Rossi is only interested in targeting his demos to his selected investor community. If all the rest of us are convinced that the Rossi reactor is the savior of mankind, there will be extreme pressure for him to reveal the inner workings of his reactor. To advance his general commercial interests and to avoid extreme aggravation, the less said to the general public the better.
On Mon, May 23, 2011 at 3:43 PM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax <[email protected]>wrote: > At 02:44 PM 5/23/2011, Jed Rothwell wrote: > >> OrionWorks - Steven V Johnson wrote: >> >> But, horror >>> of horrors, if Rossi turns out to be a sophisticated scam artist, and >>> we didn't catch that fact before the hard-core skeptics expose the >>> truth, we would be forced to assess whether our harsh opinion of >>> hard-core skeptics is really deserving. >>> >> There are two hypotheticals here: >> >> IF Rossi is revealed as scam artist and >> IF the hard-core skeptics are the ones who expose the truth. >> > > If (the first condition), the hard-core skeptics are not likely to be the > ones who expose it, because they will not be the ones who first get enough > access. It will be someone like Kullander, or Lewan, or Essen, or Aleklett. > The hard-core skeptics are so convinced that it's false that they won't > look, and we only hear from the armchair know-it-alls. > > > The second does not follow from the first. If anyone exposes Rossi, it >> will probably be an open minded person willing to look closely at the claim, >> such as Kullander. >> > > Yeah, I hadn't read the second paragraph before starting my reply. > > > It will not be a hard-core skeptic. I have not been following Cude's >> posts carefully, but I do not think he has proposed a method of fraud that >> we can check for. Other people, such as Alan Fletcher, have pointed out >> potential problem. I would not call Fletcher a hard-core skeptic by any >> means. >> > > I've pointed out the generic problem, not resolvable, really, until we have > more data, particularly from fully independent analysis. As an example of > what won't serve, suppose the full results from analysis of the powder, > before and after, becomes available, and it does, in fact, indicate an > isotopic anomaly. Well, those powders could be salted. There is no way to > rule out all possibility of fraud, and when trillions of dollars in value > are involved, not way to rule out some limited collusion. We are, as I've > said many times, at the point where simple frauds are highly unlikely, and > "error" is impossible. Rossi is right on track, it seems to be, to making > his case in a way that cannot be stopped by pseudoskepticism. > > Patient guy or very, very sophisticated con. I'll opt for "patient," while > watching my wallet. If an investment opportunity appears, I'll consider what > evidence is available at the time. It's moot now, for me and for Cude, with > his silly advice about an energy device that must be plugged in. There is no > salesman at my door, and if one appeared today, with what I know, I'd call > the police. > > > There have been many faulty cold fusion experiments. To my knowledge, the >> hard-core skeptics have not discovered or described any of them. I have >> pointed out many more real problems than they have. >> > > Yeah. Pseudoskepticism fries the brain, it cannot perceive and cleanly > analyze evidence. The pseudoskeptics have this meme: all people who point to > evidence supporting cold fusion are deluded "believers." No matter what > their credentials, no matter how strong the evidence, all that matters to > them is that they *must* be deluded, since what they assert contradicts my > opinions. Which are, of course, solidly based in Fact and Proven Theory. > > > If it turns out cold fusion is not real, I will not give the skeptics any >> credit for betting against it. It is always a safe bet to predict that a new >> claim in science is wrong. Look at the failure rate for experiments or >> business ventures. If find a way to bet against such things, on average you >> will win as surely as the house wins in a Los Vegas casino. It does not take >> any skill or knowledge. >> > > That's correct. Rossi is an outlier in the cold fusion world. Nobody had > reported results anything like his. There were lots of grounds for > skepticism, but, as you know, Jed, this wasn't as far outside what was > already known as the pseudoskeptics believe. Lots of people had been looking > for what he found, he simply was the first one to have the persistence, as > well as, probably, luck. And the money, by the way. Testing a thousand > variations was *expensive*, especially in time. He also kept his mouth shut, > it seems, for years, with his intermediate results. He was going for the > gold. > > I'm not thrilled by that, from the point of view of public benefit. But it > was his right, it was his money and time being invested. He may now have > investment from Ampenergo, so he's not so likely to run out of money on the > road to Defkalion. Funny how the wikipediots removed the reference to the > former U.S. energy official on the board of Ampenergo. "Not important," it > was explained. Right. They removed that precisely because they know it's > important, it lends gravitas, so, since they believe this is a scam, they > wanted it out. That was obvious proof of Point-of-View pushing, > self-contradictory. It was reliably sourced, and of obvious interest to the > general reader, whom they do not trust, they believe that general readers > will be motivated, seeing that board member, to write out a check.... > > They think it was promotional. Right. It was. Notably promotional. That is, > the fact that the guy is on the board was, I'm sure, deliberate. So? >
