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

    Quote from Abd Ul-Rahman Lomax

    Jed you wrote about that exclusion that it was proof of fraud in itself. However, the reality was actually worse, the IH Engineer was prohibited by Rossi from visiting the IH Plant. that's worth quoting from 29.19 (same as 30.19). this was to Vaughn.


    "About the meeting of Tuesday, you obviously can come when you want, while Joe Murray cannot enter in the factory of JM because, as I have explained to Tom during the visit with Brian Mc Laughlin, I do not allow anybody, except for the personnel already reciprocally authorized, to approach the plant before the tests on course will have been completed."


    Yes, I was upset to the initial revelation. By the time I learned of the 29.19 paragraph, "I do not allow anybody . . ." I felt more bemused than upset. It has gone beyond outrage into absurdity. Did he really think he would get away with that?!?


    I felt the same way reading about Defkalion's shenanigans with the flow meter. I feel sorry for the DE investors and Gamberale, but I was thinking "did they really expect to get away with that indefinitely?" These people have no exit strategy. They just pile on one deception after another until the whole thing collapses. It reminds me of the movie "The Big Short."

    Adb, I have a concern. A few hours ago in this thread you said this quote "Hi, Andrea! Your friend who stands for his children here."


    Do you have any evidence based on fact to make up this claim? If so I may have missed it. Maybe it was said in the heat of battle and after a long day my sarcasm meter is not functioning properly.

    Quote from JedRothwell

    Where did you hear they are investing in Brillouin? I have not heard that.


    See p. 26 of this Infinite Energy article:


    Quote

    [Marianne] Macy: You [Darden] said in your speech that Rossi is not the first person involved with LENR that you have supported. That’s a widespread misconception. You are also supporting good longtime researchers in this field like MIT’s Peter Hagelstein, Dennis Letts, high profile newcomers like Brillouin among others. You’ve said IH wants to support more work in this field. ...

    Wow - sounding just like Rossi. Spelling like Rossi........


    Rossi is just getting his first dose of the gang billing by the hour from his legal team. With all the new attorneys piling on, his legal bills are going up exponentially. Yet another reality is setting in on the old boy.

    Quote from Paradigmnoia

    OK, here we go..


    Paradigmoia oh dear !
    I have already explained to you MANY times that you and others are simply NOT understanding what emissivity is.
    But I see that you have turned a deaf ear to what I have told you.
    Regarding the images of the DOT (TiO2 on Kapton foil) I have seen that they used a standard calibration procedure.
    In any field it takes a long time Mr Paradigmoia to be an "expert". In my opinion you are not an expert in Thermal Physics and IR Calorimetry.
    You don't take a PhD in one day or simply randomly reading some literature. Understanding scientific papers needs time and hard study.
    I would like to ask you to stop disseminating FUD. But I know you will go on.

    @randombit0,
    Of course you can see from the image that the Dot, where it sticks out of the circle, is almost identical in IR imaged hue to the Rod, as well as you may notice the strong thermal gradient away from the Cap. The Figure 12b image merely shows that the Dot is not nice and round, and therefore can easily be the part that sticks out of the "computer generated circle". I almost wonder if it is high emittance paint, rather than a sticker... but it doesn't really matter.


    What does matter is that the IR spectral view band of the camera is not the same as total normal emissivity, nor total hemispherical emissivity, and therefore using the hemispherical or total normal values for the camera epsilon is wrong in the case of a selective emitter, such as alumina. This has been empirically tested by myself, and made available in video footage by the MFMP. And anyone with an IR camera, or pyrometer, and a thermocouple can readily verify this, in mere seconds.

    Quote from JedRothwell

    Mary Yugo wrote:
    I don't know what Jed means by suggesting that Cherokee and IH invest money belonging to Vaughn and Darden, if that is what his ambiguous comment meant.


    Of course that is what it meant. What else? What is ambiguous about it? It was Darden's money. So I've heard.


    First of all, there is no evidence of any Cherokee money having been invested in Industrial Heat. Someone came up with $1.5 million to secure the contract before there was a share sale for Industrial Heat. The share sale was a few days before the money (another $10 million) was due from the Validation Test. I assume that the $1.5 million was repaid with stock. Probably not with cash, my sense.


    Cherokee typically operates by starting limited real estate partnerships for environmental clean-up projects, putting in, it is said, about $25 million. Then others invest, and total investment might be $100 million. Some of these go bankrupt. They could lose up to $25 million. But others make a lot of money. How much of the Cherokee money is actually Darden investment, I don't know. Some, very likely.


    By the way, in this business, one would learn detachment. Win a few million, lose a few million, now, what's for dinner? Perfect for dealing with Rossi.


    I do not know the proportions of investment in Industrial Heat. From the share levels in IHHI, however, Darden is a major investor, so is Vaughn. But there are others. My guess is that they ultimately raised the full allowed share sale, $20 million, and operated on that. Then in 2015, Woodford came along; it appears that IHHI was created in England, in order to receive the Woodford investment, and IHHI and bought IH with shares. This is not a project designed for any short-term return. If Rossi technology had been transferred and worked, it might have been making money already, lots of it, but they knew the game when they got into it. As the recent comment from Woodford shows, they are in it for the long haul. I suspect that before there is any profit, they will have to put in more money, maybe a lot, but I also think that they may start trying to leverage governmental investment. After all, they do have an APCO contact! (not "contract," I doubt that they have paid APCO anything yet, because they are not in that game yet.)

    Quote from Rigel

    Adb, I have a concern. A few hours ago in this thread you said this quote "Hi, Andrea! Your friend who stands for his children here."


    Do you have any evidence based on fact to make up this claim? If so I may have missed it. Maybe it was said in the heat of battle and after a long day my sarcasm meter is not functioning properly.


    What claim? That's about me. However it is a reference to a Rossi blog post about me, and specifically to his last sentence.
    http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=892&cpage=157#comment-1229980


    Quote

    P.S. The guy who wrote these bestialities must be pardoned: he is a puppet paid to write bestialities and, as they say in Italy ” Pure lui tiene famiglia” ( he too has to feed his family )


    My first clear appearance on the Rossiblog! AFAIK, all earlier possible reference were much more vague.


    It seems the Rossiblog is still blathering on, possibly about this same issue, it's not clear this time:


    As one of the "puppets," I know that there are almost certainly no puppets at all. There are independent commentators as there have always been. Nobody is paying Mary Yugo, on the pseudoskeptic side, and nobody is paying Jed Rothwell and myself, who are allegedly "cold fusion believers." Certainly both of us think the evidence for the reality of LENR is overwhelming. I was always carefully neutral about Rossi -- at one point some evidence appeared that looked good and I flipped to positive for a short time, then when I realized that it was like all the rest, ambiguous, I backed off. Jed was also positive, possibly more positive than I ever was, even though Rossi had been totally rude to him. But Rossi v. Darden blew everyone's fuses. Even before we saw the details!


    (the sequence Rossi refers to is described on https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/g…/conversations/topics/852 ) The "hostile blog" is lenr-forum.org.

    Adb, I have no reason to doubt you at all. I just wanted to understand. Followed your link and I read your Yahooo thread. It honestly was sometimes hard to identify who said what. I always want to know where someone is coming from. As I said I read the Wikipedia reference. But I like to ask plainly. And you kindly gave me an honest response. I mean it.
    -Rigel

    Quote from Abd Ul-Rahman Lomax

    As one of the "puppets," I know that there are almost certainly no puppets at all. There are independent commentators as there have always been. Nobody is paying Mary Yugo, on the pseudoskeptic side, and nobody is paying Jed Rothwell and myself, who are allegedly "cold fusion believers."


    Strange that you would feel the need to try and convince readers that none of you 1k+ posts filibustering machines, are paid in any way, shape or form to spend your days laying blanket denials on this forum (and others)...

    Quote from Abd Ul-Rahman Lomax

    About the meeting of Tuesday, you obviously can come when you want, while Joe Murray cannot enter in the factory of JM because, as I have explained to Tom during the visit with Brian Mc Laughlin,


    Quote from Abd Ul-Rahman Lomax

    This was in July 2015. This was already, by then, a major breakdown.


    Blatant violation of the agreement. Totally invented.


    The IH defenders show their thin skin...


    @Abd: AR just behaved as written down in the contract (which the greedy investors accepted..), which denied IH access to the customer (JM) factory!


    In this crucial case ABD is simply lieing and distributing counter FUD.



    Quote from JedRothwell

    I.H. was defrauding itself?! That's remarkable. How does that work? Should they file suit against themselves? Or reimburse themselves?


    Jed: Sometimes Your mind seems to be troubled. JM was never owned by IH and thus (IH) billing them is about IH being a part of the dirty game.


    To make it clear once more: I have no sympathies for any player of both sides in this story. But if people claiming to be outside, and pretend to be objective, start to lie, then it's simply to much.

    • Official Post

    I would like to remind members that 'doxxing' is considered to be unacceptable by many members and moderators here, and has been the cause of complaints and calls for action from several members on more than one occasion recently. While speculating openly on the possible identity of a couple of apparently female posters is not exactly doxxing - it is in my opinion close and should not really be continued since it adds little value to the discussion, and is merely a sneaky form of 'ad hom'. (or ad fem).


    Restraint please!

    Quote from randombit

    I have already explained to [Paradigmnoia] MANY times that you and others are simply NOT understanding what emissivity is.


    Perhaps this is because your rather eccentric and aphysical explanations abstract from spectral emissivity, so that emissivity 8-13um must be identical to emissivity integrated over a Planck function that peaks way below (in wavelength) 8-13um. This in the face of many clear empirical contradictions posted by Paradigmnoia.


    You have not a leg to stand on. If as you say most IR Thermographists share your disability we must just hope and pray that they never have to measure uncalibrated Al2O3.


    Oh but wait! The first rule in the IR thermography manual is don't use book values for emissivity, always calibrate your surface at temperature...


    Hmmm...

    I think Randombit0 knows the difference by now. But it is important to her to argue and deny to keep up the morale of Rossi supporters.
    People are (obviously) for the most part uneducated in physics, and supporters with an education often don't bother to check the details. Supporters, educated or not, will be satisfied with repeating or paraphrasing Rossi's words. Laymen including jury members will choose the argument of the side that looks nicer. So THH you don't stand a chance (I think I saw a couple photos of an ex Forum member that is allegedly you). Now when in Court you won't be there nor Randombit0 's charming avatar. But Rossi has fascinated so many people that he will likely charm the jury members as well.

    Would hate to see the court case thrown out on the technicality of whether a 6-cylindar reactor were tested or not.


    Might be too much to ask, but either proof that ECat works or Rossi is a flagrant fraud is the preferred outcome.

Subscribe to our newsletter

It's sent once a month, you can unsubscribe at anytime!

View archive of previous newsletters

* indicates required

Your email address will be used to send you email newsletters only. See our Privacy Policy for more information.

Our Partners

Supporting researchers for over 20 years
Want to Advertise or Sponsor LENR Forum?
CLICK HERE to contact us.