Blaze exhibits his wishy-washiness yet again. He also doesn't follow his own posted "criteria", which was that if the report came out after September he would lower the probability to 25%, which he never did. He went straight to 20% yesterday and today he's at 45%. Because of ONE reaction to the report. One might as well use a windvane, it would give at least traceable information.
Oh well, at least he's posting on his own thread. So I'm constrained, again, to decrease my ASSessment of an ASSurance that Blaze will pull his head out of his ASinine "hind quarters" from 7.09% down to 6.59%. Blaze might as well start building a shelter, because his head will be staying there for a long time. On Thu, Oct 9, 2014 at 10:43 AM, Blaze Spinnaker <[email protected]> wrote: > http://rossiisreal.wordpress.com/2014/10/09/probability-is-now-45/ > > Based on http://www.nyteknik.se/asikter/debatt/article3854541.ece > > Exciting times! > > On Wed, Oct 8, 2014 at 8:58 AM, Blaze Spinnaker <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> http://rossiisreal.wordpress.com/2014/10/08/probability-now-20/ >> >> Disappointed to see the same names at the top of the paper. Shocked to >> see not even Arxiv will accept it. I will increase the probability if >> does make it onto Arxiv or if we see IH and Cherokee step up. >> >> On Sun, Jun 29, 2014 at 3:29 PM, Blaze Spinnaker < >> [email protected]> wrote: >> >>> http://rossiisreal.wordpress.com/2014/06/29/probability-is-now-27/ >>> >>> >>> On Tue, Jun 24, 2014 at 10:06 AM, Blaze Spinnaker < >>> [email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> http://rossiisreal.wordpress.com/2014/06/24/probability-rossi-is-real-is-now-28/ >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On Mon, Jun 9, 2014 at 1:44 PM, John Berry <[email protected]> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Well I worded that strongly to drive home a point, we often hide our >>>>> ignorance in the talk of probability. >>>>> >>>>> There are 4 domains in which we apply probability. >>>>> >>>>> 1: Things which are set and we are ignorant of, no actual element of >>>>> chance exist, such as with Rossi. >>>>> >>>>> 2: Macro chance, things that we fail to predict but maybe could if we >>>>> did sufficiently in-depth analysis, this could be likened to the spinning >>>>> of a wheel of wheel of fortune >>>>> >>>>> 3: While a machine could be used to spin a wheel and get the desired >>>>> selection to come up on a wheel, some things seem beyond our ability to >>>>> predict. The experiment with falling BB's hitting pegs and being seemingly >>>>> effected by the intent of the observer in university studies backs up that >>>>> this is maybe beyond modeling within known physics/ Rolling a dice is >>>>> similar, but we do know dice can be loaded showing that even on this level >>>>> small physical changes can reduce the randomness. >>>>> >>>>> 4: Quantum physics where it is believed God does actually pay dice. >>>>> But this is in ignorance of the state of the aether behind such >>>>> interactions. >>>>> It could be that these things are not random at all. >>>>> >>>>> But even IF you believe that probability really exist, that does not >>>>> apply to Rossi. >>>>> >>>>> And if you were to hide ignorance in the language of probability >>>>> despite the obvious lack of 'chance', there is the fact that if you were >>>>> at >>>>> 1% confidence and then saw one tiny single sign, you could have to go to >>>>> 100%. >>>>> >>>>> Such as an event that can only be explained by Rossi being genuine. >>>>> >>>>> Granted this is difficult with magicians (illusionists) and con men, >>>>> but there has very likely been such a sign that either moves him to 100% >>>>> or >>>>> damn near 0%. >>>>> Not that there is anything that could prove him false so easily >>>>> including proof he faked a test as there might be genuine motives to fake >>>>> a >>>>> test despite being genuinely in possession of the real thing, it really is >>>>> harder/impossible to prove a negative. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Tue, Jun 10, 2014 at 12:36 AM, Blaze Spinnaker < >>>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> "1: There is no such things as probability, things either happen or >>>>>> they don't. Rossi either IS real, or he is NOT real.. >>>>>> There is no such thing as probability in reality." >>>>>> >>>>>> I see.. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On Sun, Jun 8, 2014 at 5:12 PM, John Berry <[email protected]> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Blaze's ego is astounding, thinking that he has things so well >>>>>>> worked out that his ramblings about probability have meaning. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Even if he were that good at working out probability, a few facts >>>>>>> remain that make it worthless. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> 1: There is no such things as probability, things either happen or >>>>>>> they don't. Rossi either IS real, or he is NOT real.. >>>>>>> There is no such thing as probability in reality. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> 2: What is the difference between a 30% chance and a 70% chance? >>>>>>> Answer 1: 40% >>>>>>> Answer 2: Nothing much, both means that there is a very real >>>>>>> possibility of it going either way. >>>>>>> If you were invested in oil, it would mean that there is a very real >>>>>>> risk that you must take seriously. >>>>>>> If you are on the side of good, you know that there is an >>>>>>> extraordinary possibility that might be worthy of attention, but might >>>>>>> not >>>>>>> pan out. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> But the difference between 0.1% chance and a 0.0000001% chance is >>>>>>> huge! >>>>>>> With the 0.1% there is a long shot, but one that could still very >>>>>>> well pan out. Just 1 in 1,000 is not too distant odds to let one ignore >>>>>>> something potentially significant good or bad. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> But 0.0000001 is 1 in ten million, an almost impossible long shot >>>>>>> worthy of no attention/investment unless there are enough of these low >>>>>>> level 'promises/threats' to bring it up to a level of relevance. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> John >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Mon, Jun 9, 2014 at 11:55 AM, Kevin O'Malley <[email protected] >>>>>>> > wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I'm constrained to decrease my ASSessment of an ASSurance >>>>>>>> that Blaze will pull his head out of his ASinine "hind quarters" down >>>>>>>> to >>>>>>>> 7.51%, taking into account the direction of the wind and the stock >>>>>>>> price for CYPW Cyclone Power. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> At least this time Blaze increased the chances of Rossi being real >>>>>>>> on the basis of stuff that had SOMEthing to do with Rossi. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> So, he thinks the In Mercato Veritas is a sign of unrealness rather >>>>>>>> than the OBVIOUS thing it is: >>>>>>>> an old fashioned Rossism expression of confidence. This was exactly >>>>>>>> the way Rossi used to post >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> before his friend Focardi got cancer. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> When Blaze talks about the lack of news leaks, he doesn't seem to >>>>>>>> realize he's engaging in a classic >>>>>>>> fallacy of arguing from silence. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Sun, Jun 8, 2014 at 4:31 PM, Blaze Spinnaker < >>>>>>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Going to start publishing updates on this blog >>>>>>>>> http://rossiisreal.wordpress.com/ rather than this mailing list. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Rossi is now at 30% >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On Mon, Jun 2, 2014 at 8:46 PM, Kevin O'Malley < >>>>>>>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> If it's interesting enough to generate a patent then it is >>>>>>>>>> worthwhile. The world would sit up and take notice simply because >>>>>>>>>> Rossi >>>>>>>>>> ain't a fraud, as the common notion suggests. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Jun 2, 2014 at 9:19 AM, Blaze Spinnaker < >>>>>>>>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Another possibility is IH may have decided they don't want the >>>>>>>>>>> world competing with them, so they gave the researchers an eCat >>>>>>>>>>> which is >>>>>>>>>>> just enough interesting to generate a patent but not so interesting >>>>>>>>>>> it >>>>>>>>>>> causes the world to sit up and take notice. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Jun 2, 2014 at 9:12 AM, Blaze Spinnaker < >>>>>>>>>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> More and more I'm beginning to wonder if we're going to get a >>>>>>>>>>>> TIP report that shows something interesting, but nowhere >>>>>>>>>>>> guaranteeing the >>>>>>>>>>>> power densities shown in the first report. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> While I believe that Rossi believes he has something and that >>>>>>>>>>>> IH believes they have something and that there is no fraudulent >>>>>>>>>>>> behavior >>>>>>>>>>>> going on here, I think the truth is somewhere in the middle. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> And the middle is, yes energy, just not very exciting energy. >>>>>>>>>>>> And possibly, after some analysis, it could be just an impressive >>>>>>>>>>>> new >>>>>>>>>>>> source of chemical energy that's competitive perhaps with Rocket >>>>>>>>>>>> Fuel in >>>>>>>>>>>> the best case scenario, but in reality it's just competitive with >>>>>>>>>>>> optimal >>>>>>>>>>>> Geothermal. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> In this scenario, I consider the eCat not to have lived up to >>>>>>>>>>>> its promises which is why my estimate is around 35%. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, May 21, 2014 at 6:19 PM, Blaze Spinnaker < >>>>>>>>>>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Decreasing the probability to 31% based on smelly stock >>>>>>>>>>>>> offering. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> http://freeenergyscams.com/andrea-rossi-e-cat-hydro-fusion-cashing-in-before-the-collapse/ >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> HydroFusion is ran by Dr. Magnus Holm. Seems credible - but >>>>>>>>>>>>> why didn't he wait until after the report to ask for more money? >>>>>>>>>>>>> Why is >>>>>>>>>>>>> Rossi doing shout outs about Dr Holm? >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Andrea Rossi >>>>>>>>>>>>> May 18th, 2014 at 11:20 PM >>>>>>>>>>>>> <http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=848&cpage=1#comment-957368> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Orsobubu: >>>>>>>>>>>>> Thank you for your comment, that indroduces us to the paper >>>>>>>>>>>>> published today on the Journal of Nuclear Physics: >>>>>>>>>>>>> GEOMETRY OF STRING THEORY SOLITONS >>>>>>>>>>>>> by Dr Magnus Holm . It is an important work of this scientist >>>>>>>>>>>>> made in 1999, but I find his work dense of important information. >>>>>>>>>>>>> It is not >>>>>>>>>>>>> an easy reading, the work is rigorous, but this is the Journal of >>>>>>>>>>>>> Nuclear >>>>>>>>>>>>> Physics, and the paper is perfectly in line with the field of >>>>>>>>>>>>> application >>>>>>>>>>>>> of our Journal. Dr Magnus Holm is presently working also with me >>>>>>>>>>>>> for the >>>>>>>>>>>>> E-Cat. >>>>>>>>>>>>> About the comment of our friend Orsobubu: I do not share his >>>>>>>>>>>>> certainties regarding the so called “social sciences”. >>>>>>>>>>>>> Warm Regards, >>>>>>>>>>>>> A.R. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> This could be just really inane business strategy or perhaps >>>>>>>>>>>>> Magnus just doesn't have a good contract with Rossi/IH. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> For those who really believe in Rossi, my suggestion would be >>>>>>>>>>>>> to contact Hydro fusion and buy up as many shares as you possibly >>>>>>>>>>>>> can. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> I think everything comes down to this report that should be >>>>>>>>>>>>> coming over the next month. We could see a rise over over >>>>>>>>>>>>> 20-30% on the >>>>>>>>>>>>> basis of this report. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Another possibility is that the report may reveal a low COP >>>>>>>>>>>>> which is competitive only with geothermal and could be the result >>>>>>>>>>>>> of >>>>>>>>>>>>> uninteresting fuel sources. (which means a drop in probability of >>>>>>>>>>>>> 10% or so) >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Another (unlikely in my mind) possibility is that the report >>>>>>>>>>>>> will reveal that it doesn't do anything useful, which will be a >>>>>>>>>>>>> drop in 25%. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, May 12, 2014 at 10:41 PM, Blaze Spinnaker < >>>>>>>>>>>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Decreasing the probability to 35% based on shattering news of >>>>>>>>>>>>>> the Defkalion demo being completely worthless. I hesitate to >>>>>>>>>>>>>> say it, but >>>>>>>>>>>>>> It almost sounds like fraud is being implied. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://animpossibleinvention.com/2014/05/12/defkalion-demo-proven-not-to-be-reliable/ >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sun, May 11, 2014 at 5:03 PM, Blaze Spinnaker < >>>>>>>>>>>>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Decreasing probability to 46% based on lack of news from >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Nanor but up to 47% based on recent news from Darden in China: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://www.icebank.cn/news/detail_2.php?id=118 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> hat tip: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://www.e-catworld.com/2014/05/09/tom-darden-involved-in-opening-of-nickel-hydrogen-energy-research-center-in-tianjin-china/ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Note: I suspect there will be an up to (-30%, +15%) swing >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in probability when the june report comes out. Big news indeed. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sun, Feb 9, 2014 at 11:25 AM, Blaze Spinnaker < >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Increasing the probability to 47% on the basis on Nanor / >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> MIT videos. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Jan 24, 2014 at 3:42 PM, Blaze Spinnaker < >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Put that back to 43%: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mr. Darden earned an MRP in environmental planning from >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill,* a JD >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> from Yale Law School* and a BA from the University of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> North Carolina at Chapel Hill, where he was a Morehead >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Scholar. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Jan 24, 2014 at 3:22 PM, Blaze Spinnaker < >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Correction, make that 41%. It's not Cherokee but rather >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Tom Darden (investor, co founder of Cherokee) and Mr. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Vaughn (senior >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> analyst at Cherokee, BA Economics) who are the players here. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It'd be good to find out who those other investors are. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Jan 24, 2014 at 2:35 PM, Blaze Spinnaker < >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Increasing the probability to 44% on the basis of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Cherokee PR release. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Big big BIG news. Now this is no longer about Rossi, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> but about Cherokee. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I know you guys think I'm a git for my doubt, but hey, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> my model is waaaay ahead of the curve than the vast >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> majority of the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> investing universe. XOM is still trading near historical >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> highs, for >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> example. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Jan 16, 2014 at 12:39 PM, Blaze Spinnaker < >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Increasing the probability back to 35% based on the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> latest news coming out of BLP and McKubre. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hopefully we'll see some more encouraging things >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> soon. The next indie report on the ecat should be an >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> interesting >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> inflection report. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Jan 6, 2014 at 7:52 AM, Blaze Spinnaker < >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Fulvio , the tech Director & R.D. at Leonardo >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Corporation MIAMI - FL - USA previous job was: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> " Frelance Consultant >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <http://www.linkedin.com/search?search=&title=Frelance+Consultant&sortCriteria=R&keepFacets=true¤tTitle=CP&trk=prof-exp-title> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> European >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Gaming and Gambling Tech Market >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <http://www.linkedin.com/search?search=&company=European+Gaming+and+Gambling+Tech+Market&sortCriteria=R&keepFacets=true&trk=prof-exp-company-name> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> " >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -4% >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Now back to 31%. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Jan 6, 2014 at 6:21 AM, Blaze Spinnaker < >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> This is based on >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - STMicro patent (Increased about 4.5%) >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - Cherokee Investments (Increased about 2.5%) >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - Rossi stating third party reports in March >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (increased 2%) >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - Lack of news from Defkalion (-1%) >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> News seems to be coming in fairly rapidly at this >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> point. Could be updating this probability more >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> frequently. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> >> >
