Possibility of investment fraud

    • Official Post
    Quote from FrankCensor

    > But ask yourself: What would you do if you were the US government and you would suddenly find out about a guy like Rossi who has discovered such an effect and invented such a device?


    I would dump all my oil reserves on the market and try to get rid of them while oil is still worth something. Which would explain why the US is exporting oil these days. They don't have much left and yet they are producing and selling as much as possible around the world these days.


    I wouldn't accuse [lexicon]IH[/lexicon] of anything. Darden and Rossi gave completely different status reports in Italy a few months ago. I started a thread "he said she said" on this forum about that divergence of status. Rossi is talking mass manufacturing while Darden is saying some day over the rainbow. There is another motive for fraud to consider. Ever have friends who tell you exactly what you want to hear? They do it because they think they are doing good. Rossi may be on to something. Only it might be unstable and not ready for prime time. If he puts up a show and charade and pretends it is real this causes others to do research in that area. He may be blowing smoke so that other people and institutions will do something to try to figure out LENR.


    Thanks for the information, very interesting. I did not know this. Do you have a link to a website showing this export data/chart?


    You are right, it is another motive I haven't considered so far. This explains "unbinding inquiries" better than an investment fraud...


    But if you are right, this seems also very mind-boggling to me. Because look at all the efforts Rossi has expended since years for this illusion. If you are right he did this just to attract attention for LENR and make the world aware of it so they start to fund research? Maybe so.


    @AlainCo


    I used government as a collective term. I am aware of the components it consists of. Still, it seems absolutely impossible to me that, IF E-Cat is real, they would not become aware of this and would not as a consequence acquire it.


    @ 'all who said that if E-Cat is real, the ministry of defense would not acquire it because there are the "public laws" that would protect the E-Cat as Rossis invention '


    Please, stop making me laugh. I am rolling over the floor already.

    The vitality and attempts at LENR SSMs, ongoing in the e-cat community, have an exponentially positive affect on multiple successes. The fraud comes from greed and fear of those who stand to lose profit, position or reputation when the commercial product is offered, prior to any other source producing similar devices. The city in China, growing up around LENR, continues to build. The academia in Russia warms to the LENR postulations. To me fraud fades to testing repeatedly the ingredients and procedures, which, in due time (like soon after commercial introduction) bear fruit. When the means to have energy as abundant as other natural essentials (air, water, land, plants and animals) arrives, the world will change, for the better.

    [quote='Majorana','http://www.lenr-forum.com/forum/index.php/Thread/1793-Possibility-of-investment-fraud/?postID=5604#post5604']I still think that the e-cat is a source of energy.


    But let us assume for a moment that it is an investment fraud and think about the consequences of this assumption together with all that Rossi has shown to us.


    Am I then right to think that the E-cat is actually one of the biggest Investment frauds of the last years?


    What could be Rossis cheating strategy? Right now people can send "unbinding inquiries". And what would be the purpose of the "1 year E-cat test" then? Maybe just getting enough time?


    I think that if it is an investment fraud then Rossi and [lexicon]Industrial Heat[/lexicon] are working together to cheat the people. If it is, I think that the probability that Rossi is cheating [lexicon]Industrial Heat[/lexicon] is very low. Since they gave him 11 million USD he could have popped off after that.


    So probably Rossi and [lexicon]Industrial heat[/lexicon] are working together to cheat the people if it is a fraud.


    Furthermore, they spend money to bribe Essen, Hoistad and Parkhomov (who was probably the cheapest to bribe). Or just promised them to give them a share of the stolen money.


    Then Rossi was definitely anxious to build a lot of dummy devices and make photographs for many years and paying someone to write on his blo


    Parkhomov's replication expiemrnets are legitimate but, Rossi's claims of self sustaining reactions at the megawatt level haven been replicated by anyone else. And he backed off from his offer to shrare all of his data from the one year MW plant run. I think there's a definite scientific phenomeneon of COP bigger than one and LENR demonstrated but Rossi's claims are questionable.

    We have been seeing these arguments for years. If X, then Y, and since Y is not seen, or Y is implausible then not X. Many variants appear.


    If cold fusion is real, then 25 years of effort would have produced readily available commercial devices.


    If Rossi is a fraud, then the Lugano testers, [lexicon]Industrial Heat[/lexicon], Parkhomov et al, are in cahoots with him, which is implausible, and therefore Rossi is truthful.


    This last one contains several additional logical fallacies, not only the excluded middle, but also a series of incorporated assumptions, including that Parkhomov and others have confirmed Lugano and the Rossi Effect.


    "Fraud" is not just any untruthful claim or misleading statement. Fraud connotes that someone is deceived through claims known by the claimant to be false or materially misleading, who obtains a benefit thereby, to the specific detriment of another, who, based on these false or misleading claims, makes a purchase or investment or the like.


    Fraud is generally a criminal offense, though there can also be civil fraud. To obtain a conviction on criminal fraud, as I understand the matter, takes stronger evidence than to obtain a judgment in a civil case.


    Pseudoskeptics love to assert fraud. It's a cheap shot, and may be impossible to disprove. With Rossi, it is especially easy, based on interpretations of his past, it is commonly asserted that Rossi is a convicted fraud. That is misleading. My firm personal summary: maybe, maybe not. The Petrol Dragon affair is enormously complex, and Rossi was convicted of technical violations, and people argue about whether or not those were dismissed, etc. As to the thermoelectric converter affair, Rossi failed to deliver. Failure to deliver happens for many possible reasons. Bottom line: in that affair, Rossi was not charged or convicted of fraud.


    Should investors be careful with Rossi because of his history? Of course! But we can derive no definitive conclusions from what is public about this, so far.


    Then, as to investment accepted by Rossi, we do not have critical details, specifically the involved agreements and conditions. If no investors in Rossi, where Rossi obtained a benefit, have been defrauded, there is no fraud, even if Rossi, in his public statements, is completely misleading.


    So most of us are interested in this question because we have hopes for LENR. Those hopes are irrelevant, and they can mislead us. We see example after example where "believers" scour Rossi's statements, attempting to derive information from them that often exists only in fantasy.


    For example, does an e-Cat require some particular waveform, or is the input power only for heating the device to operating temperature? There is substantial, but circumstantial, evidence for the latter, I won't go over it, but when Rossi was asked about the input power requirements, he replied according to the specific design of his control system: AC power. And then we have seen the usual pile of claims about this, as if Rossi had confirmed "special input power requirements."


    Then there the "independent confirmations." The Lugano test is widely recognized -- by LENR scientists -- to have been a disaster. The best opinion I have seen on it considers that test inconclusive. The isotopic shift results, there, were most impressive. And not fully independent, because Rossi easily could have created those results. No collusion necessary, just a lack of understanding of what is conclusive and what is not.


    Does Rossi have a motive to be deceptive in his public announcements and demonstrations and the like? This would not be fraud. Major corporations have announced products in development, completely false operations designed to mislead competitors. Public corporations might have a legal problem with this, but private corporations would not.


    Of course Rossi has a possible motive, even a likely one. We do not know for sure why Rossi announced in 2011. The public statements have been that it was as a favor to Focardi. However, there is an obvious business motive: to attract possible investment. However, if investment is controlled and covered by specific agreements with investors, the publicity could be entirely misleading.


    Then there is the other side. It is a common opinion among those knowledgeable about LENR that if conclusive evidence of reality of an effect on a commercial scale appears, investment floodgates will open. By providing conclusive evidence -- such as fully independent testing by experts with relevant expertise -- Rossi would create a flood of completion. Consider what would have happened if he had done this in 2011. There might be competing products on the market today.


    The "independent professors" allowed by Rossi to test his device included none with truly relevant expertise, specifically in calorimetry. Being a "professor of nuclear physics" provides no relevant expertise, only a general knowledge of physics. Experts in calorimetry have volunteered their services, it has all been rejected.


    So ... what we want to know, is the Rossi effect real? Is he on the verge of releasing a commercial product?


    The following is my speculation, based on watching Rossi since 2011.


    Rossi found an effect, as have many. He determined to scale up, which was always risky, because of the famous unreliability of cold fusion. He was not able to make the effect reliable, at least not at first. We have no data on reliability, only best-result claims. So he is buying time for development with his strategy.


    He will announce whatever serves his purposes, and withhold whatever information might make the matter completely clear.


    And believers and pseudoskeptics will run around in circles, creating little or nothing of value.


    There is serious work being done by MFMP. They may or may not find an effect, other than the Bang effect. However, more is made of certain MFMP results than they warrant, and in some cases, shoddy work, predictable failures, are being lauded as "excellent work." Major XP will show as an increase in power that appears at initiation temperature. When results show apparent XP that increases relatively uniformly with temperature, there is a ready appearance of systematic error. In a recent test, the "control" experiment, an unfueled cell, was differently supported from the test cell, in a way that would change cooling rate, so, no surprise, that cell ran cooler than the test cell, uniformly across the full temperature range of the experiment.


    Further, a cell that is cracking and ready to fail may shift in its response to power, and thermocouples may be damaged (as well as heating elements). Talking with experts, I see a uniform recommendation: use an oven to heat the cells, do not incorporated heating elements in the cells themselves. There are ways to instrument test cells to see, then, if there is local heat generation and to measure how much; this requires a controlled temperature environment. An oven. A tube furnace can be made to do the same thing, key is temperature control of the oven in ways that are independent of what is happening with the cell.


    If the cells make XP, then, this will show in temperature rises in instrumentation thermocouples, properly placed (and kept away from hot hydrogen, nasty stuff). As well, manor XP may show in lowered oven heating necessary to maintain temperature.


    Having multiple sources of information on cell activity is crucial in this work.

    The use of an oven rather than a heater is a great idea. Rossi will never do it or allow it with his devices. So is the concept of proper calibration over the entire operating temperature range, which Rossi has NEVER allowed. There is no evidence whatever that Rossi's devices have ever produced excess heat. There is only evidence for fraud and bad measurements. Rossi's devices are nothing but elaborate electrical heaters and his results come from a variety of deceptions which the observers and investigators do not have the qualifications or ability to detect. It's really that simple. In his entire documented career, Rossi has accomplished nothing but environmental disaster and fraud. When carefully examined and analyzed, in the manner that Giancarlo, Thomas Clarke, Andrea Calaon, and several others have done, the latest performances are entirely compatible with this and little else. I do not think [lexicon]IH[/lexicon] is complicit-- they are simply marks (targets of Rossi's scams) and not very bright ones at that.

    > Because look at all the efforts Rossi has expended since years for this illusion.


    I'm sure the guy sweats from all the work.


    10AM: visit gym look at women 30-40 years younger than his wife working out, maybe lift a 2 lb. barbell or two to give the appearance of a real sport
    12 Noon: lunch at the country club
    2PM: log on and answer one or two questions Frank has on some forum
    4PM: drinks at the country club


    Frank does the rest. He eats up and publicizes anything and everything Rossi says. Runs interference. Censors malcontents on his network.


    As for the Lugano report. There is a "dead men tell no tales" plaque on the 1MW production ecat model. That guy did all the key work if anybody asks.

    Keeps the dollar with >$700T in fraudulent derivatives equities as the world currency reserve. "Pay no attention to the man behind the Federal Reserve curtain."


    You read constantly about how another collapse is coming. This time it's student loans. Last time it was mortgages. My dentist recently told me about a kid who had just graduated from dental school, expectred to get married, open his own practice, have kids, etc. This kid didn't think twice about the answer when my dentists asked how much he owed in student loans - $650,000. Banking is the best legal stealing scam ever invented. You get to loan the same fake money (well, it was once backed by gold when the Medicis started the game) NINE times. And, in this crazy world of ours, the more debt a bank has on it's books, the more assets it can claim to have. BECAUSE the assumption is that the debtor will repay those loans. Until the house of cards starts to crumble, and we pay off the too big to fail / too big to jail bankers who both literally and figuratively own the U.S. government.


    The big boys have been at every ICCF from Day 1.


    Want "table top fusion" on your own table for <$100? Get a spark inducer, coat some aluminum foil with aluminum oxide and fire the spark inducer. You will blow holes in the aluminum foil (with condensed charge clusters of electrons compressed beyond the Coulomb Barrier by van der Waals forces (aka Casimir forces) and emitted by the spark inducer. According to the late Ken Shoulders, who wrote the paper on this very subject called "Charge Clusters in Action," (attached) the conventional thermal gradient required to do what you just did by literally blowing a hole through aluminum would require 26,000 degrees C. All you have to do is read the abstract and have a scanning electron microscope (SEM) to prove it (which Ken happened to have access to to show the pictures in the paper) and the technical knowledge of what the equivalent thermal gradient to blow holes through aluminum that size is.


    Ken personally told me the spark has been studied ad infinitum. It's what happens in the metal just before the spark is emitted that has been completely overlooked and THERE is the real "root phenomenon" to cold fusion.


    As Dr. Fulvio Frisone concluded his paper on microcracks on AND BELOW the electrode surface, with the associated globs of transmuted elements next to them, "no microcracks, no cold fusion."


    When I asked Ken Shoulders why the cold fusion community ignore his "fracto-emissions", he replied that it's too simple. "They all want something more complicated" Ken Shoulders was a co-inventor at Xerox Park @ Stanford ( 4 people) who invented the quadropole mass spectrometer, ubiquitous in science today. You could say he knew something about the structure of atoms and their dynamics, even if he can demonstrate to you that virtually anyone, anywhere, can create the heat required for a fusion reaction on their desktop for under $100 worth of equipment. They just won't have the SEM or the ability and knowledge of how to translate the amount of energy required to achieve that phenomenon.


    The cold fusion community considered him a crackpot. Let's see now, if the cold fusion community itself are considered crackpots, does that make him an order of magnitude crackpot or a derivative crackpot? Or, was he simply trying to point the way to solve the problem that the cold fusion community has been dancing around for the past 25 years, expecting different results? I sure hope somebody gets it right, but, rest assured, the big players have been there from Day 1, regardless of what anyone tells you. See also Ken's paper, "Energy Conversion From the Exotic Vacuum Revised". In the abstract, Ken claimed the root phenomenon for ALL forms of cold fusion was charge clusters (although by then he was calling them Exotic Vacuum Objects.) When I asked two scientist from Los Alamos in 2003 at ICCF-10 why they ignored Ken's "fracto-emissions," they both laughed and said they knew him. but he had never explained them in the language they speak, mathematics. I related this story to Ken, who was also @ ICCF-10. Several months later the "revised" version came out with the mathematics. This version was co-authored by Dr. Jack Sarfatti. The cold fusion community continues to ignore Ken's work even today.


    This stuff is all on the internet


    Oh yes, and what happened at MIT's Lincoln Lab? Read the late Dr. Eugene Mallove's 57-pg treatise on the subject (attached.) He was there and resigned his very prestigious position at Lincoln Lab when he witnessed political science 101, the politics of science. The team was instructed to come up with a negative report. Don't believe me. Read Gene's first-hand account.


    I think it's fair to say that anything of any value out there is being manipulated, even if the value is hype.



    Quote from FrankCensor

    I don't buy the investment fraud scenario. I also don't buy 95% of what Rossi says. That does not mean I think he is running a scam. The way these small start ups make money is to sell their whole operation to a big fish. Big companies are usually public and this will force a level of quality assurance in such a sale. This technology is worth hundreds of billions if not trillions of dollars. Any CEO who squanders huge wads of cash on something that is not thoroughly vested and vetted could face serious jail time. In this paradigm the small company never admits that they are going to sell out to big company. They have a "party line" that states that they will manufacture the devices themselves. They might know perfectly well and good that is hogwash. They nevertheless proclaim that is their desire and plans. Dummies like Frank buy this party line and eat it up. So if this is a business then that would be their angle. I said if it is a business. If it is a fraud then their motive would be to political. Transparency International rates the Scandinavian countries to be the least corrupt. What better than to hire a group from that part of the world to test and verify the device. Only problem is I would trust the Nigerians more than the Swedes. Every time I go to Home Depot I pass Securitas guards. Top secret US installations are guarded by Swedish security firms like Pinkerton and such. There is a black side to that country that most people don't know about. I don't trust them as far as I can shake a stick. They also have a bug about the arctic resources competition with Russia. Russia's economy is very dependent on fossil fuels. Some clown coming out and saying they have a device that can cripple Russia's economy is a powerful motive for fraud. Every time I fill my tank up with $3 gas I wonder why it isn't $5 any more and if that has any relation to what is going on with LENR?

    Hello Maryyugo. I definitely admire your perspicacity. I believe I have you on this one but knowing you I'm guessing you'll prove me wrong. It seems your current model is Rossi fraud/Darden+Vaughn duped. Given that, I would invite you to consider this. We hear persistant whisperings from Rossi and others that the industrial installation in North Carolina is showing significant interim findings of energy gain.My logic would be as follows 1) Darden would be aware of the murmurings that the 1MW reactor is showing a positive energy balance 2) Darden would have the responsibility to [lexicon]Industrial Heat[/lexicon] and his investors to investigate whether this is so. 3)The chief engineer at the plant where the Rossi reactor is installed would be in a position at this point to say whether the process upon which the reactor is being deployed is using less electricity since the reactor was started up. 4)If Darden asked the chief engineer whether he was needing less electricity, the engineer would probably give him a straight answer 5) If the engineer told him there was no reduction in electic power use, then Darden would have a strong reason to believe that he was being duped. In the medical field, when a clinical trial is being carried out, and an interim analysis is showing a strongly negative effect, the trial is called off because it would be unethical to continue. If four months into the Rossi reactor trial there is no evidence of net energy gain, then Darden would have the ethical and perhaps legal duty to the investors to say something about it and pull the plug. What say you Marryyugo?

    Quote from Mary Yugo

    No, we don't agree. I think [lexicon]Industrial Heat[/lexicon], Darden and Vaughn are victims of Rossi's fraud, not co-conspirators. There is no reason why they would willingly participate in fraud while Rossi has every reason and his background as a con-man has to be considered. Darden and Vaughn are probably dreamers and they did not do due diligence. They supposedly hired an independent scientist to review Rossi's claims but what if it was some fool like Jim Dunn or Nelson or any one of many scientists who have fallen for Rossi's obvious scamming? That's what I think happened. Darden and Vaughn may be great business people but they are ignorant of the scientific method, controlled experiments, and the need to test extraordinary claims thoroughly by completely independent means.


    If Rossi was credible, large companies such as Tesla, GM, GE, Google and others, would be ALL OVER IT. And the government can not stop independent research, especially not secretly! If it tried, the whole thing would be in court immediately. Anyway, nobody seems to be stopping the silly Swedes and nobody is stopping Rossi from squatting in his electrically heated container for a year!

    @stevehigh


    I have no idea what Darden knows or cares about. See the link from marydh above for what happened when nuclear inspectors tried to check Rossi's customer and factory. My suspicion is that Rossi has a container somewhere in which he conducts experiments and then gives bogus results to Darden. I doubt there is a real customer and there is certainly nothing to suggest that there is your hypothetical engineer to check Rossi's numbers! There is also no evidence that Rossi's device is finished or that it can provide energy to any process. Finally, if Darden really wanted to know if the ecat worked, there would be no need to have Rossi assemble a hundred subunits to be checked by whether or not they decrease the power needed in an industrial process.


    If you don't IMMEDIATELY recognize how incredibly stupid this idea is, there is little point in engaging you in discourse. What Darden would do, if he were honest, diligent and intelligent, would be to commission some truly independent experts who are truly experts (in thermodynamics and fluid flow physics and engineering) to take ONE subunit of Rossi's "plant" and test it on a test bench, using a properly designed and calibrated calorimeter. And another unbelievable stupidity is that it takes a year to do a test like that. It would take a running time of maybe two weeks to rule out without a doubt that anything other than nuclear energy was responsible for a robust heat output. Of course, in four years, Rossi has never allowed such tests because he knows full well that they would show his device to be nothing but an electrical heater, powered by the mains.


    Important: do not base any conclusions on anything Rossi says! He is a convicted felon (a criminal) and he is also a serial liar. Or maybe you believe, among other things, that Rossi is building robotic factories for millions of ecats per year, that he sold a dozen or more megawatt plants to the US military, that he can generate nickel isotopes very cheaply, and any number of other absurd claims he's made on his ridiculous web blog and in interviews.


    Hope that settles the issue for you. Why do I doubt it?


    Anyway, testing in a so-called factory makes no sense whatever. Neither does running for a year. And the hot cat makes no sense either. It is less efficient and less powerful than the much smaller, simpler and safer old ecat. If you believe the "tests" by Levi, Kullander, Essen and Lewan anyway. Of course, none of those tests stands up to any close examination whatever.


    When something doesn't make sense, look for a scam. As a scam artist in a movie once accurately claimed, "It's the part of a scam you don't get which will get you."


    Thus far I think I understand and agree with with post.

    Quote


    "Fraud" is not just any untruthful claim or misleading statement. Fraud connotes that someone is deceived through claims known by the claimant to be false or materially misleading, who obtains a benefit thereby, to the specific detriment of another, who, based on these false or misleading claims, makes a purchase or investment or the like.


    Fraud is generally a criminal offense, though there can also be civil fraud. To obtain a conviction on criminal fraud, as I understand the matter, takes stronger evidence than to obtain a judgment in a civil case.


    The general idea here - that there are many gradations of falsehood and dishonesty - and generalising all as frau=d is unhelpful - I agree. In fact I specifically insist on it.

    Quote


    Pseudoskeptics love to assert fraud. It's a cheap shot, and may be impossible to disprove. With Rossi, it is especially easy, based on interpretations of his past, it is commonly asserted that Rossi is a convicted fraud. That is misleading. My firm personal summary: maybe, maybe not. The Petrol Dragon affair is enormously complex, and Rossi was convicted of technical violations, and people argue about whether or not those were dismissed, etc. As to the thermoelectric converter affair, Rossi failed to deliver. Failure to deliver happens for many possible reasons. Bottom line: in that affair, Rossi was not charged or convicted of fraud.


    I don't like this. Maybe MY is asserting fraud. But many, based on the facts, will argue one or other of:
    (a) fraud is quite likely, given the history
    (b) fraud is possible, and certainly NOT extraordinarily unlikely
    (c) things that look like fraud could have multiple explanations based on delusion and irrational behaviour.


    All of these support the [not pseudo] skeptic case.


    Quote


    Should investors be careful with Rossi because of his history? Of course! But we can derive no definitive conclusions from what is public about this, so far.


    You are saying that we cannot prove Rossi is dishonest/delusional. Maybe not, but if you connect the dots he certainly would have to be very weird to act as he does if not dishonest/delusional.

    Quote


    Then, as to investment accepted by Rossi, we do not have critical details, specifically the involved agreements and conditions. If no investors in Rossi, where Rossi obtained a benefit, have been defrauded, there is no fraud, even if Rossi, in his public statements, is completely misleading.


    That is true. Fraud is remarkably difficult to prove. It is also irrelevant for people here. Whether Rossi is fraudulent or delusional or some combination it does not really matter.


    So this argument is waht "smart" rossi fans must adopt.


    It goes like this: Rossi has commercial reasons to want to appear a flake. therefore even though he appears a flake maybe he is for real.


    The problem here is that there is no a priori likelihood Rossi is for real. In fact we require extraordinarily good evidence for his extraordinary claims. Therefore an argument that maybe he could be rationally engaged in an elaborate misdirection policy, while logically not excluding Rossi is for real, keeps this at its original extraordinarily unlikely level.

    Quote


    So ... what we want to know, is the Rossi effect real? Is he on the verge of releasing a commercial product?


    The following is my speculation, based on watching Rossi since 2011.


    Rossi found an effect, as have many. He determined to scale up, which was always risky, because of the famous unreliability of cold fusion. He was not able to make the effect reliable, at least not at first. We have no data on reliability, only best-result claims. So he is buying time for development with his strategy.


    That may all be true. But what you must also consider is that this "effect" can easily (ordinarily) be experimental error. Its characteristics exactly match that. And, of course, because it always exists, in many forms, many others will have found it.


    The fact that MFMP does its work and does not find anything real is evidence that gets stronger the longer they work.


    Brian Aherne was going to use an oven - I'm pretty sure. I expect that he tried this, and got a null result, and as is normal in the LENR world did not make a fuss about it. LENR cannot be disproven by any number of null results.

    Quote from Mary Yugo

    @stevehigh


    I have no idea what Darden knows or cares about. See the link from Mary above for what happened when nuclear inspectors tried to check Rossi's customer and factory. My suspicion is that Rossi has a container somewhere in which he conducts experiments and then gives bogus results to Darden. I doubt there is a real customer and there is certainly nothing to suggest that there is your hypothetical engineer to check Rossi's numbers!


    Rossi is capable of convincing a set of apparently competent and independent scientists that he has a device capable of energy generation. He has done it twice. We are sure of the mechanism the second time. As MY pointed out there is strong evidence (the mystery wire and the cheese mechanism) of what it was the first time.


    It is a lot easier for Rossi to delude a customer who will be less engineering-oriented, and less critical, and less independent. So whatever the results from this test it adds very little evidence.

    Ok....so you are saying that you think there is no 1MW Rossi reactor being tested in an industrial plant overseen by a chief engineer who would have data as to how the thing is performing? I agree anything is possible, but wouldn't that move Darden from the catagory of Dupee to Co-conspirator Fraudster. I mean Darden has supported Rossi and publicly acknowledged that this long term test is taking place. Darden the venture capitalist with fiduciary responsibility to his investors. Don't you think this will result in Darden doing the "perp walk" next to Rossi? Just trying to understand your thinking. I do agree that your proposal of how Rossi's reactor should have been tested sounds sensible.

    Quote from stevehigh

    Ok....so you are saying that you think there is no 1MW Rossi reactor being tested in an industrial plant overseen by a chief engineer who would have data as to how the thing is performing? I agree anything is possible, but wouldn't that move Darden from the catagory of Dupee to Co-conspirator Fraudster. I mean Darden has supported Rossi and publicly acknowledged that this long term test is taking place. Darden the venture capitalist with fiduciary responsibility to his investors. Don't you think this will result in Darden doing the "perp walk" next to Rossi? Just trying to understand your thinking. I do agree that your proposal of how Rossi's reactor should have been tested sounds sensible.


    I think I'm probably saying rather less than you are, because I separate assumptions from facts.


    However, re [lexicon]IH[/lexicon] let me refer you to Darden's ICCF speech when he clearly stated that he gave money to Rossi/[lexicon]IH[/lexicon] for long-term development with no close scrutiny and that this was but one of many such investments, that he hoped eventually something would pan out. It is clear from his tone and also the reality that [lexicon]IH[/lexicon] = Rossi + funding from Darden essentially given to Rossi.


    Does Darden lose anything because one of his high risk high reward investments does not pan out? Of course not, VCs expect that 2 out of 3 (9 out of 10?) of their investments will fail. So it has always been, and VCs have made many stupid investments before.


    As for a customer with a chief engineer then there are too many ways this could work out:


    (1) Rossi could have some way to make it seem like his plant was helping, when it was not. That could in principle go as far as jinxing supply meters but I've noticed that Rossi's errors are often a lot more subtle than that.


    (2) Rossi's plant could be so small a part of total plant energy that supply meters will not tell whether it works - natural variation - climate - etc will provide noise larger than Rossi's claimed output. In that case Rossi could have some way of calculating how well his plant is doing that any Chief Engineer as credulous as 6 Profs would belief was correct, that was in fact incorrect.


    (3) The whole customer thing could be artificial, with no independent scrutiny from an independent chief engineer. That is likely.


    There are probably a few other options. The point is that we get no validation Rossi has anything working from the reams of PR coming off his blog.

    @stevehigh


    If Darden was honest and diligent and Rossi really had something, Darden would be more specific. He would have said that Rossi has an ongoing test in which a real customer, who purchased a megawatt Rossi plant from [lexicon]IH[/lexicon], is being tested and an independent engineer (or team) is evaluating the result. He might have tried to justify the ridiculous assertion that such a test takes a year! He might have mentioned what the preliminary test results showed (you MUST have some after months of testing). He might have said which regulatory groups had examined the device and what they said about possible authorization and licensing for industrial use. He might have projected when the plant would be available for viewing (why not now?) and when additional units would be available for delivery (Rossi has been saying four month deliver since November 2011!). He might have asked Rossi and the professors to respond specifically to allegations by Thomas Clarke and others that the Lugano and all previous tests are deeply flawed and perhaps fraudulent. He might have explained why Cherokee's CFO had no idea who Rossi was! He might have said why nuclear regulatory inspectors had not been taken to the "factory of the customer of [lexicon]IH[/lexicon]" as they had asked to be and had the right to be. He might have done any one of MANY other things to give the reality of Rossi's ridiculous claims more credibility.


    Instead, he made vague, typical CEO bullsh*t statements about generalities-- meaningless generalities -- without addressing a single real issue. Darden doesn't have the time to keep up with details of Rossi's "work" and as Thomas Clarke points out, he probably doesn't much care whether Rossi succeeds or goes down in flames. For Cherokee, $10M is a minor investment, one which I suspect both Darden and Vaughn now regret but one which they are willing to allow to proceed to some conclusion. In other words, I think both men are willing to provide enough rope for Rossi to hang himself with. And that is exactly what will happen at the end. So to you, Steve, I say F9 which is Rossi's idiotic "macro" for "the results can be positive or negative". It's his new mantra.


    Now YOU tell ME: Does it make sense after four years of continuous testing (as per Rossi) and claimed sales to the US military and development of several models and testing by prestigious professors and universities (again Rossi claims) -- does it make sense that after all that, we need a year of testing in some obscure unknown factory by unknown people and the results can be positive or negative? Like... REALLY? Explain to me why that makes sense please.

Subscribe to our newsletter

It's sent once a month, you can unsubscribe at anytime!

View archive of previous newsletters

* indicates required

Your email address will be used to send you email newsletters only. See our Privacy Policy for more information.

Our Partners

Supporting researchers for over 20 years
Want to Advertise or Sponsor LENR Forum?
CLICK HERE to contact us.