Hello Terry,

I'm still doubtful about the Rossi claims, due to the enormous
confusion about the output water-steam flows, and the weak claims
about gamma detection.

I am not a doctrinaire skeptic, but as a scientific layman serve as a
pragmatic skeptic about the simpler aspects of cold fusion research,
while hoping for major benign advances.

I am pleased by the overall courteous and thoughtful discussions.

I was perplexed to not get any responses whatsoever from Earthtech, so
assume they are operating on their own track re surprising,
fast-moving matters that impinge on world security.

Rossi has not released any details re his "explosions".

Surely by now many teams worldwide are running their own experiments
and checking out all possible leads of information.

Amateur networks can contribute by spreading information as widely as possible.

The list of elements and their isotopes that might be catalysts may be
only a few dozen.  The most recent Rossi comments include the claim
that the half-lives of radioactives in his cells are less than a few

However, I find it easy to imagine that every facet of this complex
drama could be disinformation from multiple players with different

The article on Wikipedia re BlackLight Power shows clearly that 50-100
million dollars can be attracted in two decades by a small scientific

I note that it's been 2 months since the private demo by Rossi on
December 16, and he published provocative patents and reports in the
last 2 years.

Rich Murray

On Wed, Feb 16, 2011 at 4:13 PM, Terry Blanton <hohlr...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 16, 2011 at 4:35 PM, Horace Heffner <hheff...@mtaonline.net> 
> wrote:
> <snip>
>> Independent evaluation of the commercial viability and utility of an
>> invention like this is typically made, and could have been made in this
>> case, by an independent third party, under a nondisclosure agreement (NDA)
>> before commercial financing is provided.  Evaluation of excess heat by
>> calorimetry can even be accomplished free onsite by using companies like
>> Earthtech (www.earthtech.org).
> But Murray cross posted derogatory comments on the experiment here:
> http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l@eskimo.com/msg42393.html
> And the archives do not show all the recipients unlike my gmail archives:
> "from   Rich Murray <rmfor...@gmail.com>
> reply-to        vortex-l@eskimo.com
> to      vortex-L@eskimo.com,
> michael barron <mhbar...@gmail.com>,
> Rich Murray <rmfor...@gmail.com>,
> Rich Murray <rmfor...@comcast.net>,
> "Sterling D. Allen" <sterlin...@pureenergysystems.com>,
> lit...@earthtech.org,
> mari...@earthtech.org,
> puth...@earthtech.org,
> joshua.c...@yahoo.com
> date    Tue, Feb 8, 2011 at 12:15 PM
> subject [Vo]:Levi's interpretation of the two Rossi demos does not
> hold water, decisive critique by Joshua Cude: Rich Murray 2011.02.08
> mailed-by       eskimo.com
> unsubscribe     Unsubscribe from this sender
> hide details Feb 8 (9 days ago)
> Levi's interpretation of the two Rossi demos does not hold water,
> decisive critique by Joshua Cude: Rich Murray 2011.02.08"
> <snip>
> Which included members of Earthtech.
> When I suggested he include Earthtech in his retraction:
> http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l@eskimo.com/msg42488.html
> Rich did not respond, leaving Earthtech with a "bad taste in their mouth".
> Unethical, IMO.
> T

Reply via email to