Rossi vs. Darden developments [CASE CLOSED]

Quote from Mary Yugo

If you think that implies legitimacy, you're wrong. For example, nobody sued Steorn and they ripped off more than 20 million Euros over ten years from hapless investors. Most scams end in a whimper. The victims/marks are too embarrassed to sue and there is usually no money to recover because the scammers have already spent it. Steorn just went belly up bankrupt and so far, no lawsuits. Defkalion vanished altogether and no suits.

With Rossi you get dodgy business associates passing around fake business cards and phantom companies with no discernable business model. With Steorn you get bar-girls. With Mills you get dozens of real-life non-anonymous experts. These experts bring with them verifiable backgrounds with decades of experience working at top tier research labs and R&D companies. The investors and board members are from premium VCs, law firms and industrial companies who have collectively ponied up over $120m and waited with extreme patience for Mills to do his thing. If Mills wasn't on the level, you can believe these folks have the resources and know-how to put an end to it.

@optiongeek

I've followed BLP from nearly its beginning. Forgot about them for about 5 years as development seemed to slow to a crawl. Then to my surprise, they seemed to dust off their challenges, and have been making some interesting sounds this past year or two. My guess is that first prototypes will be in the market more like 2020 rather than 2017, given that things take time, and schedules nearly always slip, but there seems to be a legitimacy in the air now for BLP more so than at any previous time.

alan thank you for that info. It had escaped me.

Quote from Dewey Weaver

They are bombshells alright and you don't even know the half if it (yet).

@Dewey: 3 TB's of bombshells, where one state official confirming no business traffic from to Doral would be sufficient!

Or let's call it the investment peoples way to rule world. They don't need paper until the closmat's water runs out...

Quote from Alan Smith

As you say, this was duly recorded as an official payment to Bologna University, taxed and deposited in the Uni's bank a/c. It was never touched by Levi personally but was donated to a software engineering course that he supervises. The money was to pay for 2 postgraduate students to study and develop software systems for pinball machines and pinball machine simulators. There was nothing underhand or secret about any of it, his name was mentioned as recipient since he is head of the appropriate course.

Wow, Fabiani's US QL must do very well, when he could afford a 75k donation for a software engineering course!
Any idea how much money Fabiani makes with his pinball business?
How many pinball machines one has to sell in order to make 75k profit?

Quote from Alan Smith

There was nothing underhand or secret about any of it, his name was mentioned as recipient since he is head of the appropriate course.

Alan,
I know you are probably just reporting what you heard. Even if it was done through proper channels and nothing was dodgy in the university's eyes, it smacks strongly of funding to keep Levi happy so he didn't get too suspicious about Lugano and come out against AR. I don't see this as a problem per se on Levi's side (other than maybe falling prey to AR's skillful maneuvers). It does not create the appearance of being an indipendent [sic] third party.

It probably also necessitated an ongoing relationship and contact between Fabiani and Levi (to plan and monitor the project), while giving AR an influence and monitoring channel for Levi. Imagine Fabiani saying to Levi, "It's truly incredible. You would not believe how amazing this stuff is. It is going to change the world. My gosh, it is working so well. We're going to change the world. P.S., AR speaks so well of your skills as a researcher and scientists. He is learning a ton from your isotopic results."

Jack

I am reporting a fact which is on the public record. You are inferring skullduggery where none exists except in your imagination. No more please.

Quote from Alan Smith

I am reporting a fact which is on the public record. You are inferring skullduggery where none exists except in your imagination. No more please.

I am inferring and imagining skulduggery on the part of AR to use Fabiani against Levi and others (quite possibly without Fabiani being aware). Possibly (or probably) both Levi and Fabiani are victims IMO. Levi has never struck me as having bad intentions in all of this. He's just human like everyone else--potentially prone to bias and manipulation by clever manipulators. If he was manipulated and used, that means he probably has the best of intentions and presumes the same in others (e.g., AR). Objectivity is an ongoing battle, which I am probably failing at during this very moment.

Quote from Alan Smith

Defkalion too is similar, as it is (or probably was) a defunct limited liability company that was incorporated and banked (from memory) in the Turkish half of Cyprus.

As I recall, it ended up in Canada. I could be wrong about that. Maybe they only opened up a branch in Canada.

Anyway, I doubt they have any money.

Btw, does anybody know, is this Roberto Rossi, who according to his Facebook profile works for Fabiani's USQL, a relative of Andrea Rossi?
https://www.facebook.com/rober…si.946954?hc_location=ufi

Does anybody know anything about Platinum American Trust, listed in doc 93 as a legal entity having a financial interest in the outcome of the case. And does anybody know anything about Francesco Di Giovanni, listed as the beneficiary of the trust? Some over on ECW are speculating that it might be this Francesco Di Giovanni.

Quote

I would remind you that Lugano was a team. Not one person. Any more grubby little libels will be deleted.

It is an undeniable fact that the Lugano report analysis was wrong (theoretically) in a way that explains both the COP=3 and the acceleration in COP - the two things highlighted in the report as being inexplicable without some new to science heat source.

The physics behind this is not that complex, but equally, for somone not highly expert in the field, it would take some effort and independent thinking to get your head round.

In a team you don't expect this effort to be done by more than one person. Others then, relying on the one who has done the work, can check it seems superficially OK and agree.

That is how you get these errors: not every member of the team investigates independently every bit of the analysis.

So: Alan - while I agree with you that there is no evidence for skullduggery - the fact that the Lugano report was a team would not prevent one person from influencing the result. And the fact of the team does not validate the results in the way it would if every line of the report was independently vouched for by every member of the team.