Du calme...
First of all, keep in mind that everybody here who's been paying
attention has realized that Rossi lies like a rug. He makes stuff up,
he says things that can't be true, he contradicts himself.
Furthermore, the gang here seems to me to be a bit polarized, into two
main subgroups:
* Those who believe Rossi really has something, and who are disregarding
or setting aside Rossi's "occasional minor errors of fact". This group
generally regards Rossi's calorimetry results as "conclusive".
* Those who are convinced Rossi's a fake as well as a rather sloppy
liar, and who are consequently no longer surprised by any flaws in
anything he says. This group generally seems to regard Rossi's
calorimetry results as being as permeable as a sieve, and his claims as
little more than a string of ciphers.
Neither group is going to react much to what looks like a pretty solid
proof that he has, yet again, said something that jest ain't so. About
the only thing along those lines that's going to get a rise out of
people is proof that a particular experiment either was, or was not, on
the level -- and even that's likely to be mostly disregarded, since at
this point there have been so many "almost totally conclusive" results
that picking at any particular one isn't likely to get you very far.
[As to me, I don't have time to post anything serious defending a
position, so I'm not even going to state my current opinion regarding
Rossi...]
On the other hand, notes about Rossi's financing, plans, patent details,
and other such stuff seem like they're generating a lot of discussion.
And for whatever reason, Joshua Cude has gotten some major responses to
his comments on the calorimetry, maybe because he stepped on everybody's
toes so hard in the past with his condemnation of the whole CF field.
On 11-05-13 05:42 PM, Kyle Mcallister wrote:
--- On Thu, 5/12/11, OrionWorks - Steven V Johnson<[email protected]>
wrote:
Yeah, well... that's what I would have done. But who
listens to me! ;-)
Hey, at least you get replies!
I do the math showing that Rossi's (erroneous, due to mysterious typo?) claim of 58g
Nickel> 30,000 TOE of crude represents something on the order of magnitude of
mass --> energy conversion, and ask how no one messing with nickel powder and
hydrogen has ever been Curied accidentally, and don't get anything, except to be
informed of Rossi's typo.
I would have figured something of this magnitude (double meaning intended, re:
energy) would have generated some discussion. If I did the math wrong, hell,
I'd have expected to be told so.
--Kyle
