Rossi-Blog Comment Discussion

  • I think you are all getting a bit too excited about this. I see no reason why Rossi could not be included appended with the label' controversial'. I expect that I could do the same for a few others. I think there is another thing to consider- there are respected names in that list who have never seem a whisper of cold fusion, but who have never tangled with venture capital or social media. Should they be in there - despite having no results?

  • Nice Bang. Could you turn this into a song with singing Muppets?

    Hmm, "I BELIEVE IN THE ECAT" was already done by T. Florek ...


    This is something for everybody! :-)

    (Celvin Rotane - I Believe! - Music video on YT)


    And, of course, the really REAL E-CAT ENERGY SOURCE

    (A comercial for an energy drink)

    What I'm wating for, in regard of LENR:

    BANG! BANG! FEUER FREI!

    (Rammstein - Feuer Frei! - xXx - Triple X - Original Soundtrack on YT)


    Off topic?!

    Of course!


    This post was made with assitance of "Jameson - Caskmates".

    Thank you!

  • What is it with Germans, and their heavy metal music? :)

    Shane, I'm in the mood, but this is getting too much off topic:


    Here we go:

    Germany has a lot of different music to offer.

    Rammstein for e.g. is a mayor act from Germany, famous and sold out concerts all over the world, including the USA.


    What's your question, again? :-)

  • Except for the fact that it does not actually work.


    As a possible FaS strategy (1), it worked beautifully.


    As I have said, the first Levi report might indicate he has a real result, but the evidence against that overwhelms that report, in my opinion.


    IMO, the actual first Levi report (2) might indicate that the demo held on January 14, 2001 was a real implementation of a FaS strategy.


    (1) Fake&Succeed strategy in R&D. What about CF?

    (2) http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/LeviGreportonhe.pdf

  • For this one topic we will suspend kevmo's "Don't start nothing/won't be nothing" policy. You can let loose, but no strong profanity.

    I think you misinterpret my personal policy of "don't start nuthin', won't BE nuthin'"... It is aimed at reducing insults to FORUM participants, not insults to Rossi. In my view, Rossi has earned all these insults. But I draw the line at insulting other forum participants and Rossiphiles. Just as I think the other side ought to be drawing the same line. But insults towards Rossi should really be allowed to fly...


    My viewpoint is that Rossi deserves a mention on the "who's who " list in 2019 only because at least half of the comments on this blog alone are about him. He's the elephant in the living room. Just put him into the controversial section and mention whatever is worth mentioning. I think Mills is in the same category, and has even caused more trouble over more years, but he has a first class theoretical mind & is less of a tinkerer.

  • kevmo,


    I do not think an * with the word "controversial" besides Rossi's name, will be enough to protect us from the negative PR of his being recognized as a "Who's Who of LENR". Yes, as Adrian and Ascoli say, he has brought much attention to the field, and I give him credit for that, but that is far outweighed IMO with what his questionable behavior has done to LENR's reputation.


    Honoring him alongside the likes of a McKubre, Mills, Miley, Duncan, Godes, Mills would be a disservice to those who have done legitimate scientific work, and have never been in trouble with the law in the many ways Rossi has. I just do not see any good coming from this. I say we compromise between the two camps, and keep Rossi's "accomplishments" quietly within our community, and give the public honors to those we *all* can proudly stand behind.

  • I do not think an * with the word "controversial" besides Rossi's name, will be enough to protect us from the negative PR of his being recognized as a "Who's Who of LENR". Yes, as Adrian and Ascoli say, he has brought much attention to the field, and I give him credit for that, but that is far outweighed IMO with what his questionable behavior has done to LENR's reputation.


    I didn't mention Rossi. I was referring to the Ecat. Its performances were measured, documented, verified, affirmed, recognized and supported by a couple dozens of legitimate academicians, including a Nobel laureate (1). This is the reason why people still believe in the Ecat (2,3).


    The Ecat initiative didn't bring only attention to the field. Actually it became almost a synonym of LENR, presented as its most promising implementation (4) and, finally, it also brought much more tangible benefits (5).


    Quote

    Honoring him alongside the likes of a McKubre, Mills, Miley, Duncan, Godes, Mills would be a disservice to those who have done legitimate scientific work, and have never been in trouble with the law in the many ways Rossi has. I just do not see any good coming from this. I say we compromise between the two camps, and keep Rossi's "accomplishments" quietly within our community, and give the public honors to those we *all* can proudly stand behind.


    In a "Who's who of LENR", as well as in any other document describing the history and/or the status of CF/LENR, the Ecat deserves as a minimum an entire dedicated section.


    (1) Rossi-Blog Comment Discussion

    (2) https://www.lenr-forum.com/forum/thread/4645-rossi-blog-comment-discussion/?postID=89378#post8

    (3) Rossi-Blog Comment Discussion

    (4) http://lenrproof.com/slide_01.html

    (5) http://www.sifferkoll.se/siffe…woodford-taking-the-blow/

  • THE WHO'S WHO OF COLD FUSION 2019 thread


    Question is: should Rossi be listed on the "Who's Who" list of LENR players? Some feel he should. Others like myself think it best he be left off.


    That is my opinion, although I am open to other ideas. Interested in what the Rossi friend, and foe alike think? For this one topic we will suspend kevmo's "Don't start nothing/won't be nothing" policy. You can let loose, but no strong profanity.

    Ah, let Rossi have his prime spot on the "Who's Who in LENR/CF” list!


    After all, still a lot of LENR-ist consider that his e-cats have merit - just see who all attended the Stockolm Stockholm presentation.


    As long as his claims get the attention from the LENR community, he reflects somehow the spirit of (part of) this community, and his influence can’t be ignored.

    How would one justify that Parkhomov is on the list, but not Rossi?



    And in case you mark Rossi as “controversial”, then you should check who else on that list should be called “controversiall (Just google the individual names together with the word “controversial”)


    Anyhow, you better mark also in the list what claims are just “hearsay” or rumours, and what is based on evidence.

    E.g From where does the info come, that Siemens is working (“silently”) on LENR?

    (I also read somewhere else the rumour that some escaped NAZI use LENR reactor at their hideout on the south-pole - or was it on the backside of the moon?)


    There is also no “Seashore” listed in the “Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation” database of grantees.



    And why is the deceased Sven Kullander on that list, but not Martin Fleischmann?


    And why Ruby Karat, Steven Krivit, but no Jed Rothwell (and no Frank Acland)?


    And finally, why is the UK laboratory (that former milk barn, where the lovely gammas dance now) on the list, but not the Czech “wine cellar” lab (where the Quark-X style reactor was glowing)?

    I know, it became a bit quite about me356 now, and one difference is that me356 is anonymous for most of us, but not for all (e.g. not for Bob G. and other MFMP guys).