Timar - dadburnit. You guys are so smart - figured out that the ragtag band of brothers were fighting fiction with fiction.
Renzz - back to the drawing board.
I was wrong about Rossi, but what I fear most is that I might be partly right
-
-
Siffer - Thanks for the assist. Would you invest some of your hard-earned dollars into an LENR start-up based on no mention of Rossi in a keynote LENR speech and TD's lukewarm Rossi comments in the Macy interview? Rossi was clearly already not the star of the show in Spring of 2015.
That was productive and fruitful. Let's play another round - whatcha got next?
Best,
Dewey -
Here's a list of all the speakers, Dewey. http://iccf19.com/program_detail.html
For me Hagelstein and Dubinko were the highlights - and Takahashi. There was another one listed, tall feller, blue suit. I was charged with inviting him to a dinner but he couldn't make it.
-
Quote from "Weaver in denial"
Rossi was clearly already not the star of the show in Spring of 2015
Did you even read the interview? Lukewarm... It seems that you didn't even know about it; how else could you be so stupid to make the previous comment?
Quote from "Darden on Rossi"He is laser likein his attention He is very theoretical, very knowledgeable.He’s hard working and driven and we’re pleased with theinvestment.
-
2. "Wrong" is not issue. Anyone can be wrong. But if Rossi is convicted of fraud, that will be the worst public relations disaster in the history of this field. All of the support that has come in may evaporate overnight. The story will be in the mass media, and the enemies of cold fusion in the establishment will line up to say, "See? I told you so." Hearings in Congress are now scheduled. Our enemies will put fraud front and center. This will be another blow against cold fusion, thanks to Rossi. By the grace of God we may still have money from I.H., without which this field would be dead, dead, dead.
Jed, since you are one of us, persons that can be maybe categorized as 'Truth seeker, save the planet, LENR enthusiast' etc.
You know more insights than many others here, but bound to keep them secret for now. So I'm not asking about them, but may I ask you to do one home exercise:
- As you referred around September 2016 is going to happend few big things defining the future of LENR. Meetings hearings and so on that defines how big instances like government, army etc. would publicly think or act about LENR in coming years.
- Many signs leads to that this trial is stretched by lawyers actions to end around same time (meaningless extra MTD rounds etc).
- You have seen some data and maybe received some insider testimonies or had interchange with 'people inside' as you mentioned before.
- If you now would imagine hypotethically that you have been played by 'them' and you would be innocent part of bigger 'campaign' (much bigger than 150m$)Would all information and communications or something else you received somehow fit to that wild bigger picture scenario (maybe so big that even Dewey would be also used without him recognizing).
Please note I just ask you to think by yourself, not to reply here, since I don't want again to read big headlines in e catworld or sifferkoll: 'Jed Rothwell cannot confirm is he part of big game. Bigger he can handle." ... "Even suspects that Dewey is double crossed".
-
You seem to think it is okay to make up facts as you go along, without any evidence, and without knowing anything. That's not persuasive. That is not how you win a debate.
Debates are not clearly won on internet fora without decision-making mechanisms, only a peanut gallery. Rather, the more intelligent of the debaters leave, realizing there is no more value to be extracted. Winners are all those who recognize their own errors. Bonus points for acknowledging them. The one with the last word loses, as the thread goes silent or turns to the latest distraction.
-
What you have received verbally is ephemeral
It was written. I did not mean "told" in the verbal sense.The famous paper bound reason given by IH was lack of substantiation of the Rossi IP,
That is not the only reason, or the main reason. The main reason is that the reactors do not produce anomalous heat. On March 10, I.H. clearly stated that until they clearly confirm something, they do not endorse it or think that it works. Later they described the reactor as "inoperative." That means it does not work. You have disputed this, but you have no basis for disagreeing. -
There's a bit of logical inconsistency here. On one hand you claim that making it generally known that Rossi IS a fraud will hurt LENR research funding but at the same time you are doing everything you can to make it known.
I would not try to suppress information for political reasons. I could not do that in any case. Thousands of people know about Rossi.On the other hand, the earlier claim was that it was difficult to get funding when people thought Rossi was NOT a fraud (because he appeared to be so far ahead of other researchers).
I did not say that, and frankly, I think that hypothesis is silly. I don't know of any researchers who said they could not get funding because Rossi is far ahead. As far as I know, most people with funding have assumed Rossi is a fraud. -
Jed - as you well know, that was the consensus for most of the leading researchers at ICCF-19. No wonder Rossi will not take the teleporter over for even a brief appearance at these events.
-
Argon - Rossi has been labeled by DoD folks who are participating in the planning for the 2016 inquiry. He'd be saddened by what they are saying. It rhymes with bon.
-
Alan - you should have asked me for some help - one never knows but I might have been able to make something happen for you. Sad that our paths did not cross at ICCF-19 and will look forward to meeting you at ICCF-20. Lots will happen between now and then.
-
Dewey, thanks for being more precise on participants. I already can imagine big headlines in certain blogs "Dewey confirms Rossi developing ION motors, DoD interested"
But seriously, what I wrote to Jed applies even to you also (whole IH can easily be a setup just for this one purpose). I'm not saying it is even probable, but at least nice exercise, and if result is negative, you can forget about it. But then you at least know you did not involve on something by accident.
-
Argon - No names for you and rest assured that the spooks know most of what is going on across the board (by their own methods). Your track record for prediction, steerage and guidance of late has not been so great (just saying...). We'll chalk up and rank your latest machinations with the same credibility rating until you can prove otherwise.
-
The one with the last word loses, as the thread goes silent or turns to the latest distraction.
I generally agree with this, except when the last word is an incisive question, which goes unanswered.
-
the spooks know most of what is going on across the board (by their own methods).
Do you believe their intentions are pure?
-
Dewey, nah just killing my time. Snipers can operate better on daylight. At dark shotgun is better. Those MTD:s gives so little to chew on and I haven't recognized new drip drops lately.
Everything is relative, and my early predictions held quite well. Like you learning problems with Rossi quite late, better part of March. But yes I agree about my accuracy, so please give me something to work on, and I may impress you if you like -
Argon - I don't know. Plan accordingly.
-
Argon - Thank you for your thoughts and the kind offer. Do you know how many hours there are in a day on Planet Rossi? I also don't know if they run in dog years or not up there. If they run on our time/calendar then would your schedule allow you to spend two weeks on Planet Rossi?
-
Display More
"Weaver in denial" wrote:
Did you even read the interview? Lukewarm... It seems that you didn't even know about it; how else could you be so stupid to make the previous comment?
"Darden on Rossi" wrote:
This is classic Sifferkoll. Ignore the substance and quote only what he can make seem wrong, and don't link to anything so that others can verify. I've corrected the punctuation in his quote. The quote is from Marianne Macy's ICCF-19 interview of Darden. Sifferkoll milks this, dribbling it more in his next post. Yet Weaver's basic thesis is correct. "The show" is ICCF-19, not the interview, and Rossi is not the "star of the show" in the interview, either. Darden is. There are eight pages of interview. There is roughly a half page on Rossi. And it is really more about Darden's attitude toward Rossi than Rossi. Darden's attitude was to give Rossi full opportunity. By the time of ICCF-19, the 1 MW test was under way. Darden already knew there were problems, certainly with the IP transfer. He was not about to injure Rossi's reputation by talking about them.
In spite of all the Sifferkoll noise, in spite of all the noise on Peter Gluck's blog, IH is still not actually attacking Rossi. (Sifferkoll and Rossi and Gluck manage that by confusing not only Dewey with IH, but also Rothwell and others. IH has revealed, once they were sued, that they could not confirm the claims, that's about it. However, the lawsuit, if it stands, is forcing them to go public, to defend themselves. This is what I find remarkable in the interview, though I recommend reading the whole thing:
From what we have come to understand, Industrial Heat was not funded by Cherokee Partners, but by Darden and others, including Dewey. There were many who have not understood this, making assumptions about Cherokee ... including Rossi, apparently, see the Complaint.
Darden is explaining his approach to "scientists," and he treated Rossi as a scientist. I attempted to verify the "woman at North Carolina State" story. I did not find her. I did find https://www.quantamagazine.org…ispr-dna-editor-bacteria/ which is worth looking at just for the photo of E. coli (who knew that this bacterium was so cute, but the technology described is spectacular; this is thirty years after Darden's story took place.
"We" is not necessarily Industrial Heat. Darden is talking generally about himself and his friends and others working with him. Industrial Heat, LLC, was incorporated in Delaware 10/24/2012. The Agreement with Rossi was dated 10/26/2012. It does not show signature dates, but Rossi's story is that it was signed that day. $1.5 million was due on execution. Technically, though, this was of the nature of a deposit, and it was refundable under conditions such that either party, in theory, could have backed out. (IH could have refused to agree on Penon as the ERV for the Validation test, requesting refund after 120 days.)
[quote]... there’s a guy at Yale named Dan Kahan. He studies cultural cognition or confirmation bias. What he has found is that the smarter you are, the better you are at finding the one piece of information that confirms what you already know to be the case.
And here is where Sifferkoll would profit from listening up. He is an Aspie, the kind that is very smart. The behavior that Darden is talking about is quite normal, actually, but smart people, especially when they know they are smart, are especially vulnerable to this. The whole process of science is designed to factor for this and to set it aside, by creating an expectation that one will try, not to prove one is right, but that one is in error. So one diligently looks, not for proof of the thesis, but for error in it. And when one is unable to find it, then one publishes and, hopefully, listens to everyone else. What happens too often, though, is that once one is published, one becomes a defender instead of the skeptic that science requires. Detachment is lost, and an attached smart person is just as dumb as an attached normie, if not dumber. And a detached "normie" can see right through it, can see the obsession. It took me way too many years, and intense training, to figure that out.
-
That is not the only reason, or the main reason. The main reason is that the reactors do not produce anomalous heat. On March 10, I.H. clearly stated that until they clearly confirm something, they do not endorse it or think that it works. Later they described the reactor as "inoperative." That means it does not work. You have disputed this, but you have no basis for disagreeing.
Just to be clear, IH did not say that "the reactor" was inoperative, which would presumably be a reference the 1 MW assembly in the GPT. Rather, this is what they wrote, as a note in the Motion to Dismiss:
Quote1 Because Defendants are not permitted to introduce facts outside the Complaint and its Exhibits, this motion does not address, for example, the numerous errors in Plaintiffs’ purported “Guaranteed Performance Test” that the Complaint purposely ignores (such as departing from the purported test plan, ignoring inoperable reactors, relying on flawed measurements, and using unsuitable measuring devices).
The use of the plural actually shifts the statement away from an overall "inoperable" assessment toward a reliability issue. However, this is standing a lot on a brief comment. Jed has other information and we also see Dewey's comments here. Jed has collapsed that plural reference into the singular, above, as if that statement clearly establishes what he is claiming. It does not. It does establish that IH had problems with the GPT, and gives us a clue as to where they may go if they need to Answer.However, I consider better than even odds that if the Motion to Dismiss is denied, even if only one element of the Complaint is standing, and unless the Complaint is amended, they will appeal, which will further stay the proceedings until an Appeals Court rules on the points of law. I notice that Peter on his blog is complaining about Industrial Heat as if they are impeding justice with a campaign to spread "killer anti-Rossi memes." Someone sues you for almost $300 million (with the triple damages for fraud) and you are supposed to not defend yourself, in the name of "justice."" What? Peter has lost it, and it's sad.
