Plaintiffs/Counter-Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss Defendants Amended Counterclaims against Plaintiffs and Memorandum of Law

Quote from Bob

One thing that this latest event has confirmed.... IH did not go into this venture with Rossi blind on uninformed They knew about his past and went to lengths to protect themselves from possible tax issues, of which they knew was in Rossi`s past. If they knew and protected themsekves about this, it is most likely they also knew about
questionable test practices and resistance to independant testing. This would seem to support Mr. Lomax`s theory that IH fully knew what they were risking in this venture and that they had a plan in place to address different outcomes \ scenarios· They knew full well what they were doing. This is encouraging to me about thier other LENR reasearch

Yes, it is encouraging to me, too. They surely did their homework. They would definitely have read Krivit. They might have even looked at internet discussions and read Mary Yugo. Or they may have talked with someone who did all that, and I know someone with whom they clearly were in contact early on, but I don't know if was before the agreement in 2012. Not long after.

Woodford, too, by the way. Woodford was interested, obviously, and chose to work with IH as clearly having -- once they talked with IH, gravitas and serious commitment.

By the way, it had not occurred to me that the tax issue was that kind of evidence. I agree. It is. That provision about taxes in the Agreement was rather unusual. They very obviously knew his past, and Krivit had kindly researched it for them. And then they verified. I would expect that they talked with Mats Lewan, or someone representing them did.

Quote from Jack Cole

AR was the active variable resulting in Penon being selected. From reports, IH wanted someone from a certification institute to work alongside Penon, but AR wouldn't allow it. In retrospect, I'm sure they would have insisted on a truly independent tester even if it had resulted in AR terminating the relationship. I agree that to work in this area, one should absolutely insist on the independent test with a party completely selected by someone other than the inventor.

So, a messenger from the future tells them that they must insist on an independent ERV or something Bad will happen. So what does this do, given all we know?

Rossi does not agree and gives them the $1.5 million back. Or most of it and promises more later. Whatever, no agreement. And they learn nothing.

And they don't raise the additional $10 million because -- for what? And they are not recognized as the serious players they are by Woodford. Maybe they have some small investments here and there.

Look, the advice is obvious, now. It could have been obvious then, except for one thing: even though it was obvious that Rossi was not and would not agree to independent testing, he was still getting enormous traction, dominating the field. Look at poor Peter Gluck, still demolished by his belief in Rossi. Scientists were taking Rossi seriously, as can be seen in many reports.

After the Rossi fiasco, made possible by IH not only taking a risk, but choosing to probably lose that money, it is quite likely that nobody will be able to do this again. It has become all too obvious.

No independent testing? Very nice, we wish you well, but no independent testing means that we are not going to behave as if you have anything worth spending time on. So you may get some internet loonies to start jumping up and down, but not the journals and not the scientists. No, I will not fly to see your demonstration unless you pay all my expenses. You have some "real scientists, esteemed professors" who say your demonstrations exceed sliced bread in quality? Nice. Let them replicate and publish independently, we will start to pay attention then.

No longer. At least I can hope....

We have piles of serious work, done over more than two decades, with massive implications, ignored because of all this attention on crap. We need to develop gravitas in the eyes of mainstream science, and we won't do it with cheerleaders. We will do it with real science, no excuses. Yes, we will need some political action, but designed not to attack the mainstream, rather to support it, i.e., standing for real science, which respects skepticism as well as innovation and new findings.

Quote from IH Fanboy

Any attention in this world of crowded sound bites is better on balance than no attention. And even if IH is the only person/entity providing funding (they aren't), it would still be thanks to Rossi.

The idea of "any publicity is good publicity" is old and has its application. It's also face-palm crazy with certain kinds of attention in certain circumstances. The athletes who got "attention" in Rio de Janeiro recently lost endorsement contracts due to that publicity. If you are selling something, and the attention causes aversion from those who might otherwise be buying, it can cause harm.

Rossi had indeed attracted a great deal of attention. It was mixed in effect. For some, it increased the impression of fraud and scam, tarring the entire field. For others, it raised hope that something might be real, with practical applications imminent. At this point, the dominant impression from Rossi v. Darden is that Rossi was a complete fraud, and there is substantial opinion that Industrial Heat is a bunch of naive idiots. And that impression then will apply to anyone proposing funding for LENR, say, from the U.S. government. "Don't be naive. This is a waste of money. Where is the proof?" Etc.

Industrial Heat is not selling to the public. The Rossi affair did not increase government funding for LENR, apparently. There were governmental inquiries, there was an abortive demonstration for NASA and others involved with government LENR research. But that was not major commitment of research funding.

In the long run, Industrial Heat has handled the Rossi affair, and they are now working on real research (and have been for some years). If Industrial Heat is involved with seeking government funding (and Darden has long experience at this), they can now present the Rossi affair straightforwardly: "We showed that there was nothing there, Rossi was a fraud. Now ... take a look at the real research ...."

Quote

Look at poor Peter Gluck, still demolished by his belief in Rossi.

Peter Gluck is a very nice but extremely goofy individual. He was a devout fan of the obvious duplicitous liar Hadjichristos of Defkalion until way WAY past the end of Defkalion. I don't know how demolished he is. I think he still believes Rossi and Defkalion are getting raw deals and will somehow come out with the goods eventually. I feel badly for Peter. He is basically a kind and well meaning person (from his writing) and he will end up bitterly disappointed at some point... but I don't think he's there yet.

Shane:

Quote

Rossi may be poised to walk away with the Ecat's veracity still unresolved

You have learned nothing. Rossi's veracity was resolved in the negative in late 2011. Certainly by 2012. All Rossi knows how to do is bamboozle, complicate and confuse. But, I admit, he is good at it. You're the proof along with probably Levi, Lewan and all the Swedes who believed Rossi.

Quote

And even if IH is the only person/entity providing funding (they aren't), it would still be thanks to Rossi.

Yes, thanks to Rossi, IH and Woodford are likely to throw lots of good money after the bad.

Quote from Shane D.

There may be a middle ground on this publicity thing. If this does not reach trial... either by an out of court settlement, or thrown out, Rossi may be poised to walk away with the Ecat's veracity still unresolved. Yes, it will be case closed, on with something else, to some, but others may have some rope left to hang onto. I say this because even IH has left open the possibility of the tech working, but that Rossi is purposely withholding the secrets.

Yes. They have. However, consider what the evidence already visible shows. Rossi deceives and lies. Nothing he says can be trusted. If someone wants to invest in him, knowing that, on the idea that "he has a Valuable Secret that maybe he will reveal to me," well, a fool and his money are soon parted. What is becoming likely is that the Rossi Complaint will be dismissed at one of the roadblocks. That, however, leaves the counter-complaint. Again, this may be resolved (settlement is a reasonable possibility), leaving the "scientific issue" unclear. But, once again, science depends on trustworthy testimony, all the time. And business depends on people keeping their word with respect to contracts, and even if they fail to do something, not being deceptive about it.

Quote

Then there are the many anecdotal accounts of earlier successful tests, along with Rossi still apparently having the full support of Hydrofusion (other licensees are silent). He may elect to simply continue on as he is now -ops normal, and put word out through his JONP that he screwed IH because they deceived him with the Cherokee/IH thing. He's got IH's own words to back him up, so who can argue against?

I have not seen specific evidence about Hydro Fusion's present stand, since the Answer was filed -- which revealed a great deal that caused some long-term Rossi fans to bail out. Rossi lied about the Hydro Fusion test in 2012, either to them or to IH (more likely the latter). If they still want to do business with a liar, that's their choice. I would hope for their shareholders that they take steps to make sure that Rossi can't do to them what he tried to do to IH. Even then it's dangerous. At this point, it appears that the very same devices that Rossi claimed worked in Florida did not work in independent IH testing. It would be completely sane for Rossi licensees to collaborate and cooperate with each other. They are not actually competitors, because of the differing territories. Perhaps Hydro Fusion would want to buy the Doral reactor? Or how about renting it?

Quote

IH also may simply decide to leave Rossi alone and not go after him. Choosing instead to remain a licensee in a wait and see mode, just in case he comes up with something later on. That alone would lend his remaining followers encouragement they are doing the right thing by hanging by their man.

This is clear. Rossi is not "their man." Rossi is out for Rossi. He trusts nobody, it seems. The attitude I recommend to Rossi supporters is one of detachment (not rejection, per se). What evidence exists? Deep analysis postpones judgment, it does not attach to conclusions quickly, i.e,. it does not classify evidence as "good" or "bad," though it may notice the dependencies of evidence, i.e,. such and such is "according to" so and so.

Quote

Put simply, the Rossi legend could live on for some time, and if so, it may minimize some of the negative publicity to come. The pieces are there, we shall see if they fall into place.

No, the legend living on will (slightly) damage LENR for quite some time, because the claims will -- correctly -- be seen as a conspiracy theory.

The idea that Rossi might have some real effect, somewhere, somehow, can be maintained without conspiracy theory. However this more or less requires that Rossi suffers from a social disability, which is more or less confirmed by Mats Lewan in his book.

Well, of course, Jed, we don't know what Woodford and IH are actually doing other than waging an extremely costly battle against a crook they decided to get in bed with, apparently, mostly on his terms. I am very suspicious of Brillouin and Godes and I think this is where they are wasting another large sum.

I have nothing against basic research to investigate the science of LENR. Maybe they are doing that based on good information and reasonable expectations and if so good. But I doubt it. I think they are chasing unfounded claims for high power, just as they did with Rossi. While they may have learned something from their experience with Rossi, I am willing to bet it was not a complete class. Darden messed up investments before. I don't think he's as smart as others would make him out to be. I think he is very gullible. How hard would it have been to test Rossi properly AHEAD of giving him $11.5 million dollars? That's not exactly chump change unless of course, it doesn't come from your (Darden's) pocket. And if Rossi had refused reasonable demands for proper testing, Darden should have placed a clothespin on his nose and run! Exactly like Dick Smith ran from Defkalion under similar circumstances. The crooks won't let you do proper tests. Almost all the legitimate claimants will. Those who don't, you're better off without anyway.

Quote

The idea that Rossi might have some real effect, somewhere, somehow, can be maintained...

No it can't. Every last bit of evidence on Rossi SCREAMS that he is a crook and nothing else. He's never done anything at all except be a crook and he's done that all his life. The ecat scam is not that different in character from the thermoelectric scam. The thermoelectric scam even mentioned robotic production plants! The ecat scam is bigger than the thermoelectric scam because Rossi had to deliver product earlier. It always end when he has to deliver anything provable-- whether Petroldragon, thermoelectrics or ecats... it all ends the same. About time some people learned from that but they don't seem to. "Might have some real effect"... indeed?! Wake the f' up!

Quote

These people are self-made billionaires. They did not make all that money by doing stupid things.

Much of the money they made by convincing people to invest, not by bringing back brilliant returns. It's quite a different thing. Trusting Rossi and the contracts they allowed to be signed with him are an incredible stupidity. The man was so obvious and has been (about the ecat) since November 2011 and that's before we even get to the Petroldragon and thermoelectric scams.

Quote from JedRothwell

Mary Yugo wrote:

I disagree. I thought this report is somewhat convincing:

lenr-canr.org/acrobat/LeviGindication.pdf

I doubt that you have found any significant errors in this. Knowing you, I doubt you have bothered to read it.

There is also some unpublished data that looks pretty good to me.

Display More

Mary is making his usual usual. That report by the "professors" did not impress me because they depended on an extremely complex and vulnerable analysis for measuring power output. It's like the Lugano report. They claim to have done a calibration, but I don't see the actual calibration data.

Quote

The 116-hour experiment also included a calibration of the experimental set-up without the active charge present in the E-Cat HT. In this case, no extra heat was generated beyond the expected heat from the electric input.

There is no data given on that calibration. What input power was used? Did they use maximum input power? How was the "expected heat" confirmed? How about photos of the dummy reactor under the same input power conditions as the fueled reactor? You know, basic stuff.

Then there is the basic problem that Rossi was in charge of this experiment. However, setting that aside, it does not scream "fraud." In hindsight, given the Lugano report, it telegraphs "incompetence." Using a complex method to infer heat is fraught with dangers, unless very carefully calibrated. Instead of a report on the calibration, we are regaled with Ragone plots, which tell us nothing we did not already know. This is fluff, polemic designed for the ignorant, breathless excitement, Nuclear! Nuclear! Nuclear!

Let's get the heat down first, folks, before we start breaking open the nuclear champagne.

I remember reading that report and thinking, "Well, maybe."

Quote

I disagree. I thought this report is somewhat convincing:lenr-canr.org/acrobat/LeviGindication.pdfI doubt that you have found any significant errors in this. Knowing you, I doubt you have bothered to read it.There is also some unpublished data that looks pretty good to me.

This sort of response illustrates why you got bamboozled by Defkalion and are still being flummoxed by Rossi. And ad homs about what I do and don't read and know won't change it a bit.

As it happens, I read that ridiculously overly complex and badly done report. I am not a specialist in using IR cameras for temperature measurement so I will rely on what others concluded after much study. The output temp measurements are most likely BS. For a comprehensive list of what they found wrong with the experiment itself, see Göran Ericsson and Stephan Pomp who were mortified that members of their own faculty had done such substandard work and had come to such unwarranted conclusions. https://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1306/1306.6364.pdf for details. And then there is all the work done and comments written, discrediting the thermal camera measurements, all by Thomas Clarke who finally lost interest after being roundly insulted and rudely stalked on this forum. And then there is the issue of calibration which was not done on the system under test but on a completely differently powered system where spikes and transients were not present. And then there is the lack of proper monitoring of the power input, supplied by Levi (and therefore by Rossi).

From my perspective, the whole test was inappropriate. If one wanted to prove the concept of the ecat, the simple, elegant but execrably performed Feb 2012 test by Levi would have been vastly better, done right of course, which Levi has never managed to do. I've cited the article about this test many times and it's still here: http://www.nyteknik.se/nyheter…energi/article3108242.ece

Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me. Shame on you, Jed. You discredit essentially any claim you make for LENR by your refusal to understand who and what Rossi is and his modus operandi and results.