Charles Hope <lookslikeiwasri...@gmail.com> wrote: Rossi can be devious, but I have not seen *any* evidence that he lies about >> engineering data. >> > > Except that you wrote > > Mind you, the list of his statements we compiled includes some > diametrically opposite assertions: > > > http://www.peswiki.com/index.php/Directory:Andrea_A._Rossi_Cold_Fusion_Generator:Rossi%27s_Hints > > As I explained, I think those are the results of Rossi changing his mind, or getting new data, or he was confused. I do not think those are lies.
This is very important. Fundamental, cutting edge research into unknown phenomena is always filled with confusion. It is always a mixture of truth and error. As Stan Pons says, "if we are half-right we are doing well." Rossi is good at what he does partly because his mind is flexible and he is willing to change it easily and often. Mental flexibility and even the ability to entertain two opposite ideas at the same time are valuable skills for someone in his line of work. You have said his psychology is completely irrelevant, but his behavior is > not consistent with that of a pure scientist in pursuit of accuracy, a > businessman maximizing his return, a con man maximizing his take, a > secretive engineer . . . > Who can say what is consistent or normal about any of those groups? I know dozens of scientists, including many distinguished ones such as Fleischmann, Bockris, Arata and Hagestein. They are all different. What motivates them is different in every case. Their outlooks and politics and much else is as different as any other group of people such as doctors, farmers or programmers. What you do for a living does tend to shape your views, but people are not automatons. , a publicity whore seeking attention. or anything. There is no story that > can explain his random contradictory behavior, which is why the theories > still fly around. > On the contrary, it looks similar to other lone inventors I have known. I suppose that explains it. - Jed
