Rossi-Blog Comment Discussion

Quote from Adrian Ashfield

The very first paragraph of Rossi’s action against IH says that “it works.” Don’t be so pathetic.

“ROSSI is the sole inventor of a revolutionary low energy nuclear reactor, popularly known as the "Energy Catalyzer' or "E-Cat" (hereafter "E-Cat"), which through the use of a catalyst, generates a low energy nuclear reaction resulting in an exothermic release of energy “

http://newenergytimes.com/v2/s…05Rossi-vs-Darden-NET.pdf

Aha! Caught in the act...

Adrian, the above argument indicates why you are able to remain so confused over the IH vs Rossi case. You do not distinguish between statements made by the two sides lawyers (strongly sugared and misleading) and the evidence (very strong for the reasons given above) from the pre-Trial Discovery. A bit like your inability to distinguish between fact and RossiSays, you do not distinguish between evidence and RossiLawyerSays.

However, even given this caveat (you are taking legal spin as fact), your quote does not show that the e-cat works, merely that that is what Rossi claims. It is a non-specific and unquantified claim, which can never be disproved.

AA: Rossi was in a better position than anyone else to know and it seems unlikely that he would take it to court if he knew it didn’t work.

You are here forgetting the key point: Rossi has never properly tested his devices and so cannot know whether they work or no. You argue that either it worked, or Rossi knew it did not work. Bad logic.

Of course it is also based on a bad assumption - that this case could be won by Rossi only if his device works. In fact the case had little to do with that, and much to do with a specific contract, and which parties fulfilled the conditions in it.

Quote from Adrian Ashfield

I was answering Jed's comment "Rossi never once has said it worked"

No mention of where. Earlier Jed wrote that I had refused to look at the court documents and later that I hadn't looked at them.

All those statements are untrue. Yet you say I am confused as you try to spin the story.

I am really fed up with the babble and it was a mistake to answer you.

Actually, on this minor point I agree with AA regarding the literal statement of Jed. (Jed, I think you mispoke by not qualifying more precisely.) I think the more accurate statement is: in the evidence provided on the docket, there is no statement taken under oath by Rossi in pre-trial discovery where he claims that the E-Cat worked.

Rossi certainly has said the E-Cat works, on his blog and elsewhere, and even though Adrian's reference is to claims in the lawsuit and not a direct quote, it's not an unreasonable example that Rossi says his E-Cat worked.

Quote from sigmoidal

Actually, on this minor point I agree with AA regarding the literal statement of Jed. (Jed, I think you mispoke by not qualifying more precisely.) I think the more accurate statement is: in the evidence provided on the docket, there is no statement taken under oath by Rossi in pre-trial discovery where he claims that the E-Cat worked.

Yes, I was talking about the docket documents. Obviously Rossi has claimed that the machine works! Many times. But as Prof. Huxley points out, the case was not about whether the machine worked. It was about a contract dispute. Strictly speaking, the contract did not say "the machine must work" it said "Penon must certify that the machine worked." As you see in his report, Penon would certify anything Rossi pays him to certify. He would certify that a pet rock is a supercomputer.

Quote from JedRothwell

Yes, I was talking about the docket documents. Obviously Rossi has claimed that the machine works! Many times. But as Prof. Huxley points out, the case was not about whether the machine worked. It was about a contract dispute. Strictly speaking, the contract did not say "the machine must work" it said "Penon must certify that the machine worked." As you see in his report, Penon would certify anything Rossi pays him to certify. He would certify that a pet rock is a supercomputer.

Agreed. I posted my response above because though I agree with you on many things, on this issue I think your unqualified statement resulted in you and AA talking past each other, essentially about two different things. This happens a lot on blogs, but is not very interesting or productive.. I was guilty of doing something similar by misunderstanding a point AA was making when I posted one of Rossi's many lies. The evidence of Rossi's lie I provided was factual, but it wasn't actually responsive to AA's point once I re-read the comment. And so I apologized, since that confusion was due to me not reading the comment correctly.

Quote from Adrian Ashfield

I misread it as Axil saying the shape of the tube was hexagonal, instead of that he was referring to the Boron Nitride.

For anyone who can't use Google as follows:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boron_nitride

Quote

Hexagonal form (h-BN)

The most stable crystalline form is the hexagonal one, also called h-BN, α-BN, g-BN, and graphitic boron nitride. Hexagonal boron nitride (point group = D_6h; space group = P6₃/mmc) has a layered structure similar to graphite. Within each layer, boron and nitrogen atoms are bound by strong covalent bonds, whereas the layers are held together by weak van der Waals forces. The interlayer "registry" of these sheets differs, however, from the pattern seen for graphite, because the atoms are eclipsed, with boron atoms lying over and above nitrogen atoms. This registry reflects the polarity of the B–N bonds. Still, h-BN and graphite are very close neighbors and even the BC₆N hybrids have been synthesized where carbon substitutes for some B and N atoms.

Quote from sigmoidal

Actually, on this minor point I agree with AA regarding the literal statement of Jed. (Jed, I think you mispoke by not qualifying more precisely.) I think the more accurate statement is: in the evidence provided on the docket, there is no statement taken under oath by Rossi in pre-trial discovery where he claims that the E-Cat worked.

Rossi certainly has said the E-Cat works, on his blog and elsewhere, and even though Adrian's reference is to claims in the lawsuit and not a direct quote, it's not an unreasonable example that Rossi says his E-Cat worked.

OK: so here I disagree - though not in a way very pertinent to this discussion. It is largely a matter of how statements are interpreted.

Still, the reason I disagree is pertinent; so here goes.

Rossi is deceitful and shows what seems to be extreme technical incompetence in his test setups while also, in some other ways, appearing to have some knowledge of Physics.

Decoding this mix of deceit and incompetence is not simple, not even certain, and one aspect of Rossi's resilience has been exactly that he does not fit any single picture of "clever scammer" or "stupid scammer". Few scammers are interested in the philosophy of science history. Therefore those like Adrian who are inclined due to the Rossi effect to support him can spend their effort shooting down simplistic psychological pictures of him as scammer, and therefore argue that he is probably telling the truth.

I know this argument is faulty: when laid out as above everyone can see that. But it convinces many, and it leads to differing views amongst Rossi-watchers as to is precise motivation, level of deceit, connection with reality. The reality is fascinating. But not simple. So anyone (and many on both sides fit this) who looks for simple psychological pictures that explain Rossi will miss things.

Therefore I think precision in decoding Rossi-isms is a worthwhile exercise where possible. In this case Rossi (or his lawyers) are always careful to make claims that are not easily disprovable, where possible. A statement that the e-cat has an LENR reaction is unquantitative and therefore can never be disproved. In fact it is technically true since nuclear reactions do occur in hydrated metal lattices though at such a low rate that this is not significant, or measurable. Electron shielding nevertheless makes the theoretical reaction rate much higher than might otherwise be expected. So, technically, this claim is expected to be true. Rossi has throughout his career lived on such technicalities, twisting words to fit a literal version of truth while being grossly misleading. Whenever he is found out, or contradicts himself, he will use any technicality. (Actually most of the time he just ignores all his past statements, but if pushed will use technicalities, mostly concocted by his devoted fans, to justify himself).

That could reasonably be happening here. Note there is no claim that the device has a specific output power, except by reference to the Penon report and what Penon says.

Rossi is a clever guy.

THHuxleynew I completely agree with what you posted. But the narrow point AA contested was Jed's unqualified statement that Rossi never said his E-Cat worked. Which AA could apply (reasonably or not) to any statement by Rossi anywhere (like on JoNP for example). This IS what Jed said, but he meant it in the context of the information provided on the docket regarding sworn testimony in Rossi vs Darden. So qualifying his statement within that context sharpens his point. Without the qualification, AA has a more legitimate contention.

I agree with Jed (and you) that Rossi never said the E-Cat worked in pretrial discovery that we have from RvD, but in fairness: 1) Rossi was never asked this question directly by IH lawyers (because the suit was about breach of contract and fraudulent inducement, not specifically whether it worked, as Jed correctly pointed out), and 2) we don't have the full contents of discovery evidence (because the significant parts we do have were made public as evidence from discovery supporting complaints filed by either party petitioning the court for sanctions).

Obviously, there is a boatload of evidence that Rossi is a liar and a conman, and this is available to anyone who takes the time to comb through RvD, his fake "Journal" blog, and many other sources.

My comment was made in hopes of reducing unnecessary bickering as AA and Jed argued past each other. (As opposed to the necessary bickering that we do here, I guess?)

Yes, Rossi is a clever guy - a Master of Deception. Or perhaps more appropriately, the Dottore di truffo

Quote from interested observer

Director is adding immeasurably to this thread. It is great to have someone else making authoritative, scientific-sounding statements with absolutely nothing to back them up or give them even a shred of credibility. Can’t give Axil a monopoly afterall.

I can't wait for the publication of the "Theory of Chiral Surface Plasmon Polariton Spheromak Condensate Induced LENR" calculated using "Axil-Director Statistics" (ADS). Like Bones says in the Spock's Brain episode, "A child could do it!"

Quote from Adrian Ashfield

[THHuxleynew wrote:

OK: so here I disagree]

The essence of waffle. You would write anything rather than admit you made a mistake and apologize.

Display More

You misunderstand. That's not a waffle. That's strongly assertive by the standards of British academic or tech-support language. As Chris Tinsley explained, when sparks are flying out of the machine, the tech people have been up all night trying to make it go, and the room is littered with take-away curry boxes, they tell you: "we are having a spot of trouble."

"OK: so here I disagree" in U.S. discourse would be: "You're full of it, bud!!" You have to calibrate for Language Intent Factor (LIF). In Japanese it would be something like: "I hesitate to say this, and no doubt I misunderstand but . . ."

Quote from JedRothwell

You misunderstand. That's not a waffle. That's strongly assertive by the standards of British academic or tech-support language. As Chris Tinsley explained, when sparks are flying out of the machine, the tech people have been up all night trying to make it go, and the room is littered with take-away curry boxes, they tell you: "we are having a spot of trouble."

"OK: so here I disagree" in U.S. discourse would be: "You're full of it, bud!!" You have to calibrate for Language Intent Factor (LIF). In Japanese it would be something like: "I hesitate to say this, and no doubt I misunderstand but . . ."

In this case I used that phrase because I usually agree with sigmoidal, and I wished to emphasise it was a narrow point on which I disagreed.

However like you I think AA has not understood what I was saying.

I see Rossi says he is hiring people to build and run his factory. Strange no adverts on his own forum.

Quote

The BELIEVERS (Rossilievers) say the same things and ask the same questions so often I have given up answering most of them. When was the last time any of them had an original thought?

Makes a bit more sense that way.

Quote

I see Rossi says he is hiring people to build and run his factory. Strange no adverts on his own forum.

The adverts are all psychic and the work is done via telekinesis.

AA:

I think what Rossi did at Doral with his supposed customer was wrong, but I don't think it was as bad as you make out. He didn't take money from anybody through the deception.

I have to say that I almost agree with AA here. All of us I am sure agree that it is perfectly okay to attempt to borrow money from a bank and, to document your credit worthiness, forge a bunch of paperwork showing you have millions in assets (which don’t exist). Except I should point out that such behavior is one of the federal felonies for which Paul Manafort is currently on trial. And it is clearly okay according to AA to try to persuade someone to give you hundreds of millions of dollars for a revolutionary invention and, as proof that your revolutionary invention works, create a fake company as a customer, arrange for fake officers and forge invoices to show sales from you to the fake company.

The only reason Rossi didn’t take any money from the deception (I am glad to see we have moved beyond shenanigans – maybe someday we will actually get to outright lies) is that IH refused to give him any more money. AA, do you think that Rossi would not have accepted the money from IH and really, do you honestly think that the whole fake company was created for any reason other than to persuade IH to give Rossi the money?

My understanding was that Rossi was talking the Johnson Matthey but when his hoped for deal fell through took the dubious short cut to pretend that it hadn't.   

AA, what is your evidence for this “hoped for deal” – as I understand it, and I base this on the documents turned over by ROSSI in discovery, Rossi wanted it to appear as if he was buying huge amounts of platinum sponge. There was never anything turned over by ROSSI in discovery about deals for joint ventures, investments, etc., with JM. And, sadly it appears I spoke too soon about moving away from “shenanigans.” We are now back to “dubious short cut.” What Rossi did was commit FRAUD, pure and simple.

Contrary to what some have written he did tell Darden and Darden stated he didn't care if the heat went to waste.  

Please provide your source for this factual allegation. Also, what did he allegedly tell Darden – that the fake company was a fake company, that there was a non-existent heat exchanger, and/or that the heat was going to waste, but that under no circumstances could anyone from IH go into the other room and check for evidence of this tremendous amount heat being wasted?

Also to blame IH for not finding Rossi a customer for over a year causing Rossi to do what he did. And of course Rossi's obsession with secrecy. 

You claim to have read the Doral documents. I have my doubts. IIRC, the agreement that originally governed the relationship between Rossi and IH required Rossi to prove that his widget worked, with the proof to include the widget working for a year. I don’t recall that there was any requirement for a customer at all (anyone please correct me if I am wrong here). Rather it was Rossi who decided that he needed to move to Doral and to have a customer. Why, the customer requirement, and choice of customer, was driven by Rossi – he absolutely needed a fake customer.

Rossi wanted IH to pay him the additional hundreds of millions, but to do that Rossi had to prove the widget worked. But it didn’t, so Rossi had to cheat IH into paying him. What better way that to say, “hey, look, I got a real customer who is going to pay Leonardo for all this wonderful heat. And oh, don’t worry about me rigging this – my real customer is 100% independent of me.” Rossi had to create a fake customer – it was the only chance he had to keep the con running and collect his payoff.

And AA, before you accuse me of just babbling, etc., if you read the Doral documents then you must already know that: (1) Rossi controlled the formation, governance and what little operation there was of the fake company; (2) Rossi arranged for the fake company to generate fake invoices for the purchase of the fake heat; (3) no money actually ever changed hands from the fake company to Rossi – the fake company never paid Rossi for anything, in fact, the fake company essentially had no money; and (4) if the fake company had actually purchased and used the non-existent heat, why did Rossi need a fake heat exchanger?

I am sure that, with your vast and extensive experience designing, supervising the construction, etc., etc. of mega-plants and other stuff, you will claim that this kind of behavior is just common place and happens all the time. I will stipulate that this kind of behavior happens, and happens to frequently. However, if these sorts of “dubious short cuts” result in people being cheated, the perpetrators tend to end up in jail, in extradition free jurisdictions or dead, usually in jail.

I think it likely that the Dodal plant did produce excess heat but the evidence of just how much is not clear.

THE ONLY HEAT THE DORAL PLANT PRODUCED WAS FROM ROSSI’S MOUTH AND HIS ASS. And if we could harness that, we wouldn't need the ecat, the QX, the SK or any of Rossi's other fake widgets.

Quote from Shane D.

Usually when you have 22 employees, and start a factory, there is no avoiding leaving a paper trail. So far though, he has managed to hide all this activity, as I have not been able to find anything.

Yes, but are you limiting your search to this time/space continuum? Have you considered the possibility that Rossi, with all of his magnificence, might have managed to access other planes of existence? I think we should allow for that possibility. A man with Rossi's talents should not limit his fraudulent activities to just one plane of existence. Think of the potential for all those beings ready to be fleeced by Rossi.

Quote from woodworker

(4) if the fake company had actually purchased and used the non-existent heat, why did Rossi need a fake heat exchanger?

Well, if the heat were real, the company would need a heat exchanger. That is, an industrial scale ventilation system, big enough for a very large kitchens in something like a hotel or commercial bakery, with 33 of the largest stoves and ovens you can buy (100,000 btu models - 30 kW each). That calls for massive hoods inside and 4 ventilation units on the roof, each about 10 feet tall. You couldn't miss 'em!

You can't make heat disappear. Conservation of energy . . . There are no endothermic processes that could absorb that much heat, except melting tons of ice, and no one saw truckloads of ice delivered every day, so that didn't happen.

Rossi did briefly claim there was a magic endotheric process, before going on to make up the invisible heat exchanger story.