Regarding the following statement:
> Get a life! These people like Krivit, etc -- who blindly > suggest scam because they personally were not honored with a > demo -- ought to at least do their homework first and read what is > available in the public record before spouting crap about scam, > since there is no plausible motive which would be worth the risk. I thought Krivit had been "honored" with a so-called demo when he visited Rossi's lab. Unfortunately, all the evidence we had been presented with suggested the fact that the demonstration Krivit had personally witnessed had been a fake. No anomalous heat had been produced at that time. Mr. Krivit quickly saw through the ruse. Soon afterwards Krivit started to express his personal opinions of Rossi out on his NET web site. And Rossi returned the favor by labeling Krivit a "snake". The subsequent long distance interplay between Rossi and Krivt has certainly produced a lot entertaining fodder. Of what actual value it is, well, that's questionable. ;-) I'm not saying this in defense of Mr. Krivit. Yes, Krivit certainly had reason to distrust Rossi. But then, how one handles one's personal sense of distrust of others tells a lot about their own internal compasses and personal motivations. I agree with Jed and others who have been saying for quite some time now that Mr. Krivit is continuing dig himself into a deep and dark hole which will make it extremely difficult for him to climb out of. A prime example of this kind of hole digging is Krivit continued publication personal opinion out in NET as if such opinions are actual documented fact, such as the following title: "Rossi Manipulates Academics to Create Illusion of Independent Test" It is my opinion, an opinion based on personal observation, that Krivit has not had the chance in to develop an internal compass as to where is own sense of authority resides. This, in turn, has resulted in a great deal of mistrust of the actions of others. It also results in constantly misinterpreting the motivations of others. In my opinion Krivit attempts to secure what should be his own internalized sense of authority through external means, such as by attaching it to public figures, the so-called "experts" who run organizations such as the Widom Larsen camp. I suspect very early in Krivit's "CF" reporting career he had attached his personal sense of authority to individuals like McKubre, and perhaps Ed Storms as well. I got the impression that there had been some kind of falling out between McKubre and Krivit - at least as I understand it based on a collection of events that had occurred between these two individuals. At which point Krivit no longer felt he could trust McKubre as the personification of his own authority compass. Krivit must have felt a deep sense of internal isolation and discomfort at that point in his life. It must have motivated Krivit to seek out another authority figure that he would then attempt to internalize. Welcome W-L! I suspect Krivit may have done this many times. What is tragic about this turn of events is that most of us can see that Krivit is smart and possess good editorial skills. I think that If Krivit were to develop a better internal compass of where his own authority resides, I think it would automatically give him the ability to become far more neutral and impartial in the reporting of many forms of CF/LENR news. Unfortunately, at present Krivit doesn't seem to be able to maintain much of a sense of neutrality on certain matters, such as his interactions with flamboyant & eccentric personalities, like Rossi. To be blunt, Krivit simply doesn't understand Rossi. Rossi's flamboyant behavior is disquieting to Krivit. In order to compensate Krivit attempts to overlay his own personally constructed template of Rossi's motivations over the actual complicated and often unfathomable motivations of Rossi. Once Krivit did this he must have felt justified in presenting himself as an authority on Rossi's motivations and intentions (which he most certainly is NOT). I think Krivit feels the need to constantly present himself as an authority because, ironically, deep down inside he suspects he might not be the authority he publicly claims he has become on the Rossi enigma. The point being: One cannot become a useful and hopefully informative authority on the behavior and motivations of others when one has not yet acquired a sufficient sense of where one's own "center" resides. Ironically, one has to be willing to let go of... one must be willing to stop vehemently defending one's accumulated collection of opinions for which most of us tend to believe IS who we are in the world. One must be willing to let go of all these constructs in order to begin the journey of rediscovering a more permanent sense of who and what we really are. One can never ever find a really lasting "authority" in a collection of "opinions". Opinions constantly change. I doubt Krivit has felt motivated to explore what he is likely to perceive as the utter destruction of his "self" in the collection of opinions he has surrounded himself within. Perhaps Krivit would disagree with me on this last point. Nevertheless, correct or not, that is my current "opinion" of Krivit's reporting proclivities. My two cents. Regards, Steven Vincent Johnson svjart.OrionWorks.com www.zazzle.com/orionworks tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/newvortex/
