Rossi-Blog Comment Discussion

  • Rossi ready for third party testing.

    1. Frank Acland May 31, 2020 at 10:52 AM

      Dear Andrea,

      Is the E-Cat SKL developed to a point where you would be happy to have a third party test it hands-on, when circumstances permit. Or does it need further development before reaching that moment?

      Many thanks,

      Frank Acland

    2. Andrea Rossi May 31, 2020 at 11:08 AM

      Frank Acland:

      We are ready for that, provided a due agreement is done.

      Warm Regards,

      A.R.

  • We are ready for that, provided a due agreement is done.


    It has always been the case, folks. Reputable third parties have had trouble with Rossi's idea of due agreement:

    NASA

    Hydrofusion (not very reputable, but they pulled out)

    IH


    IH is a stunning case where in a surfeit of optimism they actually agreed to pay Rossi $10M up front with another $90M soon if his stuff could be made to work when tested independently, and with no financial incentive for a continuing relationship. From papers released they would have given Rossi the money anyway had his stuff just worked for them. At all. This is Rossi's idea of a due agreement.


    Rossi then faked "tested independently" into "tested by Rossi pretending to be a reputable third party", provided spurious results, and then sued for the $90M.


    Wow!


    Bet they regret it now...

  • It always amazed me that such seemingly intelligent businessmen could be so easily manipulated by a conman.


    I thought, “Are these people truly this gullible or greedy, or do they just want so badly to believe it is true, that they ignore all the obvious telltale signs of a con”.


    Oh well, A Fool and his money were parted


  • What I can't really understand is WHY F.A,, thats runs ECW and clearly is a commercial partner/promoter of Dotore's business, (see pic below) needs to communicate with him by one of the countless and ridiculous posts on JONP.

    Can't he just pick up the phone and ask directly Dotore? Just don't let fans fall asleep?

    Sam, do you happen to ask this yourself, other than cherry picking/pasting the most promising jokesposts from jonp reader?



    post

  • Franks posts on Rossi Blog keep

    him and everyone updated on how

    A.R. Is progressing.

    My guess is Frank did communicate

    directly when he seen A.R. offered

    him the chance to be involved

    in the SKL presentation.

    Fat chance that he is a commercial

    partner.He does indirectly promote

    Rossi but only because he still

    believes that Rossi will still end

    up with a commercial product.

  • It always amazed me that such seemingly intelligent businessmen could be so easily manipulated by a conman.


    Why did such seemingly intelligent businessmen when confronted with a court case against him not show in court that the Lugano test was flawed ?

    As Para stated, with the Optris ravi files it would take about 10 minutes to do so.

    And that would have been very strong evidence against Rossi.

    Maybe it is telling that IH did not take that route ?

  • Fat chance that he is a commercial

    partner.He does indirectly promote

    Rossi but only because he still

    believes that Rossi will still end

    up with a commercial product.


    So you mean he keeps advertising Doctore business for free?

    Or, by other hand, by advertising Doctore, he's indirectly trying to do not let his blog die?

    If so, this matter is going to look like the chicken-egg problem.

  • Why did such seemingly intelligent businessmen when confronted with a court case against him not show in court that the Lugano test was flawed ?

    As Para stated, with the Optris ravi files it would take about 10 minutes to do so.

    And that would have been very strong evidence against Rossi.

    Maybe it is telling that IH did not take that route ?


    Because the Court Case had nothing to do with whether the Lugano test was flawed.


    If it were relevant, it would have the difficulty that it is very technical. So it would be one expert against another. You can find scientists (e.g. Levi in this case) who will hold almost any position. Although you'd have better scientists showing it was flawed, the jury would get bored with the technical details and the end result would be somewhat random.


    Court trials with Juries about science are not the same as scientific debates, with an accurate science conclusion. they are more like PR shows where the expert who sounds better wins.

  • So you mean he keeps advertising Doctore business for free?

    Or, by other hand, by advertising Doctore, he's indirectly trying to do not let his blog die?

    If so, this matter is going to look like the chicken

    You mean Frank is a commercial

    partner by making money out of

    advertising on ECat World?

    Anyone wager a guess on how

    much Frank would make from

    advertisements?


    https://www.outbrain.com/help/advertisers/blog-advertising/

  • Because the Court Case had nothing to do with whether the Lugano test was flawed.


    Then why did representatives of IH try to bribe Dr. Levi to withdraw his support of the Lugano Report ?


    See : PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR SANCTIONS FOR BAD FAITH LITIGATION CONDUCTCase 1:16-cv-21199-CMA Document 167 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/09/2017

  • Then why did representatives of IH try to bribe Dr. Levi to withdraw his support of the Lugano Report ?


    See : PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR SANCTIONS FOR BAD FAITH LITIGATION CONDUCTCase 1:16-cv-21199-CMA Document 167 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/09/2017

    That is what was claimed, but the proof failed to pass muster.

    That is why the judge allowed the documents and then threw out that claim.

    I suggest to read all of those Zali documents again.

  • Why did such seemingly intelligent businessmen when confronted with a court case against him not show in court that the Lugano test was flawed ?

    As Para stated, with the Optris ravi files it would take about 10 minutes to do so.

    And that would have been very strong evidence against Rossi.

    Maybe it is telling that IH did not take that route ?


    As the case settled before any witnesses were called or any evidence introduced, any discussion of what would or would not have been introduced at trial is speculation. Having said that, IMO IH would have introduced as much admissible evidence of Rossi's lies and fraud as they were able. I am not familiar with the specifics of the Lugano incident so I won't opine on whether or not it may have been admissible. My personal $.02 opinion is that IH settled because they were afraid of a idiot jury who would just see a charismatic old man vs the big bad investment bankers and that even if they won they might not recover anything, and Rossi settled because he was afraid that the jury might see through him and force him to give back the $10 million to IH as well as having all of his lies and bs exposed to potential future investors/fanboys.