Rossi v. Darden developments - Part 1

    Quote from IH Fanboy

    I've never called it a lie. I think I referred to as flimsy, which it is.


    I do not know why you think Exhibit 5 is "flimsy" or what you mean by that. Do you mean it does not accurately reflect Rossi's data and configuration? If that is what you mean, you are wrong. It quotes his data exactly. Rossi and Penon did not challenge the Exhibit when it was presented to them before the lawsuit. They did not answer it at all.


    If you mean the technical reasons in Exhibit 5 are not valid reasons to reject Rossi's claims, then I think you do not understand what the Exhibit says, or how instruments work, or why it is a problem when you install the wrong kind of flow meter in a half-empty pipe.


    If you agree with Peter Gluck that it was actually a different kind of flow meter, and the pipe was not half empty, that is tantamount to saying that Exhibit 5 is a lie. Which is where we came in.

    Quote from Mary Yugo

    As for Levi, are you referring to the experiment with liquid coolant and mass flow calorimetry which Krivit challenged correctly for being uncalibrated?


    No, as I have said many times, I refer to:


    http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/LeviGindication.pdf


    The other tests I refer to have not been published.


    I wouldn't put much stock in Krivit. He wouldn't know a calibration if it bit him on the butt. I asked him questions about Rossi's configuration after he came back from visiting Rossi. He did not know the answers. He made no observations and wrote down no numbers.

    Quote from MrSelfSustain

    All I can say is that if IH didn't perform an extended replication project to produce excess heat from Rossi's IP, it is a crying shame.


    Do you have any information on this? Do you have any reason to think they did -- or did not -- perform an extended replication? Or are you speculating about events you know nothing about? My guess is the latter.

    I started a thread to examine the Rends claims from The New Fire. I've taken it through the first page now, that big Chart, the "Fog." The fog is in the thinking of whoever compiled that image, which ties things together that have no significant relationship other than in the mind of the compiler.


    It's here: The Energy Company Fog


    Rends is bringing up a series of old, discredited arguments; apparently he has not been paying attention, or has the selective memory common with conspiracy theorists.


    Quote from oldguy

    Rend-
    I don't think I understand what you mean by "owned by Cherokee" , They may have an investment
    in IH but the major investor seems to be Woodford..


    IH was funded with a $20 million authorized share issue. Apparently none of this money came from Cherokee. Likely much of it came from the personal funds of Darden and Vaughn, and, of course, others also bought shares. It appears that all those original shares have been traded for shares in IH Holdings International, Ltd., the U.K. company that Woodford invested in.


    Industrial Heat is not in the same business, at all, as Cherokee, and Cherokee investment would have been inappropriate, very likely.


    Quote

    IH only received something like 12M on the initial US SEC filing so even if that was all from Cherokee (very doubtful)


    As I recall, it was almost exactly $11.5 million. My guess is that Darden put up the original $1.5 million in 2012, loaning it to IH, and then, preparing to pay Rossi the $10 million, they made the share issue and Darden got shares for his loan. Probably not the money back. I assume that they then raised additional funds for operations by selling the additional authorized shares.


    Quote

    It is not as large as the holding by Woodford. That is estimated at 50M.


    In the records for IH Holdings International, Ltd., it is two obviously related trusts that purchased, together, exactly $50 million in special-issue shares.


    Quote

    It is a publicly traded company in the UK -Woodford Patient Capital Trust (UK Stock symbol WPTC)
    Even you could invest in it


    IH has certified in court that no part of IH or IPH are owned by a public company; however, IHHI is not covered by that. IHHI owns IH and also IPH.


    "Patient Capital." This is a very long-term investment trust. LENR research could soak up a lot more than $50 million. This gets their feet wet, their toe in the water. My guess is that they will attempt to leverage this with public funds (as the Gates grant to Texas Tech was matched by the State of Texas). This is where a company like APCO might become involved. Public relations.


    Alan Smith closed the new thread, claiming that the discussion could take place ini other threads. I.e., here, I assume. Alan seems to have no concept of the harm done when threads with a clear topic-- like this one did, started for a single purpose, to cover Rossi v. Darden developments -- are filled with what may be of interest -- or not -- but what is clearly irrelevant. It makes this site far less useful.

    • Official Post
    Quote from Abd Ul-Rahman Lomax

    Rends is bringing up a series of old, discredited arguments; apparently he has not been paying attention, or has the selective memory common with conspiracy theorists.


    It is exactly the other way around! You and the other Industrial Heat supporters, that are providing this forum with a daily overdosis of spam, are the conspiracy theorists, because you are all the time only arguing based on speculation and if you are confronted with facts you immediately discredit and despise your discussion partner. But the good think is that all those who are really interested in the facts of this story can easily check the papers and the provided information and building up there own thoughts without the destructive mind-glue out of your quill.

    Quote from Rends

    But the good think is that all those who are really interested in the facts of this story can easily check the papers and the provided information and building up there own thoughts.


    I did check what is available in public about the e-cat affair, and my conclusion is that one needs to be a quirky conspiracy theorist in order to believe that Rossi has what he claims to have, and that the dark side tries to supress it.

    • Official Post
    Quote from Forty-Two

    is that one needs to be a quirky conspiracy theorist in order to believe that Rossi has what he claims to have


    Do you mean those who invested multi millions of US Dollar to get Rossi's ECAT LENR technology under their control and filed still valid US patent applications for this technology and build up a still active global wide company web around this technology are quirky conspiracy theorist? ;)

    Rends,
    you left out the "and that the dark side tries to supress it" part when you quoted me. Why?


    No, I don't think that the ones who invested millions in Rossi are conspiracy theorists - why should they?


    For those who paid Rossi millions and are sued now, I would have another, not too charming name - but if I write that here, then I risk 'green ink'.

    • Official Post
    Quote from Forty-Two

    you left out the "and that the dark side tries to supress it" part when you quoted me. Why?


    I have left it out because Darden et.al are acting on both sides, as 'white knights' for those who believe LENR is a valid technology with disruptive potential and as 'dark knights' defending the conventional, solar and renewable energy industry. One could ask what is the sense of such a double strategy, my personal answer is that they want to achieve a smooth transition, so they protect the existing investments until they have achieved a profit and then afterwards take over the energy market with their own LENR technology based on small grids.

    Quote from Rends

    You and the other Industrial Heat supporters, that are providing this forum with a daily overdosis of spam, are the conspiracy theorists, because you are all the time only arguing based on speculation and if you are confronted with facts you immediately discredit and despise your discussion partner.


    Quote from Rends

    I have left it out because Darden et.al are acting on both sides, as 'white knights' for those who believe LENR is a valid technology with disruptive potential and as 'dark knights' defending the conventional, solar and renewable energy industry.


    The problem is that you post here with "dark knight" speculation and that gets the backs up of anyone who does not speculate the same way as you. I agree that how whiter than white the IH principals are is unclear. For example they could be cynically wanting to make money out of other people's investment in the LENR bandwagon without expecting it ever to work. I don't personally think that likely, at all, and see Darden's publicly stated motives as plausible. But whether I do or not, it is speculation.


    You have presented no (nada, zilch) evidence, merely speculation that most don't agree with, to support your dark conspiracy theories.


    Then, when you speculate complex dark motives etc, others, who've got riled, get sucked into answering you giving the (common sense) speculation as to motives.


    You think others are answering your facts with their own speculation. Whereas in reality they are just answering outlandish speculation with pretty plausible speculation.


    And, on the table, we have various facts like Rossi's e-mail and the very many known bad tests that show Rossi in a bad light which seems not to weight with you.


    Also on the table we have the mysterious customer which looks very much like a Rossi "magnificence" with no real chemicals company and no real product. That is still circumstantial, but very strongly so. Again it seems not to weigh with you.


    Regards, THH

    • Official Post
    Quote from THHuxley

    The problem is that you post here with "dark knight" speculation and that gets the backs up of anyone who does not speculate the same way as you


    And other speculations as to the probity of Darden and Co are equaly just that, speculations. Plausibility is in the eye of the beholder. I do know this though, that Rossi V Darden/IH is incredibly boring subject matter for a forum created to discuss science and technology as related to LENR. Personally I would be happy just to wait for the outcome of the case, while continuing to mow my own lawn.

    Quote from THHuxley

    The problem is that you post here with "dark knight" speculation and that gets the backs up of anyone who does not speculate the same way as you. I agree that how whiter than white the IH principals are is unclear.


    @THH (C) Can You publicly confirm that you never, in any form (directly or indirectly) took money of Brish Gas and Petroleum???


    Everybody, that knows/understands the finance sector, can easily see that the company structure of IH (xyz) is that of a typical conspiracy enterprise and you as a fierce IH defender obviously like to be a part of it.

    They are not playing two sides. It is one side. They are interested in bringing alternative power
    in many of its forms.


    Life is not either/or it is both/and. To live in the either/or world you will
    be doomed to hostility and perceived confrontations.
    Living in the both/and world you will find unity and cooperation.

    Quote

    @THH Can You publicly confirm that you never, in any form (directly or indirectly) took money of Brish Gas and Petroleum???


    This is a question as weird as the IH speculation here.


    I've been working some 40 years, for many people, and I could not honestly answer that question negatively, especially since petroleum is rather vague. I can say the following:


    I have never in the last 10 years received money or any other benefit from fossil fuel technologies or people or companies directly dependent on them, distributors, etc. Nor do I expect to do this in the next 10 years. Specifically, I have absolutely no financial or business relationship reason to be favouring fossil fuels or disliking LENR. Nor expect to have such. Nor do I have any such relationship with IH, nor have I ever had such a relationship with IH. Nor Rossi. Nor Lewan. Nor Levi. Etc, etc...


    Is that enough personal disclosure for you?


    Now suppose you do the same? I'd like to know whether you have any financial or personal reasons, direct or indirect, for disliking big oil, or big business, or Venture Capital generally, since you seem biassed against them?


    It is impolite to ask this. But then your question was equally impolite (and silly to boot).


    Regards, THH

    Quote from THHuxley

    Now suppose you do the same? I'd like to know whether you have any financial or personal reasons, direct or indirect, for disliking big oil, or big business, or Venture Capital generally, since you seem biassed against them?


    It is impolite to ask this. But then your question was equally impolite (and silly to boot).


    Quote from THHuxley

    Is that enough personal disclosure for you?


    Now suppose you do the same? I'd like to know whether you have any financial or personal reasons, direct or indirect, for disliking big oil, or big business, or Venture Capital generally, since you seem biassed against them?


    It is impolite to ask this. But then your question was equally impolite (and silly to boot).


    @THH: I'm a completely independent thinker in all these matters. I never had and will never have (had) any relations (Take money, invest etc..) to any big oil company or other players in the field.
    The only bias I have against big oil are environmental/health (Diesel) issues. In the US they face tough rules in Africa south America they can do what they want...)


    My biggest bias: I absolutely don't like that rotten minded people (like some members/owners of IHxyz seem to be) try to play a role in science, just for their private financial reasons. Basic research has to be done at universities, but this was intermitted by .. at a very early stage.
    I strictly adhere to mathematical logic: If somebody says Rossi is a crock/fraudster, then IH (and as a consequence, to some extent, - their supporters..) are crooks/fraudsters too, because only crooks/fraudsters openly deal with crooks/fraudsters.


    The only positive effect of the IH/Lugano disaster is: Many many independent researchers try to find the “holy grail..”.

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.