You again do not check before replying. You complained that DGT did not send you their data, yet now you say you are drowning in data. Make up you mind. NDA. Re read. I did not say for you to give your claimed big buck friends any NDA information other than to let them know you are convinced with what you saw. If they trust you, they would send people to check themselves. My guess is that your claimed connections do not exist. Name them. You want others to name their business contacts. "nothing, anywhere, ever about the kind of device you plan to show at NI Week." --You might want to read some postings on Vortex. There is even a link to a picture of one of my devices. I think it is as basic as it gets. One sphere with a sample hotter than the control in the same constant temperature bath. There are also descriptions of the device. I even gave the volumes, make of the bath...... see for example: http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/msg83809.html Check your facts before your attacks. I have not described the second device. Only that I hope it to be visually interesting for a passerby. You assume too much. How do you know if I have funding or not and for what? You need to avoid attacking so much and not criticize other's path of actions as though you alone know what is best for others. If DGT wants to go the NDA route then let them. You do not know their or anyone else's constraints or who might be helping them. And never, ever, have you offered to help write or correct one of my papers. You have only presented attacks and criticisms...... Fact. D2
Date: Wed, 10 Jul 2013 19:34:28 -0400 Subject: Re: [Vo]:DGT or ECAT? Same Process? From: [email protected] To: [email protected] DJ Cravens <[email protected]> wrote: re read what I wrote. I said a board room not a hotel room. In that case I know nothing about it. I personal resent you calling activities disgraceful and horrible. I resent seeing people piss away $20 million. I thought that Vortex rules prevented such things. I will defend myself" I am talking about Patterson. You played only a bit role. 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. You have that backward! I would not need to sign an NDA if I am presenting the information. As it happens, I have no secret information. Or would they not believe you. They believe me. That's why people download so many papers. You use your personal NDA views as an excuse for doing nothing. I do plenty! See: http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/RothwellJthefuturem.pdf Why do you think others are wrong if they do not give you data when you won't even show yourself trustworthy? I am drowning in data! "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. Let me rephrase: You have not published your results in many years as far as I know. Perhaps I have not kept up with your publications. This is why many inventors do not trust you. Who would that be? You have or had several of my papers on lenr canr. You know that! Do you deny it? Nothing after 2008 and nothing, anywhere, ever about the kind of device you plan to show at NI Week. You have been talking about it for years but as far as I know you have not published so much as a calibration curve. And yet you expect people to magically know about 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. Mitch S. sent me two letters saying he would sue me if I uploaded his papers or quoted from them. If you send me letters like that, yes, I will scrub your papers. You don't even have to threaten a lawsuit. You tell me to remove them and they will be gone the next day. Several authors asked me to remove papers, usually just one paper, leaving the others. I have not removed any other papers for any other reason. - Jed
