Rossi-Blog Comment Discussion

  • never said regulations would stop their use. I said they will delay it, just as they delay all other technology.

    I don't think think there is a law to stop the first installation at the client.

    I have said many times there is evidence that the Rossi devices worked in the first Levi report. I still think so, but subsequent events make me think it is unlikely. I am quite sure the Doral test did not work, and you might agree if you looked at it, but you refuse to do that

    Saying there is evidence for and believing early E-Cats worked are two different things.

    Do you not think it is highly unlikely that early E-Cats worked and he would build new reactors that didn't? He even had the previous generation on standby and never used them at Doral.

    You again say I refuse to look at the Doral evidence. I', tired of you repeating that lie. I have told you several times I DID look at the evidence, but I am not about to read it all again and so will not rehash that subject.

    Apparently I do need to repeat it, because you just distorted it. You changed "delay" to "never." Time will not tell. The regulations and laws will not change, and regulators not allow an exception for Rossi or anyone else. They can't. They would be breaking the law. Only Congress can change the laws, and I cannot see any reason why it would change them for Rossi. A delay of a few years will not hurt him or slow down progress measurably. On the contrary, it will ensure the products are safe and the public accepts them. In the end, it will speed up the process.

    See above on regulations. I am not expecting a delay. If the government did get involved the delay would be a long one. Show me a law that would require government testing in an industrial situation.. Time will tell.

  • Here are Rossi's exact quotes on ECW/JONP establishing the importance and contributions of his fabulous new partner:

    "We already found the right Partner.

    Warm Regards,



    Warm Regards,


    1- yes

    2- yes

    3- yes

    4- yes

    Warm Regards,


    Everything else was Frank. Does anyone really believe he even read the questions?

  • Adrian's militant support for Rossi, is based on his profound and absolute lack of certainty. He has told us many times that he does not know whether Rossi is a scheming cheat or not, and while his knowledge remains so incomplete he will strongly champion Rossi, report his sphinx-like utterances with undertones of approval, etc.

    What, IO, we perhaps need to take into account is that while erroneous views can be displaced, somone who is determinedly not sure, and in that enlightened state strongly supports Rossi, is not likely to change. Personally, I'll be interested in how he rationalises the continued lack of certainly over the next 10 years. I will not expect his belligerence to change.

    As a determined skeptic myself I should have fellow feeling for Adrian's self-proclaimed lack of certainty, but it not does not quite work like that. Even I, not liking to think ill of others, agree Rossi is a proven cheat and liar based on disclosed public evidence. You have to be strangely ignorant not to do this. I'd then find Adrian's brand of strong Rossi support most unpalatable, even were I inclined to think the tests showed something of interest (which they most definitely do not).


  • I believe Adrian has given Rossi until January, if I am correct? Sam until April.

    What I said was Rossi says production will start in January and I thought that slightly optimistic.

    After that, plants of a few MW have to be assembled. After that installed and I have no idea how long it will be before Rossi releases information about it.

    I hope Rossi installs the first module in his partner's manufacturing facilities. He can claim to be running a full scale test of safety and reliability and that he can provide the data to the government should they be interested.

    Forecasts are valueless. What counts are facts. Lets wait anf see.

  • I see you can't bring your self to answer the question asked for the 5th time in my last post to you. Remember yes or no?

    On the topic of unanswered questions, I asked you a question several times and have yet to get an answer. My question was what do you believe about Rossi's fake customer JM Products, which he admitted was a scam, and what do you believe that says about Rossi's credibility?

  • We keep debating with Adrian as if there was a point to it. The only really interesting question is whether there is any conceivable circumstance under which he would decide that Rossi has nothing of value. And I think we already know the answer.

    The problem with old Rossi tech is that it was not robust and enduring. His new tech may be more robust and less fault prone since Rossi tested his new tech for a year, the advertised lifetime of the reaction zone.

  • Rossi's partner will have (maybe is now having) a very strong voice in the SK vs. QX product release decision. If Boeing is the partner, it would REQUIRE that the SK reactor is to be the first product release that Rossi makes since the SK reactor is ideal as a jet engine primary power source. If the partner is a food vendor, then that partner would opt to release the QX to the market since it is well tested and is less risky to release to the marketplace and the process heat market.

  • You say what counts, are facts. Why do you then ignore the clear facts that Rossi has been proven to be a liar and con man? He himself admitted to be his own fake customer he did sell heat to...

    I now beleive that when Rossi finally understood that he could not commercialize his old tech, and when IH offered to buy that tech, Rossi decided to sell it to IH. This old tech could pass a day long test, but not a year long test that was required for commercialization.

    When Rossi found a way to fix the failure prone nature of his old tech, Rossi then came up with a way to get the E-cat IP rights back. His methods involved a no holds barred legal knife fight in which Rossi was not constrained by ethics.