I was wrong about Rossi, but what I fear most is that I might be partly right

Quote from "Abd"

This is classic Sifferkoll.

Thanks Abd! I Actually agree... and this is important. Regardless of your endless booooring rants about nothing the actual quote from Darden about Rossi is correct (except for the punctuaion that somehow dissapeared in my copy/paste), and I did tell it was from the Macy interview in relation to the ICCF.

So here we go again so that this important piece of information do not get lost in endless FUD and diversions produced in the land of Abd ...

Quote from "Darden on Rossi"

He is laser like in his attention He is very theoretical, very knowledgeable.He’s hard working and driven and we’re pleased with the investment

And Abd please dont lecture me on confirmation bias - that is simply pathetic and you are obviously clueless since you forgot the simple first rule - looking in the mirror ...

Quote from IH Fanboy

Abd Ul-Rahman Lomax wrote:

I generally agree with this, except when the last word is an incisive question, which goes unanswered.

Perhaps. However, by that time, it's not clear who is reading the interchange. Further, the last "incisive question" can be a variation on, "When did you stop beating your wife?" No. Winners know how to get answers to questions, and they know how to listen to answers and read them and interpret them, as to what they reveal (including what is right and what may be misleading). Losers know how to read comments to figure out what is wrong with them and will continue attacking until everyone else loses interest. And then may continue for a while, crowing about how they won.

One of the characteristics of these flame wars is that one obsessed is not looking for answers to questions about reality, but want to prove that so-and-so was wrong, so will keep asking questions designed for that purpose. It is always possible to interpret statements to make them wrong, so at some point, one who might initially have answered questions gives up, realizing that it's going nowhere.

Quote from sifferkoll

And Abd please dont lecture me on confirmation bias - that is simply pathetic and you are obviously clueless since you forgot the simple first rule - looking in the mirror ...

I am not lecturing you and what I wrote wasn't written for you, though it contained a reference to something that you might profit from; and you respond with a rule that I allegedly forgot. Nope. However, Sifferkoll, you might consider that what you are "reminding" your elder of, you have yourself forgotten, and almost everyone with a functioning brain, reading these discussions, can tell.

At the age of 67, I entered extensive training (It may have totalled a thousand hours) that involved, in the advanced phases, standing in front of many experts being told just exactly how stupid I looked when I was defending myself. I know and use the technology I practiced in that training, every day, and yes, when we are upset, the training is to always look in the mirror. That's always where it is coming from.

Power is never developed by blaming others.

Quote from "Abd"

when we are upset, the training is to always look in the mirror. That's always where it is coming from.

Exactly. Thank you!

Btw, I've done some of that stuff too, not thousands of hours though (it is not that fun) ...

Quote

Skeptopaths will be skeptopaths, lobbies will be lobbies, only the market will prove LENR real once a product is available

There are some fascinatingly and incredibly stupid ideas out there in LENR forums such as e-catworld.com, this one, Mats', Ruby Carat's, etc. etc. One thing that concerns me about these is that LENR enthusiasts who appear sincere, like Jed, for example, don't write against them. One recurrent theme of patent idiocy is explicit in that one line quote above by Keieueue and one, what skeptopaths supposedly do, is implicit.

1) Only the marketing of ecats (or any LENR device) will prove that LENR is real. Nothing else will do.

This idea is beyond stupid. You have to be totally ignorant of all of history, science and technology to even entertain it briefly. So the discovery of neutrinos and the Higgs Boson aren't real because nobody markets products based on these? And similarly, success in marketing a product to the general public says nothing at all about its validity. Scams are a trillion dollar a year business. HHO power schemes which can't possibly work and don't work are marketed and sold to silly enthusiasts. But my hallmark example is homeopathic medicines which consist of nothing -- substances diluted to where no molecule of the substance can remain. These are a several BILLION dollar a year business. So the idea that marketing something is necessary to prove it works is specious and the idea that if something is marketed, that is enough to prove it's real is equally dumb.

What would easily prove LENR would be a single good experiment like the one Levi did wrong and did not document in early 2011 with liquid flow calorimetry. It would need to be done by a credible group not associated with Rossi or Levi. And it would need replication totally independently of the first group by a major university officially, or renown testing organization, or large well know company. I've given all the examples of candidates before.

2) The idea that there is a huge cadre of paid (or perhaps also volunteer) agents out there, aptly dubbed "skeptopaths" whose professional life is devoted to defeating LENR or any new power scheme because it endangers the status quo.

First of all, skeptopath is not a word and is barely a concept. Anyone who would fight against a nearly free and inexhaustible, non-polluting power source would have to be a complete lunatic. First, what motivation would there be? Second, what possibility of success? If there were such a thing, it would overrun any existing product to generate energy and it would do it quickly and irrevocably. A few obscure people writing on even more obscure internet forums not only could not stop it but would never even be noticed. But who would want to undertake such a thing? As for my personal motivation, it's that I originally believed Rossi and he fooled me. And I hate being schnockered. And I hate scammers. As Jed pointed out, they take resources and money (and time) away from legitimate researchers.

Finally, someone said that people like (and he gave a long list which included me) lump people like Jed, Mats and the Swedish professors in with Rossi and claim that all are scammers. I am embarrassed to say I have seen that done rarely by a few people. But most skeptics do not do this. And as for me, I have gone out of my way to note that I think all these people are honest and well meaning *except* for Rossi (and Defkalion's arrogant and unpleasant Hadjichritos who could not possibly be honest). Levi, I have said, I don't know about. He's either a crook too or he's incredibly inept, stupid and incompetent about science. He's a mystery. I have no idea which it is and I doubt that he will tell us. If you're going to cite someone else's position, please get it right. One characteristic of rabid believers in con schemes is that they vilify their critics all while misquoting them and chasing straw men arguments that the critics never made.

Keieueue and Sifferkoll are perfect example of this type of believer. Jed, Mats and the Swedish professors are not. I only wish Jed had his act together earlier (not sure he completely does about Rossi even now) and I wish that Mats and the professors would relook ALL the evidence that Rossi is a scammer and a f__d. I also wish that they would argue against the idiots who think honest and cautious skeptics are paid shills or somehow want LENR to fail. I can not understand how they let morons like Sarah Vaughter ( http://ownshrink.com/skeptopat…yptodenialism-rossi-ecat/ ) write the inane drivel that they do unopposed, all the while stalking participants in forums. It does not speak well for the field of LENR research that they do.

Quote

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.

Too bad for the share holders that neither Woodford nor Darden bothered to consult these people before offering Rossi giant sums of money for insanely planned "tests" done by and for totally inappropriate people. But I am sure Darden sleeps well. His gigantiferous salary and perqs, like those of most CEO's, are never threatened, no matter how crazy bad their performance is.

BTW, Rossi's unwillingness to appear anywhere that he might be properly and competently questioned always reinforced my opinion that his scam was indefensible to anyone with sufficient knowledge of technology and science.

Quote

Mary, why do you pretend that I object to you saying Rossi is a fraud when I have clearly said I do not? However, I do object very strongly to your painting anyone else- or even implying that they might be painted - in the same colours. And those are the posts that I will moderate. Very simple- Rossi OK, others not.

Yeah, UK libel and slander laws are insane. But Alan, show me where I stated or clearly implied that anyone other than Rossi was a crook. I *never* wrote that *anywhere* about Jed, the Swedish professors (all of them from the start) and Mats Lewan. I questioned their competence but never their honesty. I left the door open that xxxxxxxxx but I clearly stated some equally likely and equally unflattering alternatives. And implying the *possibility* of fraud can't be libel, even in the UK.

Small edit redaction of unneccesary name(s) Alan