...@gmail.com wrote: No, it is pro-science. Ok Jed but play by your own rules. Stop making statement about secret testing that you can't reveal. That is not against the rules here, or at a scientific conference for that matter. No but it fails to improve either your or Rossi's credibility. Also it's not technology OR science and thus, according to you, inappropriate here. Either reveal the data or stop with the statements is exists. If you can't post it, then it does NOT exist as it can't be checked. Okay, the data does not exist. Feel free to ignore it. Add my name to your auto-delete list if you like. Since you are the only one here complaining about this Many people here object to it. They may not bother to complain to you, especially since you tend to screen out any emails from people you disagree with. You must realize Rossi will tear down all you have built. Bull. The worst that can happen is that he is wrong. LOTS of cold fusion experiments have been wrong. Heck, I've *paid for* lots of wrong experiments. It is nothing to fret about. What is going to happen is that the next time you cry Wolf! nobody will believe you. Wake up Jed, supporting Rossi's and his fake LENR god like Ecat will burn you, just like it has burnt many others. It has not burnt anyone so far, despite Rossi's quirks and the best efforts of rumor mongers such as Yugo and you. Thanks for calling me names. I'm sure it's in the spirit of Vortex, as interpreted by Jed.
Re: [Vo]:Opponents should please go away and form your own group
On 1/22/12, Craig Brown cr...@overunity.co wrote: In 5 years of listening to you ENDLESSLY complain about investors being ripped off and people being scammed you have been unable to point to even ONE single instance of someone who has made a complaint. You talk of victims like they are everywhere when in reality you can't point to one single investor in Rossi or Steorn who agrees with what you say. Actually, if you follow even Sterling Allan's enthusiast web site, you see people complaining of ripoffs all the time. Apparently even the ever critical Jed Rothwell lost $100 to an Aussie type of guy. And 21 million Euros went to Steorn which produced grandiose claims (need I remind you of always works all the time, 0.5 W/cc power density, African pumps, 550HP motors, self charging Orbos', Orbos in cell phones, university tests, etc. etc. etc.?) and nothing else-- no product, no sales and no independent tests except the few that failed dismally. Bedini sells magnetic motors that are supposed to be free energy but always require batteries. Dennis Lee and Jeff Otto were busted for felonies regarding their HHO scheme, Carl Tiley is a fugitive under indictment in Tenessee and you were thoroughly bamboozled by all of them at the time including something as silly as Mylow's joke. It's a bit early for Rossi's investors to complain. Give them a bit of time. The reality is that many companies take investment money that doesn't yield a return. This is not confined simply to the world of new energy technologies. The reality is that NO investment in any free energy claim has ever yielded a return-- it absolutely NEVER has and yet everytime a new one comes out, people like you and Sterling Allan push them on your web sites despite a complete absence of proper testing. With friends like you and Allan, Rossi needs no enemies.
Re: [Vo]:The 1MW container is not from old footage.
On 1/22/12, Mark Iverson-ZeroPoint zeropo...@charter.net wrote: Mary, have you forgotten that at least one of the principles in Ampenergo has worked with Rossi before, or was in business with him, and if they gave Rossi $ to secure a licensing spot, so what? So Rossi has received money in advance from investors. Has Ampenergo held investor sessions and taken money from the dupes of the world, or was it their own $? Where's your PROOF that Ampenergo has taken $ from anyone?? Well, they had to get the money for Rossi from somewhere unless they printed it. I don't understand your point. I am not comparing Ampenergo with anyone. I am only pointing out that Rossi, despite his protestations to the contrary, did receive investor money.
Re: [Vo]:Opponents should please go away and form your own group
On 1/22/12, Craig Brown cr...@overunity.co wrote: So basically you STILL can't point to a single complaint from a Steorn or Rossi investor. I rest my case. I don't claim to be able to point to complaints about Steorn or Rossi. Steorn's investors long ago wrote off the losses and their contract with Steorn probably prevents them from suing even for lies and failures-- it's still a scam. The final verdict (remember the Steorn jury and what they said?) is still not in on Rossi and it's way too early to expect investor suits or complaints. You have no case. You have a straw man argument.
Re: [Vo]:I`ll just leave this here
Another issue with Rossi's claim of isotope enrichment is how he accomplishes it. He's never commented on that though he was asked. Where is his plant for the enrichment? What technology does he use? Can he afford a farm of gas centrifuges? A high intensity laser setup? Who runs it? Indeed, to do what he claims, Rossi would have to own a huge industrial complex. But nothing like that has ever been seen.
Re: [Vo]:University testing of the E-cat question asked on Rossi blog
On Sat, Jan 21, 2012 at 6:43 AM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote: That is absurd – John. Do you have any depth of understanding on this test, since you seem to be coming in after all of these details have been hashed and rehashed ad nauseum ? I'm not sure what there is to understand about the October 28 test. The data were taken in secret. None of the illustrious observers saw how it was done. None of them know how much power was introduced by the generator, none of them know how much power *or* energy the device produced during the test. The customer isn't known. Nothing is known about the colonel. None of the illustrious guests wrote anything convincing about this event. It has only been hyped in the usual brainless web sites that promote UFO's, Obama's trip to Mars, magnetic free energy motors and cars that run on water as the only fuel. In addition, several of the guest scientists have had substantial prior involvement with Rossi including Levi, Stremmenos, and Focardi. Assuming these three are honest, that they have not held Rossi's feet to the fire about doing independent tests or performing a properly documented and controlled repeat of Levi's experiment of last February, or adequately explaining in public the ridiculous contradictions between Rossi and Defkalion's claims regarding their breakup and the reasons for it. Either the credibility or the honesty of those three has to be considered questionable, IMO. As for Lewan, Kullander and Essen, they obviously are not as knowledgeable in making thermal and fluid flow measurements as they think they are. And they are too polite and not willing to confront Rossi about the inadequacy of the dog and pony show he presented on October 28. That doesn't mean they believed him. IIRC, even they expressed doubts, as noted in the NyTeknik report, and remarked that nobody should be certain that Rossi's technology is real until it has been independently tested. These were not merely “guests” dragged in off the campus - Dozens of PhD level scientists were there. Are they all in on this with Rossi? Did they take his word for it? What favorable and credible reports did any of the people attending, other than credulous fools like Sterling Allan and people who work with Rossi -- what did any of the independent and reliable scientists write about the October 28 demonstration? Maybe I missed it but I didn't see a single one that said that the demonstration was well done and convincing. A good magic show can fool a few journalists and grad students and yes, Levi does not inspire confidence – but take a closer look at the “guests”. It didn't fool the guests that matter, for example the AP reporter. Rossi uses the same tools as stage magic, IMO. But that doesn't mean he's putting on a good magic show. In fact, it's a pretty lousy one in that a lot of people aren't buying the illusion.
Re: [Vo]:Ian Bryce and Rossi
On Sat, Jan 21, 2012 at 11:13 AM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.comwrote: You, Mary Yugo and the other trolls should please go form your own discussion group. I think one of the rules of the group is that it tolerates dissent and also that insults are discouraged. This group is about science, not rumors and character assassination. Yes but your method of supporting Rossi is hardly about proper science. It's about wanting too badly to believe him. Rossi's flamboyant antics should not be the main focus here. Your speculation about these antics is far off topic. No it's not. If someone lies to you about just about everything that they do and has a history of prior convictions for fraud and has two major projects consecutively that were disastrous failures, there is no reason to believe anything they say without proof. The October 28 demo was entirely without the slightest proof. The prior demos all had significant weaknesses. In any case, the notion that someone would try to judge this based on a phone call is ridiculous. With $200,000 involved, I was assuming this expert would go to Italy for a few weeks and do hands-on testing. There is no way anyone can make an evaluation based on a few phone calls. But that's the thing. Nobody has done independent hands on testing -- with either Rossi *or* Defkalion.
Re: [Vo]:I`ll just leave this here
On Sat, Jan 21, 2012 at 11:35 AM, Daniel Rocha danieldi...@gmail.comwrote: You don't need to do a great effort to enrich to a few percent an element with an isotope variation of 10% of mass from the less stable to the most stable isotope. This is not like uranium enrichment. I am not familiar with modern methods of isotope enrichment. How would he alter the natural composition of nickel isotopes in an industrial size amount cheaply? What method do you think he would use? How do we know he's trying for the 10% variation? What about the smaller ones?
Re: [Vo]:Ni-64 enrichment
On Sat, Jan 21, 2012 at 9:44 AM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote: As mentioned in prior posting - Ni-64 costs about $3 per gram from a medical supplier. We checked the ones near Rossi's former lab in NH and no one remembers him or the name Leonardo (LTI, or EON). The reason for checking was to see if Rossi started out this way first before finding a less expensive solution.SNIP Sorry, I didn't see this response before asking the same question in another string. Disregard the question I asked there.
Re: [Vo]:Ian Bryce and Rossi
On Sat, Jan 21, 2012 at 2:16 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote: Whatever it is called, I wish they would stop. I am sure you do but your problem isn't with Rossi's critics. It's with Rossi. He could stop all the critique any time he wanted to and easily with low risk. You should be upset with him, not us. We're just responding to his tangentiality, evasion and probable deception-- all completely unnecessary as well as ineffective for protection of IP if there is any. Ask him to stop. People project, elaborately and at length, in meticulous detail, mechanisms of action and future consequences for a claim that is completely unproven. They seem to enjoy that. I find that objectionable and counterproductive so I respond to it. But I am not suggesting that authors of it be banned or muffled.
Re: [Vo]:Catalyser ? argon ?
On Sat, Jan 21, 2012 at 2:20 PM, Daniel Rocha danieldi...@gmail.com wrote: MY loves that Argon fueled motor. ?? MY referring to me ?? I know nothing about any such motor.
Re: [Vo]:Catalyser ? argon ?
On Sat, Jan 21, 2012 at 3:15 PM, Terry Blanton hohlr...@gmail.com wrote: On Sat, Jan 21, 2012 at 5:34 PM, Mary Yugo maryyu...@gmail.com wrote: ?? MY referring to me ?? I know nothing about any such motor. Sure you do. Joseph Papp's motor? The one where Feynman pull the plug? Oh right. Sorry. Forgot. Yes, that's my favorite motor. I plan to install one in my lovely classic Edsel. You don't think I'd drive a Yugo do yu?
Re: [Vo]:University testing of the E-cat question asked on Rossi blog
On Sat, Jan 21, 2012 at 5:12 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote: Eric Walker eric.wal...@gmail.com wrote: It's a common tactic of those with something to sell to play up the professional associations of others who are involved in some way, which is clearly what is being done here. If it is clearly being done, then why has Rossi stiffed the university? You don't suppose that it's because the university would want a device and some secret sauce to run it with? And he can't give them that because they don't really work? Occam would approve of that conclusion.
Re: [Vo]:University testing of the E-cat question asked on Rossi blog
On Sat, Jan 21, 2012 at 5:22 PM, Eric Walker eric.wal...@gmail.com wrote: A good magic show can fool a few journalists and grad students and yes, Levi does not inspire confidence – but take a closer look at the “guests”. I also fail to see the point of Rossi's pulling off a successful magic show, unless he's just flying blind and improvising at this point and is hoping to pull off a hail mary. Even if he had wanted to, the E-Cat story is not something he has been able to shield from third-party observation, at least from a distance. If he's hoping to set up a large racket and take in illicit gain, how long does he hope to keep it going? Or is it that he's not thinking that far into the future? Unless he's very shortsighted, I don't see the motive. Again, look at Steorn, Dennis Lee, Carl Tilley, Bedini, Bearden, Mark Goldes, and don't forget the bigger and more effective scams like many I'd have to look up 'cause I don't offhand remember, and of course the newest and biggest, Solyndra. The usual motive and method is to scam the inventors early on when they fund the initial venture and sign NDA's and disclaimers of responsibility and best effort agreements and more legalese. Lots of money to be made that way and you can bet Rossi had plenty of volunteers (and still does).
Re: [Vo]:University testing of the E-cat question asked on Rossi blog
On Sat, Jan 21, 2012 at 7:46 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote: I do not trust his test data. I trust other people's test data taken from his machines, and independent replications of them. How in the world do you know that? Which other people? Where? When? How? Can we interview them? If not, why not? Did they publish? If not, why not? And don't use lack of patent protection as a cover-- it won't wash.
Re: [Vo]:Story of DoD and TE devices of leonardo corporation
On Fri, Jan 20, 2012 at 8:51 AM, Alain Sepeda alain.sep...@gmail.com wrote: someone have cited this dcument from us army corp of engineer http://www.dtic.mil/cgi-bin/GetTRDoc?AD=ada432046 it talsk about the experiments with Rossi'es TE devices. it is interesting because they don't talk about total fraud, but what look like optimism and amateurism... The problem with Rossi's version of this story is, as near as I can find out, that nobody credible ever saw, documented or wrote up for publication the exact test they did on the initial batch of highly efficient, 100 W devices. This is exactly analogous to the experiment done by Levi in February on an E-cat. As everyone probably recalls, that experiment was the *only* Rossi demo properly designed to measure enthalpy with a straightforward and accurate method by obtaining the flow rate of coolant and the delta T across the device, using an entirely liquid coolant. The problem with the experiment is that Levi wouldn't provide Krivit or anyone else with documentation and equivocated about quality of the data when asked why in an interview. That's OK but what's not OK is that Levi and Rossi never repeated the experiment with proper blanks, calibration and controls even though it would be simple, cheap and safe for Rossi's intellectual property to do so. They've now had almost a year to do it. Rossi gave a typical tangential and nonresponsive answer about this on his blog when he was asked -- something completely absurd about how he would prove the device through sales and not tests. Well, in the last year, he hasn't done that either. Back to the TE devices. It defied imagination to suppose that Rossi could have made a sample batch by hand which tested at 100 W for an efficiency of 20% and then could not provide DOD with samples which tested better than 1 W or so with the same thermal input. If his factory had been destroyed by fire, if his subcontractor could not provide the devices, Rossi could have proved them real by making a few more by hand and submitting them for proper independent testing. It is also unlikely that the university or Rossi did not retain one of the original devices. Rossi never provided any more valid high efficiency tests -- a parallel with not submitting the original E-cat for such testing. I think Rossi never provided 100 W devices to anyone. I suspect it was only a claim or if the test actually happened, it was another Rossi-engineered mis-measurement.If such claimed devices were in fact tested at a university, where are the data? Who has the original devices? And most important, how were they tested? Is it a credible method? And why can't those devices be found, retested and replicated or reverse engineered? The best answer is that it was indeed a scam and a deliberate one from the start. And DOD, as it often does, looked at the voluminous and highly fanciful initial paperwork and approved a grant. I bet they wasted millions of dollars on Rossi's TE devices and the unnecessarily elaborate and grandiose test equipment they developed which proved that they didn't work. Here is the final report from 2004 by scientists at the Army Corps of Engineer. You can see the elaborate and expensive equipment DOD made up to test the devices and the piddly insignificant efficiency of the devices Rossi gave them. One has to suppose Rossi did not final testing or quality assurance on the final product or he would not have submitted them at all because they simply did not work as he originally claimed. http://dodfuelcell.cecer.army.mil/library_items/Thermo%282004%29.pdf I did browse it and read selected sections but I did not read every word so if there is something which casts serious doubt on the above interpretation of what happened, perhaps someone can point it out.
Re: [Vo]:Keef Versus Greg Watson
On Fri, Jan 20, 2012 at 6:44 AM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote: GOW has apparently learned from experience that selling stock in worthless companies is much lower risk than selling products you can’t deliver. “Capitalism” protects the “pump and dumper” pretty well - but not the guy who takes deposits and does not ship product. Right. But in the US, pump and dump scams get caught too. It's that the punishment is often limited to a stop and desist order and disgorgement of the ill gotten funds. The problem with that last item is that the scammers have often spent or hidden the money by the time the order comes out. One recent example of a pump and dump that got caught is Sniffex -- a company which sold dowsing rods as explosive detectors and perpetrated a $6 million fraud in the US. A stop and disgorge settlement was reached in a case brought by the SEC and the FBI: http://www.propublica.org/article/sec-bomb-detector-bought-by-military-was-front-for-scam-717 http://www.sec.gov/litigation/complaints/2008/comp20645_sniffex.pdf http://www.sec.gov/litigation/litreleases/2008/lr20645.htm Unfortunately, the scam continued with the sale of hundreds of millions of dollars' worth of the worthless equipment in the rest of the world, especially Iraq and Thailand and resulted in several deaths documented on Youtube in Thailand and unknown numbers of deaths in Iraq. Prosecution of the perpetrators of those schemes is still uncertain. The whole dreadful situation of people who make millions by selling dowsing rods as explosive detectors in mostly undeveloped countries is continuously documented here: http://sniffexquestions.blogspot.com/ and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ADE_651 A device similar to Sniffex sold in Iraq: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zBQEkXkSVd0 and http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BWr6NO8YAbk There was a video on Youtube which showed a member of the military clearing a motor bike with a dowsing rod, soldiers moving in, and the bike exploding from a hidden explosive device which the detector failed to find. Six people died right on film. I couldn't find it so maybe it was redacted from Youtube for the violence. The still photos of this incident are here (WARNING: very graphic and violent and may be NSFW): http://sniffexquestions.blogspot.com/2009/10/what-does.html To summarize, sometimes in some countries, pump and dump schemers do get their hands slapped and their gains reversed. In most places, even in egregious cases that result in injuries and deaths, the scammers are not punished. I think the appropriate punishment for the Sniffex scammers would have been to place them inside an intense mine field and give them one of their own explosive detectors to get themselves out. Sorry for the OT aspects of this post but the point is that scams can be lethal as well as financially destructive and even then it can take an extremely long time to stop them and the punishment to the perpetrators is not sufficient.
Re: [Vo]:KHCO3
On Fri, Jan 20, 2012 at 12:58 AM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote: The Rossi reaction in a nutshell… SNIP Getting back to the science of Ni-H thermal gain, instead of soap opera. No it's not science. It's not science to postulate a mechanism for a reaction that has never been properly demonstrated to work. It's putting the proverbial cart way ahead of the horse.
Re: [Vo]:KHCO3
On Fri, Jan 20, 2012 at 10:03 AM, ecat builder ecatbuil...@gmail.comwrote: MY: You have quite an ego to accuse Axil of not contributing science to the Vortex! LOL! I never said that. You made it up. My response was to a very specific post.
[Vo]:University testing of the E-cat question asked on Rossi blog
1. Italo R. January 19th, 2012 at 3:36 PMhttp://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=563cpage=14#comment-172614 Dear Ing. Rossi, I have been told that in your official E-Cat website http://ecat.com/there is the important news that two Universities are already studying and testing your E-Cats. May I ask you if it is real? Maybe those Universities are in Bologna and Uppsala? I apologize to be so indiscreet but, as you know, we all are excited and follow every fact of E-Cats!! Kind regards, Italo R. Interestingly Rossi published this but did not respond at all so far. Anyone know if the University of Bologna will extend Rossi's contract to test and characterize his technology? It was supposed to expire about now if not funded.
Re: [Vo]:Keef Versus Greg Watson
On Fri, Jan 20, 2012 at 12:21 PM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote: ** ** If anyone is still in doubt that Greg and Aussi Guy are one and the same, here is a thread from another forum - that turned up today - where other posters are calling Greg the world’s greatest supplier of bullshit, to his face - and he doesn’t blink an eye - PLUS he identifies himself as AussiGuy. Case closed. Sure enough. And the post makes him sound like a lunatic.
Re: [Vo]:University testing of the E-cat question asked on Rossi blog
On Fri, Jan 20, 2012 at 1:48 PM, Robert Leguillon robert.leguil...@hotmail.com wrote: The only reference that I could find on ecat.com to dispensation of university testing was more than two months ago, before Rossi seemed to have disavowed it:SNIP Interesting bit from ecat.com: “We have some kind of fusion inside but I do not think this is the main energy source” http://ecat.com/news/andrea-rossi-interview-ecat-cold-fusion I think it may be a squirrel. On a treadmill.
Re: [Vo]:I`ll just leave this here
On Fri, Jan 20, 2012 at 10:33 PM, thorium breeder thorium.bree...@gmail.com wrote: I ask the wisdom of the crowd for a sanity check. Can rossi achieve do it yourself isotopic separation? One of the more far out of Rossi's claims, made clearly and at least twice in his misnamed blog (JONP), was that he can do (nickel) isotope separation on the cheap. Of course, that's immensely unlikely. He was asked how he does it and of course he said it was proprietary. It ranks up there with the self destruct system and the private homes and factories which are currently heated by E-cats but of course we can't see them or talk to the owners.
Re: [Vo]:Ian Bryce and Rossi
On Fri, Jan 20, 2012 at 10:18 PM, Shaun Taylor shauntaylor...@gmail.comwrote: Ok Rossi may not be interested in private investors for Leonardo Corp Well, we don't know that. He says it but it doesn't mean he didn't take money secretly already with people who signed NDA's. For sure, a lot of people on his blog volunteer to send some. How would we know how many he took up on the offer or from other sources?Also, we know he got money from Ampenergo. It was described in an interview by an Ampenergo principal who refused to the name the amount but described it as a major part of the equation or some such words. but instead is working with his licensees to hook in private investors for them and in return for him. Now it is becoming clearer how this scam works. At least how part of it might work. Seems Mary, Jones and others here were correct. There is a scam going on. Dick Smith and Ian Bryce have exposed how it works and apparently are working to stop it as they are now asking for people any country who have been approached to invest in local E-Cat licensees to come forward and contact the Australian Skeptics. That will be interesting, LOL.
Re: [Vo]:Misunderstanding Rossi
On Thu, Jan 19, 2012 at 4:28 AM, Terry Blanton hohlr...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, Jan 19, 2012 at 1:58 AM, Mary Yugo maryyu...@gmail.com wrote: Could you indulge me by revealing exactly what indications there are that AR has anything whatever to do with the US or any other military and is being funded by military groups, other than that the probable shill he put up during the October 28 demo was given the arbitrary rank of Colonel? No. Could that be because there are no such indications * at all * other than huge extrapolations on vague and tangential statements from Rossi?
Re: [Vo]:Interesting new video from ecat.com
On Thu, Jan 19, 2012 at 7:00 AM, Aussie Guy E-Cat aussieguy.e...@gmail.comwrote: All we need is ONE photograph of another E-Cat on a production. Rossi claims to be making another 13. Why not post a photo of that line? Will that give away trade secrets? Instead what we get is a video of the 28 Oct BBB. Is that all Rossi has to show? I am sorry for your possibly wasted time and money however it's been true since last January that Rossi could work out a way to get an official test from his the University of Bologna without giving away trade secrets. Why not do *that* now? Even a photo of another BBB being assembled wouldn't tell you that it works. The same objections have always applied to Defkalion. I never bought the trade secret argument because of all the dog and pony shows. If you don't want to give away any information at ll to the competition, you don't invite major news media and reasonably well known scientists to your demonstrations. A good example of how a proper product is brought out is the Bloom Box. It was installed at several prestigious companies who had bought, thoroughly tested, and used prototypes before any public news releases were made. Then, the device was shown working and the pleased customers were interviewed. Before the big reveal, *nothing* much was said or shown to the press and there were no big claims. Here's a cite from the Wikipedia entry: The CEO gave a media interview (to *Fortune Magazinehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fortune_Magazine *) for the first time in 2010, eight years after founding the company, because of pressure from his customers.[11]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bloom_Energy_Server#cite_note-bstfort-10A few days later he allowed a journalist (Lesley Stahl http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lesley_Stahl of the CBS Newshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CBS_Newsprogram *60 Minutes http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/60_Minutes*) to see the factory for the first time.[19]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bloom_Energy_Server#cite_note-gtm-18On February 24, 2010, the company held its first press conference. [15]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bloom_Energy_Server#cite_note-mercnews-14 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bloom_Energy_Server
Re: [Vo]:Rossi often says things he does not mean
On Thu, Jan 19, 2012 at 8:13 AM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote: There is no doubt he is accomplished engineer. He has invented many important products. Just out curiosity, which are those? May we have a list? Does that include waste to fuel conversion? How about heat to electricity conversion? Those didn't seem to work out very well.
Re: [Vo]:Interesting new video from ecat.com
On Thu, Jan 19, 2012 at 7:30 AM, Aussie Guy E-Cat aussieguy.e...@gmail.comwrote: It is time for Rossi to stop making wish full statements and to start delivering independent black box tests. I can arrange to make that happen as I'm sure many others can do. Thank you, thank you, thank you. It was time for that immediately after Levi's February experiment which supposedly produced a 130 kW surge and continuous power in the tens of kW range back last February using the temperature change in liquid coolant for measuring enthalpy. I am willing to make a reasonable bet that such tests will not happen.
Re: [Vo]:Goodbye Greg
On Thu, Jan 19, 2012 at 10:19 AM, Andre Blum andre_vor...@blums.nl wrote: I must say that AG made a more than useful contribution to the discussons here. I liked him a lot! What if he isn't Greg Watson like he isn't Dick Smith? Is there some evidence about AG's being Greg Watson?
Re: [Vo]:Goodbye Greg
On Thu, Jan 19, 2012 at 10:42 AM, Robert Leguillon robert.leguil...@hotmail.com wrote: After a bit of digging around the web, looking for commonality in the posts of the two personas, it certainly seems likely that AG is Greg Watson. I would concede that everything I've found is circumstantial, and that a string titled, Goodbye Greg was probably premature. Further, if they are indeed the same person, would that preclude acceptance on Vortex? I understand that some Vortexians may deserve an apology and restitution, but I think that his posts have been valuable, albeit some have been too quick to jump to conclusions. For those of us who came lately, can you summarize the evidence that this is the same person who apparently defrauded people by taking money for SMOT kits?
[Vo]:New paper by Celani
Interesting summary tables of LENR/CF research results. Celani highlights the fact that of all the claims, Rossi and Defkalion are the largest by far and are the least confirmed. Found the cite on ecatnews.com. It's in English: http://www.22passi.it/downloads/WSEC2012%20Present.pdf http://www.22passi.it/downloads/WSEC2012%20Present.pdf%09 Sorry if this is a duplicate -- I might have missed something due to the large volume of posts on the list recently.
Re: [Vo]:Rossi's behavior is more tragic than deceptive
On Thu, Jan 19, 2012 at 11:28 AM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.comwrote: Who knows what to make of it. I am sure that NI is really working on it. Their VP wrote to Forbes, after all. Or they were working on it . . . Maybe Rossi threw them out. It would be better to be more precise. The VP of NI wrote a news release of a general nature saying that they assist many companies in fitting control systems to their products including Rossi's. That makes Rossi a customer of NI's and nothing more. And there are millions of those. Nothing about working with NI or what the VP wrote lends the slightest credibility to Rossi's claims.
Re: [Vo]:Rossi often says things he does not mean
On Thu, Jan 19, 2012 at 11:50 AM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.comwrote: I do not see any of that. I have been dealing with him for years, and I have seen him act this way countless times. He never fools me. This seems like a good place to ask what those dealings were and exactly what it is Rossi delivered to you which makes you believe that he did not, as I suspect, wildly fool you many times over. Other than words, of course -- we know he delivered a lot of those. Far as I know, since this adventure began more than a year ago, Rossi has not been proven to have delivered anything tangible to anyone, anywhere, ever. Ditto Defkalion. He does not seem to be trying to fool me. That remains to be determined, IMHO.
Re: [Vo]:Rossi often says things he does not mean
On Thu, Jan 19, 2012 at 12:08 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.comwrote: Stephen A. Lawrence wrote: Personally I stopped believing anything Rossi said after the wet steam/dry steam business blew up early last year. That is unfair to Rossi. He did not select the meter which is controversial. He is using industry standard techniques to ensure dry steam. Every expert he has consulted with assures him the steam is dry. Every expert I have consulted with says the same thing. How strange. Everyone of Krivit's experts, and he named them by name, said the opposite. You should blame him for things that are his fault. The wet steam/dry steam controversy has nothing to do with him. As far as I can tell, it is a figment of the skeptics' imaginations. If you read all the detailed arguments that appeared here, you'd know it was not figment. It makes no difference which is more common. We can be sure that Rossi's claims are real because they have been independently tested by Ampenergo Ampenergo has said nothing and published nothing and shown nothing. and others, and independently replicated by Defkalion. Defkalion seems to have lied grossly about having submitted anything to the Greek authorities for certification. All they have shown are a few photos of lab gear of indeterminate nature. They have never given a public demo. Nobody who's seen a private one has ever written about it. There is nothing from Rossi but questionable tests in which he was always personally deeply involved. There are no tests at all from Defkalion. None of Defkalion and Rossi's claims are credible. Yes, I'm repeating myself. In response to Jed's constant symphony of misinformation.
Re: [Vo]:List of Questions for Defkalion?
On Thu, Jan 19, 2012 at 1:39 PM, Robert Leguillon robert.leguil...@hotmail.com wrote: What are some questions that we could be asking? Last time that I asked them uncomfortable questions, they at least acknowledged that they were uncomfortable. That said, can we come up with a list of questions for them? Just shoot some questions into this thread, and I'll compile and submit some of them. The last time I asked them about why the Parliament member for Xanthi was told no application had been filed for Defkalion products with any Greek regulatory agency, they banned me and redacted all but the first inquiry by someone else. They even redacted their own response to the other person! They will not answer questions about showing products or testing and my best guess is this: they were waiting for Rossi to provide a core and depending on it. When he did not do so, they became stuck and hoping against hope someone or something rescues them. They are probably trying all sorts of catalysts and all sorts of reactions and I would bet they have nothing at all that works. Good luck asking though. You'll likely get nothing for it except maybe a ban.
Re: [Vo]:Lewan Mats says he never thought the reactor shipped
On Thu, Jan 19, 2012 at 1:21 PM, OrionWorks - Steven V Johnson svj.orionwo...@gmail.com wrote: If I had a highly controversial free energy device that I wanted to market which didn't yet have adequate patent protection I would not in be too much of a hurry to draw undue attention to the legitimacy of who I am, or what I potentially represent, or of my invention. In order to keep my anonymity an occasional piece of disinformation strategically placed out on the Internet here and there would probably go a long way in keeping most of those potential competitors reasonably satisfied that I was nothing more than a scam artist. Not to bother. In the meantime, I'd focus on two objectives: 1. Double my efforts to secure adequate patent protection. As many people in many places have noted, patent protection is effective from the first day of application and disclosure. The patent issue is totally a red herring. This was said by both a patent attorney and a patent examiner at one time or another during the saga. And if Rossi wanted to keep a low profile he would market privately like the Bloom Box which sold multiple working units to Google, eBay and some other giant before they made even a preliminary announcement. Read the Wikipedia on this product. The company would not even have done that except that the customers wanted the publicity.
Re: [Vo]:Interesting new video from ecat.com
On Thu, Jan 19, 2012 at 2:23 PM, Aussie Guy E-Cat aussieguy.e...@gmail.com wrote: Steven, Didn't sleep much last night. Went for a morning walk along the beach with my dog and watched the sun come up. Just had a coffee with our chairman who lives not that far from me. I'm taking 2 weeks leave to get my head together. The company will not be moving forward with any of my LENR plans as I have not be able to produce a working device. Good news is I still have a job. Why don't use the two weeks to go to Italy and to try to get Rossi to show you something that works. On the way back, stop by Defkalion's office and see what they have. Please take your camera and thermocouples.
Re: [Vo]:Lewan Mats says he never thought the reactor shipped
On Thu, Jan 19, 2012 at 3:51 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote: 2. Rossi has been independently replicated by Defkalion, and his devices have been carefully checked by many experts. Except that no expert has been allowed to use a better method of measuring enthalpy such as sparging steam or liquid flow calorimetry. And Defkalion's independent replication has never been seen and is only a claim. Claims are not facts nor evidence nor proof-- they're just words. 3. He cannot have faked devices checked thousands of miles away from him at Defkalion. Same comments about Defkalion who has never shown anything in public or to anyone who can expertly comment on measuring something with their own gear. 4. It is not physically possible for him to fake heat that burns someone. It's possible to use a large prominent electrical heater powered by the mains to heat anything you choose and maybe burn someone. not possible for him to conduct 5 kW of electricity over a thin wire. No one can do that. Depends on the wire. You can run a lot more current in wires than they are rated for, especially for short period. But I'm not sure anyone ever claimed that Rossi did this. Hidden power sources are another story. Yugo and others say that the experiment was never done except in Rossi's presence, and he might have used stage magic. Stage magic is a sort of proxy attribution -- he may have done it by some hidden means is what's meant. 1. It has been done repeatedly thousands of miles from him, with equipment he never touched. He denies the equipment exists! We have not one shred of credible evidence that this is true. Defkalion lied about giving equipment for tests to the Greek authorities inasmuch as can be determined by a member of the Greek Parliament from the city in question. 2. No such stage magic tricks exist, or can exist. It is physically impossible. Because you claim that does not make it so.
Re: [Vo]:Interesting new video from ecat.com
On Thu, Jan 19, 2012 at 9:52 PM, Eric Walker eric.wal...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, Jan 19, 2012 at 8:21 AM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote: I wish I could add something substantial to this list, but I can't. I haven't taken time to watch all of the videos or read the comments on Web sites, so I have to rely on others for the second detail. I can't even conclude that Rossi has probably lied. The final result is a lack of clarity about the situation. Like detectives in a cheap novel, we're looking for incriminating evidence in every little scrap. In the process we have ended up with little more than speculation. Yes it's speculation. But taking the totality of the evidence and putting Defkalion and Ampenergo into the equation, it just isn't the way a true development of practical, powerful, LENR fusion reactors would go. None of it makes the slightest sense. Not the delays in getting university or any independent confirmation, not the failure to change to better measurement methods for demos, not the anonymous client, not the same client buying 12 more collections of 50 crummy looking sloppily assembled reactors, not inviting all the reporters and scientists for the Big Reveal of the megawatt plant and then keeping them behind a barrier so they could see nothing, not the constant barrage of unlikely developments and claims like a self destruct mechanism as the only IP protection, not the rest of the weird responses from a silly blog with an improbable name, not that most of the support comes from the likes of Sterling Allan, Paul Story and Craig Brown who wouldn't know a scientific principle or method if it bit them in the butt -- NONE of it makes the SLIGHTEST sense and after an entire year, nothing promising has developed. Let me know if it ever does.
Re: [Vo]:Rossi selling Licenses?
On Wed, Jan 18, 2012 at 5:55 AM, Aussie Guy E-Cat aussieguy.e...@gmail.comwrote: Terry, I find it difficult to believe these guys would not be able to get Rossi on a Skype connection, especially as they had Dick Smith's $200k riding on the call. Perhaps Rossi did not want to be found. Dick Smith's $200K was contingent on an independent test. Rossi does not want independent tests as he has said many times. Where are the tests promised by the Universities of Bologna and Upsala? Last year they were fervently promised to come soon. Now, they are not needed.One can only venture a guess about the reasons why, LOL.
Re: [Vo]:Dick Smith warns against investing in cold fusion
On Wed, Jan 18, 2012 at 9:55 AM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote: That worked out well. Good job Andrea! See: http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/health-science/dick-smith-warns-against-investment-in-cold-fusion-technology/story-e6frg8y6-122624779456http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/health-science/dick-smith-warns-against-investment-in-cold-fusion-technology/story-e6frg8y6-1226247794568 Six lines of text about a missed meeting is probably not going to pull back Rossi very much. The question is why Dick Smith said anything about it and why he didn't reschedule the meeting. Maybe someone should ask him what else he knows or thinks he knows.
Re: [Vo]:Rossi selling Licenses?
On Wed, Jan 18, 2012 at 10:44 AM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote: Until the NI control system is developed, Rossi is the only operator qualified to keep the E-Cat within operational limits through manual control. Because of improper temperature control due to operational inexperience and/or ineptness, another untrained outside tester will either cause the E-Cat to flame out or melt down. Rossi may change his mind about letting a third party operator get his hand on the controls of the E-Cat for demos when the moron/snake proof automated control system is debugged and made operational. I would just love to see a melt down or even better one of those famous explosions Rossi mentioned on his blog a while back. Then we could measure the yield and learn something maybe. Of course it should be out in the desert where nobody would be hurt. I wish Rossi would give us just one explosion. I'd settle for 0.01 kiloton-hr per hr (just Rossifying the units).
Re: [Vo]:Interesting new video from ecat.com
On Wed, Jan 18, 2012 at 11:12 AM, Mark Iverson-ZeroPoint zeropo...@charter.net wrote: 1) so they are wearing jackets in the warehouse; in many tilt-up industrial parks like this, a small (front) section is walled off and made into offices and *is* heated, whereas the large warehouse section is not heated to save on heating costs. Tell me again why the office and wharehouse of the owner of a megawatt plant whose output is thermal remains frigidly cold? Reminds me of these: http://www.moletrap.co.uk/wiki/index.php/Rossicaptions
Re: [Vo]:Misunderstanding Rossi
On Wed, Jan 18, 2012 at 6:03 PM, Terry Blanton hohlr...@gmail.com wrote: (I know, Mary, don't bother.) Don't mind if I do. After all, you brought it up! Now, all indications (to this author) is that AR is being funded by the military Could you indulge me by revealing exactly what indications there are that AR has anything whatever to do with the US or any other military and is being funded by military groups, other than that the probable shill he put up during the October 28 demo was given the arbitrary rank of Colonel?
Re: [Vo]:oilprice.com: Are we on the Brink of an Energy Revolution? Andrea Rossi to Build 1MW Power Plant
On Tue, Jan 17, 2012 at 11:35 AM, OrionWorks - Steven V Johnson svj.orionwo...@gmail.com wrote: The article might be of some interest. Titled: Are we on the Brink of an Energy Revolution? Andrea Rossi to Build 1MW Power Plant Dated: Tue, 17 January 2012 http://oilprice.com/Energy/Energy-General/Are-We-On-The-Brink-Of-An-Energy-Revolution-Andrea-Rossi-To-Build-1MW-Power-Plant.html http://tinyurl.com/84kvzy2 Something is really screwed up with this article. It's dated Jan 17, 2012 but the comments are disjointed and carry October 2011 dates. I see bits and pieces of stuff I've written included in comments with bad BB code markup and other strange things. Perhaps the publication is nothing but an attempt to eke out a few extra dollars from an ad farm sort of site. If not, something else is messed up with it.
Re: [Vo]:Hank Mills: NASA, MIT, and the DOE have blood on their hands.
On Tue, Jan 17, 2012 at 2:07 PM, Alan J Fletcher a...@well.com wrote: At 01:37 PM 1/17/2012, Robert Leguillon wrote: From Hank Mills - *Pure Energy Systems News*: Original Source: http://pesn.com/2012/01/15/9602013_138_Million_Cold_Fusion_Holocaust/ Good grief : Just imagine that if cold fusion had not been suppressed, there could be 138 million individuals alive today. What if -- One of these individuals would have been the next Tesla? Or the next Jeffrey Dahmer
Re: [Vo]:Forbes and Gibbs Garbage: NASA says Cold Fusion is Nothing Useful
I wish 60 Minutes would update their story on CF. It's been enough time to see where all the promising research of the old program has gotten. And I'd love to see them approach Rossi and Defkalion. In my estimation, that would be absolutely hilarious. Ever see the number Dateline NBC did on Dennis Lee, Jeff Otto and their idiotic scam injecting on-board-generated hydrogen into cars and claiming doubling of mileage figures? Video and transcripts of the Lee HHO car runs on water story here: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/29899191/ns/dateline_nbc-the_hansen_files_with_chris_hansen/t/fast-money-car-device-sellers-scheme-unravels/#.TxYa0YHW5ls 60 Minutes on CF here: http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=4955212n from 2009.
Re: [Vo]:Rossi comments on the It was sent back statement
On Mon, Jan 16, 2012 at 8:40 AM, Craig Haynie cchayniepub...@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, Jan 16, 2012 at 11:02 AM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote: Rossi sometimes plays word games. Jones did not claim that it was given back. His comment is more like it was returned for repairs. That is correct. Not only that, Rossi has all the characteristics of a pathological liar, and liars like to use tense to advantage. You know: the meaning of is. I have to speak up here. I have never read a Rossi lie, It's not so much proven lies as it is constant inconsistencies, vagueness, tangential answers to obviously relevant and harmless questions, spouting off about snakes and clowns, and general avoidance of credible answers. In a recent post on Moletrap, Alsetalokin again raises the issues. Here are a few he mentions ( here: http://www.moletrap.co.uk/forum/comments.php?DiscussionID=2292page=32#Comment_163596) First there are gammas, then there are no gammas, then there are. First the COP is 20 or more, then it's six, then it's three or less. First there's a lot of lead, then the lead isn't necessary, then it's the main way heat is produced from the gammas. He keeps his hydrogen behind ordinary stainless steel fittings which are cycled to (claimed) high temperatures. Gahh... next we'll be told that the weird construction -- core inside, then water jacket, THEN the lead shielding -- is necessary to keep the hot lead from melting down. That is, the water cools the lead. Since the heat is produced in the lead, not the core itself wait a minute safety heater insulation... isotopes. Somebody hand me a #3 trepanning drill, quick, before my head umplodes. The more Rossi writes on his misnamed blog, the less credible he becomes.
Re: [Vo]:Rossi comments on the It was sent back statement
On Mon, Jan 16, 2012 at 10:22 AM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote: *From:* Mary Yugo It's not so much proven lies as it is constant inconsistencies, vagueness, tangential answers to obviously relevant and harmless questions, spouting off about snakes and clowns, and general avoidance of credible answers. ** ** Well, Mary – “inconsistencies” may be what it is about most recently, but early-on, it was about big lies. Yes, you're right. I was speaking only about recently. After all, what honest person would name a silly, heavily censored blog The Journal of Nuclear Science?
Re: [Vo]:Rossi comments on the It was sent back statement
On Mon, Jan 16, 2012 at 10:47 AM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.comwrote: And, as to the factory being heated continuously, this is still only his word for it, or visitors who saw it running when they were there on occasion. I have heard from reliable people who observed it operate over long periods of time. I have a photo of the machine and a description of it. Even so, that does not prove it operated at all, much less continuously. As to those who observed it operate, it would be easy to bamboozle them if they did not do independent tests. Yes - you will counter that DGT is not honest either, but recent visitors have seen the staff and the facilities and are favorably impressed. I was the one who reported that! I have spoken to those visitors at length. Please tell us what independent tests they performed on Defkalion equipment. Also see my questions to Defkalion and the COMPLETELY NONRESPONSIVE EVASIVE REPLY here: http://www.defkalion-energy.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=23t=865p=5389#p5389 DGT is preparing to eat Rossi's lunch... as they say. Probably they will. I think they still hope to reconcile with him, and I hope they can. I doubt very much that Defkalion is going to eat anyone's lunch. They can't even respond properly to simple direct questions of what should be entirely public information.
Re: [Vo]:Rossi on the Smart Scarecrow Show
On Mon, Jan 16, 2012 at 11:06 AM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.comwrote: I think the only way it could happen would be if government regulators opposed to cold fusion refuse to admit the machine is real, and allow it only because they claim it does not exist. Nonsense. First, almost nobody is opposed to cold fusion. Why in the world would anyone be opposed to a plentiful source of new, clean energy? Would people be opposed to hot fusion if it could be shown to economically feasible and safe? Would they be open to a new process to better extract energy from sunlight? Would they be opposed to a new find of huge amounts of natural gas? The idea that cold fusion isn't accepted because of some vague but highly evil conspiracy to oppose it is purely ridiculous. If Rossi or Defkalion's claims are real, which is looking less and likely with every day that passes, then no government regulator opposed to cold fusion could stop them. What would they say to a dozen clean and clear tests proving that those robust claims are valid? What could anyone possibly say if several prestigious test labs and universities verified those claims? What could they say when millions of machines poured out of Chinese, Indian, Mexican, or other country's factories? The conspiracy theory of why cold fusion isn't a proven and useful technology is crazy.
Re: [Vo]:Rossi comments on the It was sent back statement
On Mon, Jan 16, 2012 at 10:59 AM, Mary Yugo maryyu...@gmail.com wrote: Also see my questions to Defkalion and the COMPLETELY NONRESPONSIVE EVASIVE REPLY here: http://www.defkalion-energy.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=23t=865p=5389#p5389 LOL. I got this response from Defkalion: You have been permanently banned from this board. Please contact the Board Administrator for more information. A ban has been issued on your IP address. How Steornish can they get? What did I do to merit this ban? I asked them pointed questions about their certification process. I told them to stop patronizing me with that stupid grasshopper thing Jed started and that's about all. I guess they got enough truth for one day. Oh yeah. I told them they're not a bit credible. And they're even less so now. Only miscreants, who are lying, ban polite critics. It's a hallmark of fraud. Keep that in mind. Bans don't work and they serve mainly to make the outfit doing the ban look bad. Seems to me, talking about excess heat, Defkalion can't take any.
Re: [Vo]:Rossi comments on the It was sent back statement
On Mon, Jan 16, 2012 at 12:58 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.comwrote: I cannot understand why Rossi's personality, his problems, and alleged problems are an issue here in this forum. Why do you -- Jones -- have such difficulty separating the person from the claim!?? Why do you have this weird obsession with Rossi's business deals?? It makes no sense to me. It is like being obsessed with a scientist's sex life or the kind of food he eats. So, if I understand you correctly, if a car dealership had been convicted of fraud in two major cases over the years, that would be your choice of a source for a used car?
Re: [Vo]:Rossi comments on the It was sent back statement
On Mon, Jan 16, 2012 at 1:17 PM, Zell, Chris chrisz...@wetmtv.com wrote: ** Defective analogy. The cars for sale are real and functional, aren't they? Even if the business is dishonest. Sorry, I miss your point. I was noting that Jed would likely not buy from someone convicted multiple times of fraud but he's buying the claims from Rossi who has been similarly convicted and who, by Jed's own admission, lies all the time. How is that a defective analogy exactly? The cars may be real and even functional but because there are many fraudulent ways to make a car appear newer and more functional than it is, it would be unwise to trust a used car dealer who has been previously convicted of doctoring his odometers or cars or whatever. Perhaps you haven't shopped for a used car. Not to get too far off on a tangent like Jed likes to, you should try to visit a chop shop. In one not far from where I live, you can peek into cracks in the tall fence and watch sweaty grubby people who look like they live on the street, assembling vehicles from scraps and chunks of other (wrecked) vehicles. When they're done, they just shove stray and excess parts and wiring harnesses anywhere they can. Then, the misaligned and dangerous, unreliable messes that result are given Mexican upholstery and a meticulous paint job, and sold to unwary people at discounts, usually masquerading as private sales to avoid having to provide a salvage title. I realize this may not mean much to our out of country friends-- it applies to the Southwestern US mainly but I bet the principle applies widely.
Re: [Vo]:Rossi comments on the It was sent back statement
On Mon, Jan 16, 2012 at 1:28 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote: 1. Tests on his device. Despite the handwaving and nonsense published here by Yugo and others, these tests are irrefutable. There is not slightest chance of fraud. I refuse to rehash that with you. If you believe that those tests were irrefutable, no rational discussion about it is possible with you. 2. Independent tests by Ampenergo and others. Unpublished, unverified and if done, likely by friends of Rossi's. Ampenergo has no meaningful web or other presence that anyone knows about and has never shown a single product or test. What if anything they have done, other than claim publicly in NyTeknik that they gave considerable money to Rossi, is unclear. They are certainly not a reliable source of test information. Same with others. What is the value is citing anonymous others? 3. Independent replication by Defkalion. Who are most likely not telling the truth and who have shown no working product whatever. Great source they are. They recently banned me from their forum and removed both my question and their answers when I reminded them that a Greek Minister had directly contradicted them in an interview about their supposed submission of a device for testing or an application of any sort to the Greek authorities. That minister's interview, by the way, was discussed on Vortex previously here: http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l@eskimo.com/msg51035.html You can't ask for better proof. I mean that literally: there is no such thing as better proof. Only more of the same. You're really getting way way out there now!. No such thing as better proof? A test by a major university would not be better proof? A test by Oak Ridge National Lab or Sandia or CERN would not be better? Hell, even a woowoo-ite like Josephson could provide more reliable data if he tested Rossi's kludges independently. I am starting to think you've lost it when you argue that there is no better proof than the patchwork of equivocation, bad experiments, lengthy if amusing arguments, and wildly incredible Rossi evasion we have now. This is so misguided . . . Yugo has no concept of separating a person from a claim. So then, you would buy a used car from a person twice convicted of used car fraud? Great -- you must have an interesting purchase history. I am s glad I put her on my auto-delete list! I believe in your case, that is called the Ostrich Syndrome. In Defkalion's case, banning me from their forum is very very Steornish. Truth to a scammer is like sunlight to a vampire.
Re: [Vo]:Rossi comments on the It was sent back statement
On Mon, Jan 16, 2012 at 2:11 PM, Zell, Chris chrisz...@wetmtv.com wrote: Edison was a greedy liar and cheat who was cruel to animals. Schrodinger was a bigamist. MLK and possibly Einstein were plagiarists. Werner Von Braun was a Nazi and may have held rank in the SS. Tesla was a OCD-laden nutball. I'm not sure I'd buy a used car from any of them. OTOH, I still respect their achievements. If Rashomon Rossi gets it all together, I have my Home Depot credit card ready. Then, I can stop buying 40lb bags for my pellet stove there. Misses the point. If Edison repeatedly lied about his inventions and/or was jailed because of they didn't work as he said they did, and he described a new invention, you wouldn't trust him. Or if you did, you'd be a fool. It doesn't matter that he might be vindicated about the issue later. You'd get proper independent testing and replication which is exactly what has been asked again and again for more than a year of Rossi and Defkalion. There is no cost or risk involved any more and neither will do it. Their pretexts are flimsy and defy credibility. That's the problem.
Re: [Vo]:Rossi comments on the It was sent back statement
On Mon, Jan 16, 2012 at 2:23 PM, Aussie Guy E-Cat aussieguy.e...@gmail.comwrote: Jones, So you are OK with DFG taking Rossi's invention and in effect stealing it from him? You do admit it worked. How can we possibly know that anything from Defkalion ever worked? They've never shown any testing in public, they have not allowed private results to come out (not that they would be trustworthy anyway) and they have never allowed independent tests. All we have is their claims. It defies my imagination that people believe them after so much time has passed and they have missed so many obvious and easy opportunities to prove their claims.
Re: [Vo]:Rossi comments on the It was sent back statement
On Mon, Jan 16, 2012 at 3:02 PM, Zell, Chris chrisz...@wetmtv.com wrote: ** Testing without cost or risk? Not in any way that I would risk, if I was him. What is the risk beyond any risk Rossi already assumed when he did some 8 or 10 public demonstrations already? And he still gives regular interviews and meets with lawmakers and scientists, most recently in Massachusetts. What defies credibility to me are academics who believe corporations and governments won't neutralize people who get in the way. The sign guarding Area 51 says, 'use of deadly force authorized'. Area 51 is where secret and stealth weapon systems are developed for the Armed Forces. They don't make house heating units there. Where they do, they rarely use deadly force if you sneak into the factory! President Obama orders the killing of US citizens without trial. Perhaps but irrelevant even if true. As with an iceberg, *if this is what you can see openly, how much is below the surface that is hidden from your sight? *Did Karen Silkwood just have an 'unfortunate accident'? Did JFK ride thru Dallas in an open vehicle after the Secret Service knew about multiple plots on his life? How about the silver trade whistleblower who was rammed by a car, not so long ago? How many Americans know about a plot to overthrow FDR in the '30's and replace him with a military junta - that Congress took seriously? Can major politicians be bought off - to help corporations - by faking commodity transactions? (Hilliary) I don't know the answer to any of those conspiracies but they have nothing to do with Rossi. If every inventor who had a radical new technology that would upset someone's apple cart were to be assassinated, the grave yards would overflow with them and we'd have no Salk Institutes, Microsofts, IBM's, Oracles, Googles, Groupons, Facebooks, solar and windmill power, new medical discoveries and so on. Rossi is running no unusual risk by allowing his invention to be properly tested. In any case, he has said clearly on his blog that the invention is protected by his giving many anonymous friends secret access to the formula should anything happen to him. There is no valid reason to give equivocal and badly designed demonstrations instead of proper tests. It's been argued that this was to mislead. I find that proposal absurd because if Rossi didn't want people to believe him, he would not have given public demos at all.
Re: [Vo]:Mary Mary Quite Contrary
On Mon, Jan 16, 2012 at 3:45 PM, Michael Butcher thebend...@gmail.comwrote: Mary I'm a little confused. Perhaps you can clarify ? I know that you have stated it many times but is your position still that Rossi's first customer is a fictional one made up by him to give him credibility ? If this is the case then this fictional customer seems to have had fictional problems and fictionally returned it to him for fictional modifications. Mind you, we have only Rossi's word for it that his fictional customer has problems - perhaps he's completely satisfied ? The non-existent customer is completely satisfied but Rossi is making problems up to strengthen his technology's credibility. Yes - it all makes sense now. I don't understand even if your assumptions are true. If Rossi lied about the existence of a customer, why could he not elaborate on the lie later on? The technology (if it can be called that) has absolutely no credibility inside the rational part of the scientific and journalistic community anyway. Rossi could hardly make it worse unless he admitted it's phony. He could make it *better* as we have pointed out many times but he says all the time, he's not interested in doing that. What I'm curious about is how long the believers will believe if there is no conclusive evidence from Rossi and Defkalion in six months or a year or two years? As the Jay Leno Show often asks in one of their video comedy segments, How long will it take?
Re: [Vo]:Kiplinger Letter, Jan 6 2012, Topic: ENERGY
On Sun, Jan 15, 2012 at 9:20 AM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote: A thermoelectric hybrid vehicle would be better. It would be a lot more expensive at present, but I expect the cost of themoelectric chips will fall rapidly. Let's use Rossi's thermo-electric chips... oh!
Re: [Vo]:1MW delay
On Sat, Jan 14, 2012 at 8:51 PM, Harry Veeder hveeder...@gmail.com wrote: Another guess...If it is a military organization, based in (North) America and starts with the letter N, maybe its NORAD. NORAD could use a LENR power plant to power their underground bunkers. If NORAD needed nuclear power for their bunkers, they could afford to buy a small submarine style fission reactor. They would hardly buy 13 Rossi kludges at the current state of development he showed on October 28, whatever that was we didn't actually see.
Re: [Vo]:Nicholas Moller and MAHG
On Sun, Jan 15, 2012 at 11:31 AM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote: Naudin/Moller seem to have given up research, in favor of fundraising If 1/100 of what Naudin claims were true, he would be rich beyond his imagination. Naudin creates lovely art work and take beautiful photos of his often dangerous creations. But properly tested, they can't do what he claims or else he would be very famous and he's virtually unknown outside the small crew that follows free energy claims.
Re: [Vo]:Rossi on the Smart Scarecrow Show
On Sun, Jan 15, 2012 at 3:34 PM, Alan Fletcher a...@well.com wrote: Last I heard, Rossi was still saying you need a WATER line to the eCat. I hope that's changed. If it hasn't, I'm sure it will. All you have to do to hear just about any claim from Rossi is to wait a bit.
Re: [Vo]:Joe Zawodny comments on the Nasa LENR video
On Sun, Jan 15, 2012 at 4:28 PM, Aussie Guy E-Cat aussieguy.e...@gmail.comwrote: To be fair to all parties on this forum we need to read Joe Zawodny's comments on the Nasa video: http://joe.zawodny.com/index.**php/2012/01/14/technology-**gateway-video/http://joe.zawodny.com/index.php/2012/01/14/technology-gateway-video/ Good find, AG. Thanks. Some parts are well worth quoting out loud (also the dark text on dark background of the original hurts my eyes): There have been many attempts to twist the release of this video into NASA’s support for LENR or as proof that Rossi’s e-cat really works. Many extraordinary claims have been made in 2010. In my scientific opinion, extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. I find a distinct absence of the latter. So let me be very clear here. While I personally find sufficient demonstration that LENR effects warrant further investigation, I remain skeptical. Furthermore, I am unaware of any clear and convincing demonstrations of any viable commercial device producing useful amounts of net energy. and So what does extraordinary evidence look like? As a trained scientist, I have been taught the historical standards for acceptance of experimental results or theories. Experiments and theories go hand-in-hand in what is known as the scientific method. Both must be independently tested, replicated, or verified. As a minimum, experimental results must be replicated by an objective and independent party. The nature of the test or replication needs to adhere to the spirit of the original experiment but, should be under the full design, implementation, and control of the independent tester. So, if a device is claimed to be capable of producing excess heat by nature of its operation (i.e., the consumption of fuel via a nuclear process), it must be operated properly. The way power input and power output are measured should be left up to the independent tester. This is standard scientific practice. What would take this to the next level (extraordinary evidence) would be to have the test be an open public test. The nature of the test and specific approach to executing the test should be made public. The conduct of the test should be open to additional 3rd party experts. And finally, the data should be publicly released. Further peer review of all aspects of the independent test is a must. Community consensus is the ultimate goal. Every attempted demonstration of a LENR device that I am aware of has failed to meet one or more of these criteria. To which, if I were religious, I'd say amen! And I now have renewed respect for Dr. Zawodny. Perhaps he'll be a bit more precise and informative in his next released NASA video.
Re: [Vo]:Rossi on the Smart Scarecrow Show
On Sun, Jan 15, 2012 at 4:15 PM, Alan Fletcher a...@well.com wrote: Mary, have you ever actually worked in any organization where design of any kind was done? Yes. I've done considerable design work on scientific instrumentation myself. I've also been involved in design of sales brochures and manuals. I'm supposed to complain because the price has gone down 10-fold? No but you can be alert to inconsistencies in the overall scheme of things-- inconsistencies which suggest the possibility that Rossi may not be telling the truth. | On Sun, Jan 15, 2012 at 4:19 PM, Wolf Fischer wolffisc...@gmx.de wrote: | Mary, aren't you getting tired of repeating yourself all the time? Like I've said to Mark, I don't repeat myself to hear myself speak. I respond to what others write which I perceive requires a good sense response. Your beef isn't with me. It's with those who write again and again as if they believe Rossi is really selling megawatt plants by the dozen, and that he will sell a million table top fusion reactors to anyone who wants one within a year. Read Zawodny's recent statement as cited by Aussie Guy. That's pretty much my view. He makes a lot of sense the second time around.
Re: [Vo]:Joe Zawodny comments on the Nasa LENR video
On Sun, Jan 15, 2012 at 5:27 PM, Harry Veeder hveeder...@gmail.com wrote: Unfortunately his expert opinion will be used to futher delay investment in LENR research in favour of pouring more money into god particles and hot fusion. Perhaps you missed this part: ... I personally find sufficient demonstration that LENR effects warrant further investigation ... ?
Re: [Vo]:1MW delay
On Sat, Jan 14, 2012 at 8:31 AM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote: No, I am not an employee of the customer, but it is a rather large group... Which large group? How do you know? (generically... I am not asking you to reveal a confidential source of course)
Re: [Vo]:Rossi fails to call Dick Smith
The entrepreneur Dick Smith had offered to invest $200,000 if the physics was proven. He sent along a consulting aerospace engineer and sceptic, Ian Bryce, to assess the machine. This is the second time they wrote that and it's confusing. Did Bryce go to Italy? Or just to their town meeting or what?
Re: [Vo]:1MW delay
On Sat, Jan 14, 2012 at 9:00 AM, Wolf Fischer wolffisc...@gmx.de wrote: Thanks for the info! Can you share some more information? If so: - Do you know, if works for a short time means that it actually delivers more energy than has been put in? How long is short? ;) - Is the customer waiting for a new and improved version or has he canceled all the contracts? I'd like to add another question: how would we know for sure that Rossi ever has had a customer? I mean other than what Rossi said, and the charade and non-demo of October 28, of course.
[Vo]:Rossi's pricing mismatch is really gross
Sorry if this was discussed and I missed it but a new set of Rossi says is creating cognitive dissonance in several places. Rossi says on his blog that the price of his so-called megawatt plant has been reduced from $2 million to $1.5 million. But he projects that starting within a year, his 10kW devices will sell for $50/kW. $50 per kW is only $50,000 per megawatt. Why would anyone pay a million and a half dollars for something you could assemble yourself, albeit in a more modular form for $50,000? Perhaps Rossi should buy his own 10kW modules to put together his megawatt plant. Wasn't that what he did for his supposed first customer anyway? Best I recall even he claimed only 470 kW from more than 50 modules. This Rossi Says should be over the top for even the most enthusiastic believer. (first noticed, far as I know, by Alsetalokin on the moletrap forum: http://www.moletrap.co.uk/forum/comments.php?DiscussionID=2212page=709 )
Re: [Vo]:1MW delay
On Sat, Jan 14, 2012 at 2:47 PM, Wolf Fischer wolffisc...@gmx.de wrote: Hi AG, Jones gave a lot of hints in his answer to my questions 4:30 hours earlier. The customers name seems to start with N, is an organization in Brussel, Rossi also once mentioned the name in the context of the 28th october 1MW test while talking about the Colonel (my guess, the name has four letters and ends with O ;)). If anyone has the slightest evidence that the Colonel works for NATO, that NATO is a customer of Rossi or that Rossi even *has* a customer other than himself, could you please provide it? If you have conclusive evidence, even better. Then I could stop trying to slightly correct the torrent of obvious misinformation, misdirection and outright error which gets posted here so much.
Re: [Vo]:Rossi's pricing mismatch is really gross
On Sat, Jan 14, 2012 at 5:02 PM, OrionWorks - Steven Vincent Johnson orionwo...@charter.net wrote: From Aussie: Rossi says the domestic E-Cat is in UL certification. Is in UL certification? Not sure I understand the phrase in as it's being used here. Does Rossi mean his eCats are currently being tested for UL certification? Yes. If so, I don't suppose he'd give us (or someone in the reliable press like maybe an AP reporter) a contact at Underwriter's Laboratories to let us know how the test is progressing and when they can have results? No trade secrets asked or wanted of course. How could Rossi's eCats possibly get UL certification this soon? Good grief! Rossi claims his contraptions emit gamma radiation! 8-0 Yes, not to mention that they supposedly have a self destruct mechanism and a safety heater! I imagine that means that if something happens to go wrong with the safety heater, something too terrible to mention happens to the E-cat and its owner? Something doesn't make sense here. I hope clarification is forth coming. Glad you came to the logical conclusion.
Re: [Vo]:1MW delay
On Sat, Jan 14, 2012 at 5:26 PM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote: -Original Message- From: Aussie Guy E-Cat Why you put a negative spin on this is beyond me? It is the best news you could have reported. IT WORKS! Works, yes ... for a short time. But is it cost effective? - not on this planet. Will it make a dent in fossil fuel use? - not on this planet, at least not as it stands now. Let's be clear, I want to see this technology, Ni-H, succeed more than anyone and by anyone, but I am not a shill for AR, and I hope you are not. He may have succeeded in raising the level of consciousness that Ni-H works, but the invention goes back to Thermacore, and whether Rossi can take that through to fulfillment is in doubt. What is the real value of a $2 million device, or a $2000 device, that works for 24 hours, produces about $1000 worth of heat and then goes quiescent? Rossi's (and Defkalion's) claims were always that their devices run unattended for a minimum of six months without refueling or other attention. In fact Rossi repeatedly said they run much longer but that he would prefer the six month interval for safety reasons until he got to know how they age in the field. If that was a lie, what else do you think Rossi lied about? If he lied about that, why believe anything he said?
Re: [Vo]:Rossi on the Smart Scarecrow Show
On Sat, Jan 14, 2012 at 6:00 PM, Aussie Guy E-Cat aussieguy.e...@gmail.comwrote: What I learned from the interview. 10 kW home E-Cat is the size of a portable computer.SNIP Just curious -- you believe all that? Some of that? None of that?
Re: [Vo]:1MW delay
On Sat, Jan 14, 2012 at 5:54 PM, Aussie Guy E-Cat aussieguy.e...@gmail.comwrote: Mary spin it anyway you try, you were wrong. Rossi does have a customer, he did ship the plant, it does work and produce excess heat, there are control issues, so what, you expect there would not be control issues. They will be fixed. Main point is Mary your original analysis and statement about the 1 MW plant were 100% incorrect. Care to do better now? I'd be happy but what evidence other than what Rossi says would I base doing better on? How in the world can you know whether or not he's telling the truth?
Re: [Vo]:E-CAT Home to be $50/kW
On Fri, Jan 13, 2012 at 2:53 AM, Energy Liberator energylibera...@gmail.com wrote: The price is really tumbling now. If I didn't have one to sell, I'd offer it to you cheap too. Just saying... nobody who has ever talked about it has ever bought an E-cat from Rossi .
