FOIA Request of the Munson report about Rossi's thermoelectric claims

There are now so many replications now that I find it difficult to believe that they all, having in some cases been inspired by one another, are questionable since they all lead to similar results even with different devices. And one of these is the MFMP you mention, that thanks Parkhomov for some input, so lends him additional credibility IMHO. Of course, the more the merrier, and I know of several other groups in my neighbourhood working on that that will surely take the recipe and cook it.

As far as Rossi is concerned, I shared the doubts expressed by Shane D. and more, but I now try to explain them in other ways, since I no longer believe in a scam.

Giving a wrong address for the place where work was supposed to be done, might be justified by the risk that the N in LENR might attract unwanted attention, even though the phenomena are not those intended by nuclear safety as we' know it, and he's been verifying emissions in public tests and therefore being sure of the safety of it. Other contradicting declarations might just be due to spreading wrong information to put followers off the scent.

Was anybody ever able to determine how much DOE and / or DOD paid Leonardo / AEG for Rossi's thermoelectric generator project?

Quote

TEs, that Rossi (Leonardo Corp, Leonardo Technologies Inc.) provided the DOE (Dept of Energy), were in fact *never* tested.

This doesn't prove the guilt of Rossi at all. Such a testing is usually part of contract, which was never signed. This is like to say, that 1 MW unit provided to IH was never tested - why it should be, if it was completed just on IH demand.

These technologies aren't borrowed from stock piles, but developed according to customer needs.

LENR implies an alternative scientific paradigm that is just as persecuted as religious heresy and perversion has been in the worst historical examples of this reaction. It is almost as if the currently established scientific beliefs are religious in nature and these divinely revealed beliefs must be protected with extreme zeal where the ends justify the means just like divine revelation must be protected from the mischief inspired by the devil. The opposition that Galileo Galilei, Nicolaus Copernicus, and Charles Robert Darwin faced are born anew in a religious frenzy that LENR inspires with as much venom and misdirection as ever in this dawning of this new LENR age..

Nuff said. [Attempt at doxxing a forum member removed.] I just see ironic, when people who are lying about their identity get impertinent enough for to accuse other from frauds and lies.

My stance is, the public critics of particular publicly known persons should remain also publicly known - or their opinion has no merit from ethical issues.

Please respect other forum members' desire for anonymity. Eric

Zeph - where'd you dig that out from? Not interested in re-visiting Rossi's TE season, just trying to find out how much those guys got paid for their efforts.

However, if you'd like to wander over into the 1MW pre-Doral testing quadrant then I'm game - what's your point?

My point is this

Zeph - so you want to wander over into the Rossi ash salting controversy for the Uppsala fellows and drag Focardi along with you? Is that your signal?

Quote from Paradigmnoia

I wonder why a lawyer is involved in this request, and more so, why then only up to 50 bucks?
I hope there is no NDA attached to it.

Answers:

That's what lawyers are for.

$50 is a typical handling fee for any kind of document search. It is quite reasonable. They are not making a profit.

If there were an NDA they wouldn't give it to you in the first place. Many documents are secret and off-limits to the FOI act. Mostly for legit reasons such as the privacy of people who can be identified in medical studies, or detailed recent Census data.

Quote

Zeph - so you want to wander over into the Rossi ash salting controversy for the Uppsala fellows and drag Focardi along with you? Is that your signal?

Focardi worked with Piantelli long time and Piantelli has working - yet secret - technology. Therefore it's probable, A. Rossi has it too.

There is no reason for distrusting his claims prematurely.

Except that very same pattern exhibit all cold fusion researchers, including these most trustworthy ones. EvenHagelstein & Schwarz don't offer their NANOR commercially anymore.

This is because the premature revelation of IP can be as damaging at its future market, like the losing the support of investors at the case of delayed research.

Therefore the people who have no working cold fusion technology yet behave in the same way, like these successful ones, who are hiding their results from fear of competition.

Note that the Gartner hype curve pictured at the left is remarkably similar to the dark matter profile within galaxies and IMO it's typical behavior for findings,

which utilize extradimensions (less or more hidden connections) of established paradigms and thus behaving like the dark matter of mainstream.

The finding and improvements which utilize already well accepted and established paradigms exhibit much more convergent expectation curves similar to potential of normal gravity field.