On 12-01-19 02:09 PM, Wolf Fischer wrote:
Some of us tried to find where he said that the thing was shipped. The
only thing that we found was his answer on the question "Is it gone?"
--> "Yes". The question leaves a little room for interpretation in my
opinion, but really - it's only very little room...
Hmmm -- I was just taking Jed's statement at face value; I confess I
didn't go swimming in the strange river of Rossi's statements to try to
confirm it.
Certainly there have been recent quotes from Rossi in which he
strenuously denied claims that the customer had RETURNED it. I suppose,
though, if he never shipped it, then he's being totally truthful in
asserting that it wasn't returned ... right?
Personally I stopped believing anything Rossi said after the "wet
steam/dry steam" business blew up early last year. There are no doubt
zillions of cases of hotshot researchers who lied about their results
but none the less went on to produce real breakthroughs, as Jed seems to
be fond of asserting, but I'm afraid the opposite is quite a bit more
common. (Google "korea clone" for a perhaps more typical example.)
Wolf
On 12-01-19 10:11 AM, Jed Rothwell wrote:
This discussion about Rossi's 1 MW reactor is silly. The reactor has
not shipped anywhere. He said it has not shipped, and it is obvious
from the photos it has not.
Previously he said he did ship it. Now he says he did not. He is
contradicting himself. He often does that. I would not call it a "lie"
He said it shipped. That's a binary statement, either true or
false. If false, I, personally, would call it a "lie".
In fact, for the most part, when a vendor says they shipped something
and they really didn't, most folks would call that a "lie".
Photos indicate Rossi didn't ship it. That makes his statement
false, thus, as I said, making it what most folks would call a
"lie". (That's what a lie IS, for goodness' sake! It didn't ship,
he knew perfectly well it didn't ship, and he said it did ship. Right?)
Now Rossi says it didn't ship, which most people would characterize
as an "admission", though he didn't couch it quite that way. (But of
course he didn't say "I admit it didn't ship" -- if you're covering
up an earlier lie, it's always better to make it sound like the
current story was true all along, and anything else is just mistakes,
misunderstandings, or stuff to be ignored and/or dismissed.)
Just what would he have to do, Jed, for you to say he "lied" ?
in the usual sense because he makes no effort to cover up or explain
the contradiction. He says "X" on Monday and "not X" on Tuesday as
if it makes no difference.
Yup, he's what most folks would call a pathological liar.
Yet you seem to be saying that because he lies habitually, nearly
constantly, we should conclude that he really doesn't lie at all.
I don't quite follow that.
As if he never expected to be believed in the first instance, and he
did not mean it.
This is a totally bizarre characterization of his behavior, IMHO.
Truth is malleable in his imagination.
Maybe; I don't have a direct line into his imagination.
From where I'm sitting he just looks like a pathological liar.
