Rossi-Blog Comment Discussion

Quote from sigmoidal

It seems to me that if Rossi announced and confessed to the whole world that he is and always has been a fraudulent con man, there would be a contingent here that was sure this was all just part of Rossi's plan to hide his miraculous pink unicorn perpetual motion machine magic heatilator.

Or, as Mark Twain * put it, it is easier to fool people than to convince them they have been fooled.

(* Attributed, and I believe I saw that in a contemporaneous article in the New York Times.)

Quote from Forty-Two

There have been, are, and will always be people around who yearn for a Guru / leader / hero, who they can follow and admire, who they dream will change the world (and their lifes) to a better one.

Quote from Shane D.

Good summation by Acland, about the upcoming Rossi event:

https://e-catworld.com/2018/11…rcial-e-cat-presentation/

Looking forward to seeing what Rossi has in store for us.

42

I have always suspected that the “Rossi-ites”

Are slightly susceptible to manipulation by this flamboyant con man.

hopefully, this charade ends soon and they’re smarter for it.

Quote from Shane D.

Good summation by Acland, about the upcoming Rossi event:

https://e-catworld.com/2018/11…rcial-e-cat-presentation/

Looking forward to seeing what Rossi has in store for us.

Shane,

Frank could have written his “summation” before Rossi announced a date.

Frank is “All in” on Rossi, and believes whatever he is told.

What do YOU think is going to happen in the upcoming event?

Maybe Rossi himself?

Quote from JedRothwell

That "goal" is absolutely impossible in the 21st century. Significant IP in a commercial cannot be hidden. Here are the main reasons:

1. Anything of importance will be reverse engineered within weeks of the first sale. Industrial corporations will do this surreptitiously, and government agencies in every country will do it openly.

2. You are never allowed to sell a product until you reveal practically all important details. You cannot get UL certification or regulator certification without giving them complete blueprints and the sources for all parts. I have seen the UL applications and that is what they call for.

3. Regulatory certification for major products that can cause harm, such as automobiles and boilers, involves destructive testing and taking apart the device to look for weak parts and dangerous parts. You might be able to sell yet another 2.5 kW room heater without this, but there is no way anyone could sell what appears to be a nuclear reactor that works by unknown principles without extensive investigations. Every single component will be examined with the best instruments available, and the device will be tested over thousands of hours, in every country in which the product is to be sold.

In short, what you describe is nonsense taken to the third power.

Display More

I brought this up on Ecat and it got shouted down by the usual suspects, mostly predicated on the genius that is Rossi.

It appears that they can justify nearly anything, no matter how ridiculous.

So, supposing that Rossi has no genuine IP, what is he up to? Do you think that this will be just another turn on the merry-go-round and he will announce next year yet another advance in the technology that necessitates a delay in marketing ... or does he have some way to make money by selling heat/power at a 20% discount? Maybe he will be accessing carbon credits or some other type of subsidy?

Big business would likely pay to keep everyone on the merry-go-round,

“Do you think that this will be just another turn on the merry-go-round and he will announce next year yet another advance in the technology that necessitates a delay in marketing”

Yes

just another episode of Oak Island. Same old tactic.

1. Brokeeper November 14, 2018 at 9:31 AM

   Dear Andrea,

   1- You mentioned the broadcast would be from the factory where it is produced. Is this the same factory by which the E-Cat SK will be mass produced? This would be an ideal time to demonstrate the power of the E-Cat providing heat and/or electricity to its production facility.

   2- Would this be possible during the broadcast?

   3- Also, could you shed some light on how your recent illness may have been affected by the yearlong test inside the container? Some are concerned it may be due to some ‘Strange Radiation’. I am very glad to hear you are recovering.

   Thank you. God be with you.

   Brokeeper

2. Andrea Rossi November 14, 2018 at 10:03 AM

   Brokeeper:

   1- yes

   2- no, we will not give any particular related to the factory, at least for the time being

   3- during the year long test in Doral I covered the shift from 5 PM through 10 A.M. and during the night, when I was alone, many times I opened the shielding to look inside to understand things. The Ecat does nor have emissions of ionizing radiations out od the Ecat body, but the inspection I made “open heart” were a risk and I knew it, but these inspections have allowed me to understand important things and this knowledge has born the QX and the SK versions of the Ecat. I spent a dear price in terms of health, but I could work very well and now I am healed. Also the voice returned.

   Warm Regards,

   A.R.

Hmmm. 3 is very interesting.

Quote

The Ecat does nor have emissions of ionizing radiations out od the Ecat body, but the inspection I made “open heart” were a risk and I knew it

So the Ecat never emitted ionizing radiation but it is dangerous?

Quote

SK stands for the physicist Sven Kullander (headed the Skeptical Soc.) who viewed one of Rossi's reactors working in Europe and who Rossi said had been most helpful to him.

Just to set the record straight. Dr. Kullander never said of any of Rossi's devices that they work as claimed. What he said was that they produced anomalous results which had to be explained with additional experiments. If he saw that a scam had been named after him, he'd roll over in his grave.

Quote

Both meters pegged, so it must have been a powerful source. If that is true, and not an instrument error, and if the source was the reactor, then clearly Rossi did have a working something. I don't know what he had, but you can't fool two radiation meters. Also, the first Levi report seems to indicate he had something. We know he did not interfere with that test because it was under surveillance with a video camera the whole time, as noted in the report. They should have done that with the Lugano test as well

Do you have documentation of Celani's test? I know nothing of the alleged second spike? Who reported that and where and when? This seems like either a pair of anecdotes or simply an unexplained anomaly. That would not suggest that the radiation came from anything Rossi had which was "running."

ETA: I just saw

Quote

Here are some of my notes about the time Celani detected gamma emissions... etc.

Thanks for that. So it is a brief report about a single brief event and the interesting parts are that the meters "saturated," they were battery powered and both reacted at the same time. I will leave it to people who know more about radiation detection (? kirkshanahan ?) to conjecture what the possibilities are. The person who suggested some interference, I think was not referring to stuff on a mains line but rather to RFI where a large transient could mess (overload) up the detectors and/or amplifiers in the geiger counter etc. some distance away. For example, maybe Rossi was screwing with his large heaters and shorted something and then removed the short. Bottom line is, I don't know. And I doubt anyone ever will. Since it's a one of, albeit with two detectors, the probability that it came from radiation produced by a Rossi kludge is minimal to vanishingly small.

Quote

The Ecat does nor[sic] have emissions of ionizing radiations out od[sic] the Ecat body, but the inspection I made “open heart” were a risk and I knew it

Quote

So the Ecat never emitted ionizing radiation but it is dangerous?

It only emits when Celani is there and it only did it once. Only dangerous to inventor money.

Quote

I disagree. I find the first Levi report credible. Perhaps you do not. Can you point to significant technical errors in it? There are weakness, of course, but can you show it was definitely wrong? If you cannot, I do not think you can say there has never been credible evidence for Rossi's claims. The claims have not been replicated so we cannot have confidence in them, but there was credible evidence for them. In my opinion, Lugano greatly reduced that credibility, by showing that Levi is incompetent.

You keep harping on that theme. Specifically that if nobody can find an error or something technically wrong, then it must be real. That is how scientists get fooled all the time by con men. The "error" is fraud, deception and sleight of hand - not "technical errors." If someone else said that Levi is incompetent, they would get banned from this forum or have things changed now that Rossi vs IH is history?

Quote

You have NO hint, let alone proof that a factory is not being built.

Actually there is evidence (but not proof). No permit has been filed, no plans have been submitted, no authorities have reviewed any plan even though the claim is that Rossi's kludges are nuclear. Rossi has never named either the company he works with or the one providing him with industrial robots. Someone I know looks into these things quite meticulously, exactly why, I am not sure. I suppose Rossi could have built some skunk works inside a hollowed mountain somewhere and left no trace. Yah shoore. Are there mountains in Florida?

Quote from seven_of_twenty

Do you have documentation of Celani's test? I know nothing of the alleged second spike? Who reported that and where and when? This seems like either a pair of anecdotes or simply an unexplained anomaly. That would not suggest that the radiation came from anything Rossi had which was "running."

ETA: I just saw

Thanks for that. So it is a brief report about a single brief event and the interesting parts are that the meters "saturated," they were battery powered and both reacted at the same time. I will leave it to people who know more about radiation detection (? kirkshanahan ?) to conjecture what the possibilities are. The person who suggested some interference, I think was not referring to stuff on a mains line but rather to RFI where a large transient could mess (overload) up the detectors and/or amplifiers in the geiger counter etc. some distance away. For example, maybe Rossi was screwing with his large heaters and shorted something and then removed the short. Bottom line is, I don't know. And I doubt anyone ever will. Since it's a one of, albeit with two detectors, the probability that it came from radiation produced by a Rossi kludge is minimal to vanishingly small.

It only emits when Celani is there and it only did it once. Only dangerous to inventor money.

You keep harping on that theme. Specifically that if nobody can find an error or something technically wrong, then it must be real. That is how scientists get fooled all the time by con men. The "error" is fraud, deception and sleight of hand - not "technical errors." If someone else said that Levi is incompetent, they would get banned from this forum or have things changed now that Rossi vs IH is history?

Display More

bring some radiation detectors to the demo and see if they show This magical ”burst”

Quote from seven_of_twenty

You keep harping on that theme. Specifically that if nobody can find an error or something technically wrong, then it must be real.

No, I never said "it must be real." You put those words in my mouth. Let me repeat what I said; please read it this time:

The claims have not been replicated so we cannot have confidence in them, but there was credible evidence for them.

"Credible evidence" is not proof. "Credible evidence," does not mean "it must be real." There is a world of difference between those two. You have greatly distorted what I said, which is annoying.

Quote from seven_of_twenty

It only emits when Celani is there and it only did it once.

How do you know this only happened once? Do you have a complete record of all tests performed by Rossi? You should not make assertions without evidence.