Poll: Should we ban Rossi-related discussions?

  • Wouldn't Mills -that darned other unending scam!- be closer? He's been designing reactors for a decade and a half now, and they seem very solid

    Mills state of development is at the reactor meltdown stage that Rossi was at 5 years ago. Mills needs to figure out how to control the megawhat reaction that he now understands cannot be caused by chemistry. He needs to discard his hydrino theory and replace it with LENR. That change will be hard for him, he might be incapable of such an ego killing act...time will tell. Love of a theory is the strongest love of all.

  • Why is everybody talking of censorship??

    One thread is enough for the therapeutic support of all the people, who need this (a hundred times repeated) Rossi- socio/psychological - crap!

    The problem is we can't find the real information anymore because everywehre (in any thread) we encounter this Rossi "pipi" smell.
    Either LENR is a physical effect or a social event. This has to be separated clearly!

  • Frankwtu:


    Yes, I agree but this must be applied to all sides of the discussion, not just the anti Rossi stuff, do you agree?

    Sure, the same methods can be applied to all sides of the discussion. I don't recall that I ever asked anyone to take my claims about Rossi's criminal history, his cheating the DOD with the thermoelectric devices, or the poor methods he used to test and demo ecats, on faith! I always provided evidence, at least in the initial discussions. And the fact remains, Rossi has no proven record of any accomplishment whatever, ever. Or do you see anything he invented or discovered actually for sale to anyone who can be interviewed anywhere and at any time?

    Jed Rothwell:


    Okay, prove it. Let us see you stick your neck out, be bold, and predict a difficult but important success.

    I really don't know what you want me to predict other than the usual dime a dozen futurist stuff about what medical research, robots, and computer are going to do for us in the future. I think the energy issue will eventually be solved or at least mitigated. Perhaps by renewable sources, perhaps by a new generation of fission reactors, perhaps by hot fusion, perhaps by something we have no idea about now but I doubt it will be cold fusion/LENR. I have nothing good to predict about LENR because I have yet to see one convincing high power demo that has been properly confirmed and replicated and is available for scrutiny. I asked you about this in the past and you gave me some papers. I did find one, JUST ONE, and unfortunately I forgot which, among those you gave me, which suggested that there really was high power and the experiment was properly blanked and calibrated. But I searched and could not find any follow up! If someone really got hundreds of watts of excess power from a small input with LENR, how could it be that nobody followed up and did it a second time? Not even the same people! So, no, I can't predict anything at all for LENR.


    Are you willing to justify your belief in something that most scientists dismiss? Or are you the kind of person who only kicks those who are already down. I get a sense you are that kind of bully, who enjoys being right when most people agree with you, and when you would be readily forgiven if it turned out you were wrong.I suggest you try taking an unpopular stand on some issue that matters. See how it feels.

    Obviously, Jed, you have no idea about the research and development I've done over the years. I doubt it's of interest here, but if you want to know the particulars, contact me at maryyugo [at symbol] yahoo [dot] com. I have been involved with many projects which were revolutionary at the time. Some worked out. Most, sadly, did not work out in the form I had to work with though all eventually resulted in products and results, albeit by other people. My basic work and that of my colleagues is still frequently cited but when it was done, it was stuff few were doing and few expected to succeed. In fact, I was too much ahead of my time for my own good. So yes, I worked in unpopular and little explored areas before many other people did. So what? How does this bear of the veracity of people like Rossi, Defkalion, Brillouin, Miley, etc. etc.?

    As many do, you are placing the blame for the abject failure of LENR and cold fusion on the critics. The real problem, however, is that people in the field give credence to con men like those with Defkalion and Rossi and don't properly test them before advocating them or giving them money. No wonder the bottom drops out and people lose interest. The problem with LENR is the lack of rigor, the lack of reproducibility, and the lack of reliable high power results.

    You asked me to make predictions? I predict that Brillouin, Nanospire, Miley, Swartz, and other current claimants to moderate to high power LENR will fail you. I see nothing to suggest that they can perform as they claim. Maybe they can, I am not saying it's impossible. But with the evidence in hand now, I just don't see it. And of course, Rossi will go down in flames when his legal contortions have run their course. That Rossi and Defkalion were con schemes was extremely obvious early on. I am amazed that LENR enthusiasts failed to see through their bravado, contradictions, failures to test properly and publicly and their lies. And I deplore the banning, stalking and personal attacks that believers used to thwart and attack skeptics and critics.

    Like most skeptics, I very much wish LENR were real. It would be interesting and wonderful. I just don't believe it is real at high power but for the lowest power level claims, I simply don't know. I can't read and understand those claims so I simply have no opinion on them, preferring to stick with the high power claims where I have the expertise and background to evaluate at least some of the claimed results.

  • Results of polls may depend critically on the questions. Here, we have at this point:


    No, let everything as is (80)50%

    Yes, but NOT completely, for e.g. open one thread for discussions of new developments (70)44%

    Yes, ban it completely (9)

    The real problem on lenr-forum, in my analysis, is lack of thread discipline. Part of this is due to site software structure. Threads are linear, and all posts are treated and displayed equally (unless one has blocked a user). There is no distinct comment structure. I.e, if I write a post on a Rossi v. Darden development, someone might comment that I'm allegedly a "paid FUDder." That is not on the topic, but is a comment on a post. A deep solution would require software changes. Short of that, it is possible to enforce topic discipline. the basic proposal here generated an equally divided community, in fact.

    "One thread" would require constant intervention to close multiple threads, but multiple threads are not the problem, except where these threads actually overlap. "Rossi" is far too large a topic to confine to one thread. So the proposed solution was not precisely what could help. It would require far too much intrusive adminstrator action.

    Administrators apparently have the power to move posts to new threads or perhaps other threads. If a new thread is an obvious duplication of an old one, it is possible that threads could be merged. When a post is moved to another thread, it could be replaced by a pointer. However, this is all work for an administrator. My own suggestion, to enforce thread focus, is not practical if there is no available labor to enforce and implement it. Simply deleting or closing threads can cause resentment among users. Organizing is far less likely to do this.

    Lenr-forum.com will, I hope, look to the future. The Rossi affair is a huge disappointment for many (and others believe it is an example of major repression). However, this forum was founded with a broader mission than "Rossi LENR." LENR is real, I'm adequately convinced of that. But without the Rossi Hope, it's not a near reality. Are we in this for the long term?

  • No need to ban a topic. If someone does not want to see something just don't click on the thread.

    Perhaps just do something simple like require all such
    "Rossi topics" to be labels with a title that starts with "Rossi". Then it would be clear if the thread was
    Rossi related or not. It also would allow for spam filters to screen them if someone emails the info.

  • The Rossi Effect is LENR. There is no other publicly disclosed technologies that come close the the power densities reported by Rossi and the successful replicators of his effect. A thousand watts per gram of active fuel is at a bare minimum a magnitude of power density above all his competitors -- especially when even Brillouin is showing power densities with the ratio of one watt per one gram of fuel. Power densities similar to the "Rossi Effect" have been demonstrated briefly during uncontrollable transitory exothermic events, but not as a more or less standard performance metric. Combine that with the fact Rossi that one of the newer iterations of his technology utilizes only nickel and lithium (unlike some of his earlier work with more expensive elements) and the technology becomes economically viable. This isn't the case with palladium until we get asteroid mining operations going. Then we'll be able to have an all you can eat buffet of any element we need for industrial purposes.

    I'm convinced that the Rossi Effect is absolutely real. Other's think differently. However, if the Rossi Effect doesn't work and isn't real, LENR is a non-starter for the near term. No high-powered LENR technology even close to the performance of the E-Cat will likely emerge for decades. If I were to put a super-cynical naysayer hat on for a moment, I'd even say that LENR would be no more likely to produce a high powered viable product than billion dollar "hot fusion" programs. In that situation -- in which the E-Cat never existed at all and was only one massive fraud -- the only benefit of LENR over "hot fusion" would be the cost of research. If either hot fusion or cold fusion needed to be studied -- since true success with either one would be a toss up -- I'd say give the funds to LENR because you could accomplish a hundred or a thousand times the research.

    I think banning or limiting discussion of E-Cat related topics would be out right ridiculous.

    And, for the record, I'm not here for the "long term."

    My interest in LENR was reinvigorated by the E-Cat technology. If the E-Cat technology successfully makes it into the marketplace in a big way, then I'll be ready to move on to another topic I'm interested in. If the E-Cat technology doesn't make it into the marketplace due to the legal battle with I.H. then I'll refocus my attention onto other energy technologies. For the record, if the legal battle with I.H. resulted in the E-Cat technology never being commercialized by Andrea Rossi, I'm NOT saying that would be an act of suppression. If all of the bold claims of I.H. are proven to be factually true beyond any doubt (everything was one giant scam with no customer, no manufacturing, an actor for an engineer, opening of sealed components, totally faked invoices, no connection to Johnson Matthey) then Andrea Rossi would deserve *any* consequence dished out by the court. He wouldn't deserve to ever be allowed to participate in any business endeavor ever again. The squashing of his ability to ever work on the E-Cat again would be JUSTICE. If Andrea Rossi was put out of business without these accusations being proven, then my opinion would be VERY different. Suppression could have taken place.

  • How about we consider this:

    Barty and Abd-Rahman both are restricted from posting regarding Rossi.

    Barty to emotional and Abd is an admitted agent for IH seeking out any negativity
    he can find on Rossi, we all know in advance of anything Abd writes so whats the point.

  • Some people instead of accusing some long time LENR supporters or being bought by evil forces (I'm proudly among them), should rather wonder why they believes in a so improbable and absurd conspiracy , while not considering a so simple and clear and predictable conspiracy.

    I know it is painful to admit, especially 2 times, that you supported the wrong guys, especially if warned, but that is life. it happens.
    This have no relation to old-style PdD, which despite some dubious individual results, is globally doubtless.

  • Yes, Rossi had his chance, long enough. We have been fair, patient, loyal, we believed and some even supported him.

    What do we get back ?

    Nothing else then another "keep them waiting" strategy.

    I really think, he should explain himself, and I think, if he is interested in a community backing him up, then he will find those people, here, and
    also on some other pages.

    And so I assume, he should be following up, what his (former) supporters are thinking about his actions, which more and more look like playing all those, which have been loyal all the time.

    And not even that, there is more to it:

    If any replicator is really even more open about his/her attempts, Rossi's actions just are destroying the credibility of possible real LENR researchers.

    Seperate one thread, only to Rossi, so that other replicators are not mixed up with the fraudulent Rossi.

    So, Rossi is allowed to loose his credibility as much as he wants to, this will at least not affect the other LENR-supporters.

  • DRM,

    We may be serious in following the legal battle, but keeping up on the supposed QuarkX, new customer, developments is only for entertainment purposes. So allowing Rossi discussion does not really compromise our integrity too much. :)