re read what I wrote. I said a board room not a hotel room. It was a board room with board members, president of a company, technical advisors showing the results of the tests. It is things like that make inventors not trust you or your motives. I personal resent you calling activities disgraceful and horrible. I thought that Vortex rules prevented such things. I will defend myself" You keep making claims of being able to bring mega buck and big companies. You talk about the need to save the planet. But then you say you will not even sign a NDA. Why not sign, go convince yourself and then bring your big mega buck friends and let them see it. Or would they not believe you. You use your personal NDA views as an excuse for doing nothing. Why do you think others are wrong if they do not give you data when you won't even show yourself trustworthy? "You do not publish your results."-----You are totally wrong and misleading. You keep perpetuating this mistruth as if by saying many times it will come true. This is why many inventors do not trust you. You have or had several of my papers on lenr canr. You know that! Do you deny it? I just did a search on LENR CANR and find 122 hits. I have papers, and people know them and reference them. My guess is you will scrub them now like Mitch S. But you keep saying these things. You also know I gave the review and keynote speech at ICCF 14 If you don't believe it, here is a link to SK's video of it http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mskdJ31FXYg It was a review and things needed to see the effect and designed especially to help young researchers a start. I also gave papers at talk at ICCF10, 4, 7,...... coauthored papers with Peter H in MIT tech .... etc. Review facts before you attack. Stick to the facts not dreams in your "sleep" of how you will save the field by mega buck "friends". Dennis Date: Wed, 10 Jul 2013 15:20:44 -0400 Subject: Re: [Vo]:DGT or ECAT? Same Process? From: [email protected] To: [email protected]
DJ Cravens <[email protected]> wrote: I had a working device on a board table of a major corp, (actually two different companies) and had their technicians measure and verify and it went nowhere - back in the CETI days. Are you are talking about the CETI demonstration they showed in the hotel next to Disneyland? The one that was supposed to impress Motorola. That was a DISGRACE!!! It was horrible. They did not even have a written description of it! When I wrote one, they used mine, for crying out loud. Without permission. This was after they almost threw me out because I wanted to their temperature (which was right) and flow (which was wrong). And why was it so bad? For the most idiotic reason imaginable. Patterson and Reding told me that they deliberately designed that to be unimpressive. They wanted to sway Motorola but not excite anyone else's interest. It was supposed to be carefully calibrated to be bad -- dreadful, really -- but just a smidgen good enough to bring in $20 million. It was enough to make me throw up. When I told Chris Tinsley about it on the phone that night I was hopping mad. Furious. By the time I finished we were both laughing hysterically. Chris and I had had experience doing demonstrations of products at trade shows. We knew a disaster when we saw it. If that was your idea of a demonstration you have no clue. I don't believe a word that Jed says about corporations jumping in and throwing money at commercialization. I repeat, if you think a corporation or any sane investor would put money into something as poorly presented as that, you have no clue. That demonstration made Rossi look like a consummate professional. I will grant the thing was probably working as claimed. As far as I could tell, it was. But if it had been done properly, with proper instruments, a written description and a professional presentation script, I could have used to that device to convince any corporation on earth. I could have brought in $100 million in my sleep. I offered to do this but Patterson rejected all offers of help, just as Rossi and others have done. Patterson told me he wanted a 100% market share. He got that, and took it to the grave with him. 100% of nothing. The proof and methodology is already there. We must first change the public perception. Oh, please. You have NEVER TRIED to change public perception. You will not even upload a paper to LENR-CANR.org. You have not lifted a finger to change public perception. I have done that. You have contributed nothing because you hide your light under a bushel. (You do not publish your results.) A person who does research but does not publish is no scientist. Rossi is no scientist, but he does research and tries to sell, so he is a businessman, instead. You are neither. Patterson was neither. - Jed
