TTM - You might be the last to know.
I have to hang out here to prevent the R trolls and SPs from attempting to rewrite history which is presently at least 3 to 4 times per week.
I'll keep watching and correcting.
Back at you buckwheat!
-
-
Oh wow Dewey!
So now I might be the last to know?
Till today it was always "You will be the last to know!". Lost ur confidence?
Well nevermind. A lot of good people in LENR were convinced they saw something and then...
-
TTM - You might be the last to know.
I have to hang out here to prevent the R trolls and SPs from attempting to rewrite history which is presently at least 3 to 4 times per week.
I'll keep watching and correcting.
Back at you buckwheat!
This Rossi SPs is not trying to rewrite
history but trying to find out the correct version of it.
Because IH heat and Rossi did not work well together this is not easy.
It would take a person skilled at
finding facts and getting at the truth
to tell the true story.
-
Sorry Shane, It was boring enough the first time through so I have better things to do than wade through it again. Did you enjoy the video?
Adrian used that DOE thing to divert attention away from the fact he has not provided that reference. He has learned a thing or two from his mentor Rossi.
Shane, my answer had nothing to do with DOE. I think the subject trivial, that also seems ro be the direction of this off topic thread recently. At this stage, rehashing Doral for the nth time is pointless.
-
Display More
This Rossi SPs is not trying to rewrite
history but trying to find out the correct version of it.
Because IH heat and Rossi did not work well together this is not easy.
It would take a person skilled at
finding facts and getting at the truth
to tell the true story.
Sam,
I disagree with your premise that IH and Rossi were both equally at fault for "not working well together", but I respect your opinion. For some reason, most of Rossi's remaining supporters (not you) seem compelled to demonize IH, as if that is a requirement for standing by Rossi. But IMO, there is room to both hope that Rossi is not the scammer Doral showed him to be, and also accept, and support IH for the good they are trying to do for LENR.
.
-
But IMO, there is room to both hope that Rossi is not the scammer Doral showed him to be, and also accept, and support IH for the good they are trying to do for LENR.
I wish they are doing this support and help the field advance. But since they are very keen on keeping everything as secret as possible it is not so easy to form an opinion about what good IH is actually doing.
-
TTM,
Dewey said this past January that he is buying new eye shades, because the future looks so bright (for IH/LENR). You call that being secret?
Seriously (he did say that BTW) he has confirmed some things we never knew before. He is one of the few windows into the field we have going. Of course, we thirst for even more, but he does have constraints he has to consider in feeding us information. But what he has, certainly gives me enough to form the opinion IH is good for the field. How can it not be if they are funding research?Sure, if you pick on Dewey as you and others do, knowing damn good and well that he always fights back, you are going to set yourself up for hating IH.
-
You dodged my question JedRothwell
Did you or did you not receive money from IH?
It is none of your damn business. That's not a dodge.
-
It is none of your damn business. That's not a dodge.
Fair enough. But it also is a major conflict of interest.
-
that Rossi is not the scammer Doral showed him to be,
I thought they settled. If a scam could really be "shown", that would hardly be the case in my opionion... So to me your presentation of an opinion as a "fact" looks mostly like classic labeling and consensus cracking. Ie the frequent use of the word "scammer", and opinion presented as fact "showed him to be"
-
I thought they settled. If a scam could really be "shown", that would hardly be the case in my opionion... So to me your presentation of an opinion as a "fact" looks mostly like classic labeling and consensus cracking. Ie the frequent use of the word "scammer", and opinion presented as fact "showed him to be"
Right - but then you are not a legal expert and the ones who came here and commented explained why those with more professional knowledge of the way civil cases with expert witnesses work disagree with you. Splitting the baby was the expression used I believe.
-
THH,
Experts are often misleading when the case is political (as it is here.) Consider the overwhelming majority of "experts" said Iraq had WND. I much prefer evidence to exert opinions.
-
Fair enough. But it also is a major conflict of interest.
What is a conflict of interest? What are you talking about. Dewey told you they did not pay me for advice.
For that matter, suppose they did pay me. What interest would that conflict with? They paid Murray and Smith. Their reports is right on target. They show what was wrong with the test. Paid for or not, the reports are fully credible.
-
I much prefer evidence to exert opinions.
No, you do not. You ignore a mountain of evidence in the depositions, and you ignore Rossi's own Penon report, which proves beyond doubt that the experiment was a farce. Instead of looking at the evidence you make up nonsense.
-
@ JedRothwell,
If you actually want information from me, this is hardly the way to ask for it. I would say you are trolling.
I'm not trolling, I am just curious, like many others here, to know something more about the rationale of this story. I find very interesting everything you say with this respect, even when it doesn't fit with what you said in the past.
Anyway you're right, I had no reason to doubt the existence of some other old models tested before the first public demo in January 2011. But I have reasons to doubt that the results of these tests were so convincing, as you said, about the allegedly good performances of the machines.
-
Right - but then you are not a legal expert and the ones who came here and commented explained why those with more professional knowledge of the way civil cases with expert witnesses work disagree with you. Splitting the baby was the expression used I believe.
Maybe I'm not. But I sort of got the idea that IH hired the most experienced and expensive "experts" money can buy, both to do "PR" and to "show" Rossi was a scam in court? And then they settled. And if taking into account all the Dewey talk made here up until that point, it seems more like IH lost BIG time. Rossi got his freedom and IP back and IH pulled back into silence... Dead silence, well except for some random comments by Dewey explaining that (not why) everyone except him is such a loser ... especially if doubting the great honor of IH... To me it looks more like an attempt to do damage control than anything else.
-
@ Shane D.,
If we start publicly humiliating every insider who believed in Rossi early on, LENR is going to be a very lonely place.
No intention to humiliate anyone. My wording here may seem rude, because I'm using a foreign language. I apologize to anyone who may feel offended for this wording.
As for JR, from what he wrote in the past he seems to be an "Ecat insider", not just a simple "LENR insider". Anyway, I didn't say that he believed in Rossi, only that he strongly supported all the performances of his devices claimed by people other than Rossi himself.
QuoteOnly one not fooled it seems was Brian Ahern. Oddly, Brian is one of the few "competitors" Rossi has praised.
Of course he wasn't. According to Celani (1) "Dr. Brian Ahern and Rossi were both doing work for the DoD, apparently on a related project, as recently as 2008."
So Ahern was too informed on his "competitor" to be fooled, nevertheless, according to JR, he gave him some useful credit (2): "he definitely does believe Rossi has seen anomalous energy, but he does not think Rossi has good control over it."
In any case, Ahern was not the only one to be not fooled. Last year, JR revealed (3): "There were many others in the U.S. military he did not fool. I have been in touch with them. They never believed a word he said."
QuoteAnother thing to consider is that Rossi may have had a "little" something in the beginning. It has not been ruled out.
It doesn't work this way. It is the claimant who has the burden of proving what he claims. In any case, JR is the only person here who can shed some more light on what happened in the real beginning, but he keeps trying to rewrite the Ecat story postponing its beginning to the Ferrara tests and the corresponding report.
QuoteLet us also keep in mind that the only one deserving of blame, and ridicule is Rossi.
I don't like to ridicule anyone, and IMO the first deserving of blame are those who was paid by the taxpayers to ascertain and proclaim the scientific truth, but missed to these duties.
QuoteBlaming the victims is not the way to go.
Which victims do you mean? Not JR, I hope. As shown by his own words above, he was in touch with many in the US military that told him that they never believed a word of Rossi, but despite this he strenuously proclaimed the reliability of the Ecat performances for years. The victims are rather those who have believed the Ecat was producing excess heat thanks to his posts on the web.
(1) https://ecatsite.wordpress.com…the-us-navy/#comment-1897
(2) http://www.mail-archive.com/vo…@eskimo.com/msg55881.html
-
Tony - you speak in ignorance. I don't know why.
-
No, you do not.
Yes I do. You shouldn't make things up. I know what I think - yu don't.
I didn't find the evidence compelling and the opinions even less so.
-
Tony - you speak in ignorance. I don't know why.
I can understand why you feel that way.
