Rossi vs. Darden developments [CASE CLOSED]

  • A fine example of exuberant extrapolation that is the sole content of so many believers' arguments.


    In 2012, Blackrock made a comment that they were keeping an eye on startups in various fields including LENR. From that one-time remark, the conclusion is drawn that the fossil fuel industry is focused on LENR.


    I guess if you have nowhere to stand, all you can do is execute an endless series of leaps of faith.


    Yep, they were watching it then, and they are now. Just take a look at Siffer's website logs that he posts on occasion. When the Lugano report was posted, it was downloaded hundreds of thousands of times within a matter of days. There is a giant lurker community that spans the world, and they aren't all hobbyists.

  • Perhaps we should make a list of types of people supporting Rossi I'll start:


    1) Real estate brokers that get a commission each time Rossi buys a condo in FL

    2) Glass dealers that can quickly replace glass windows each time Google drives by

    3) Heating tape dealers that sale band heaters for DN40 , and DN120 pipes

    4) Day laborers that get jobs building and removing piping but can keep their mouths quite

    5) People that have invested in pin ball machines

    6) People that sale Palladium and then repurchase it for profit

    7) People that sale toupees

    8) Lawyers that want to keep the case open at great cost

  • 7) People that sale toupees


    LOLs. In the Jan court hearing transcript, Rossi's lawyer opens up by telling the judge: my client is here, and wanted me to tell you he is "wearing a piece". The judge looked over at Rossi, and said: well, if you had not told me that, I would not have even noticed. Why Rossi thought that was necessary, I have not a clue, but I thought it was funny. Such a crazy story.

  • neither sigmoidal nor I are trying to distort your position.


    Well if you're not trying then I guess it just comes naturally. ;)


    In your case, I detect also from your post here that you are convinced that viable LENR technology now exists (but has not been rolled out due to the worldwide anti-LENR forces). That would perhaps be part of your evidence that such forces exist. My view would be simpler - that commercially viable LENR technology does not to my knowledge now exist. Anyway, it is easy for any actor to prove me wrong by showing commercially viable LENR technology. They'd need a different attitude to independent testing than that shown by Rossi.


    Afraid to tell you that once again you're off the mark. Though I guess it depends on what you mean by 'viable.' If you mean a technology that is read to be commercialized, then my answer is 'probably not yet.' So no, I don't think the technology has come that far yet and so active suppression of a 'ready for prime time' LENR tech probably hasn't happened -- although I pause to stress that I believe it's entirely possible. But I do not take it as evidence that such forces exist. My evidence for that comes from a myriad of sources, only some of which are directly related to the field of LENR per se (such as Stanley Pons saying he went into hiding due to death threats). You can dismiss me as a kooky conspiracy theorist, and I in turn will dismiss you as hopelessly naive.



    While I'm not sure about a viable LENR technology, I feel quite certain that LENR as an 'over-unity' phenomenon does exist. But I don't think we've got a good handle on it, yet. It seems that Brillouin is the closest. Here's hoping MFMP will find something worthwhile with Suhas's technology. Or Me356. But I'm not holding my breath.


    The "powers what be" cannot prevent people from providing an unambiguous and convincing proof-of-principle that LENR exists. To even think that requires that every qualified scientist on the planet is under the thumb of the nefarious forces of energy evil. Sure, they can make it tough to get funding, but it is pretty lame to argue that LENR has not been validated because of lack of funding. And the counterargument that such proof already exists is nonsense.


    I think your view that LENR hasn't had convincing, unambiguous proof-of-principle evidence that it exists puts you in the minority here. I don't feel any need to argue this point with you. The argument that such proof already exists is not nonsense. It just shows your ignorance. And I never argued that LENR hadn't bee validated due to lack of funding.


    LENR has a long way to go before the bad guys could be bothered to plot against it. It is just plain silly to think that a 5 trillion dollar industry is sweating bullets about the pet science dream of a few thousand internet fans that the overwhelming majority of the world has never spent 5 minutes thinking about.


    You really think LENR is the wet science dream of some people on the internet? If so, I'm not surprised you think it poses no threat. But in my opinion you are not only ignorant, you are naive.

  • LOLs. In the Jan court hearing transcript, Rossi's lawyer opens up by telling the judge: my client is here, and wanted me to tell you he is "wearing a piece". The judge looked over at Rossi, and said: well, if you had not told me that, I would not have even noticed. Why Rossi thought that was necessary, I have not a clue, but I thought it was funny. Such a crazy story.



    Rossi's lawyer messed up, he was supposed to say a "masterpiece"

  • I agree that one of my working assumptions is that the deeply entrenched political and economic powers that currently control the world's energy supply do not want to see their control and profits evaporate due to LENR.

    I see no evidence that energy companies are even aware that LENR exists. To the extent that a few of them are aware of LENR, they are no more afraid of it than they are afraid of space-based solar systems or Tokamak plasma fusion systems. They consider both of these pie-in-the-sky schemes that will never be practical.


    Established energy companies fight one another. The coal industry is trying to outlaw wind turbines; gas and oil companies have it in for coal, now that natural gas is used to generate electricity. None of them are fighting to prevent plasma fusion or cold fusion.


    The history of commerce shows that established companies do not fight new competitive products until those products begin to take actual market share. It is always too late by then. See, for example, the book "The Innovator's Dillema."

    And since it is easy to see that those forces are extremely powerful and do not want LENR, it is reasonable to conclude that these powerful forces will fight LENR.

    Perhaps they will if LENR ever becomes practical, but they are not fighting it now. I know just about every LENR researcher in the world. Not one of them has had a problem with opposition from energy companies. On the contrary, some excellent research was paid for by AMOCO and Shell Oil. The only opposition has come from academic scientists, mainly theoretical physicists who think they know everything, and plasma physicists who are afraid of losing their funding.

  • joshg


    Jed is a good deal more credible than you on this issue. He has talked to the relevant people. You have dark conspiracy theories based on what you've read.


    Jed is also correct that mainstream scientists have very little time for LENR - so if you argue that scientists are (in general) biased against LENR that is a much more credible argument - not one I'd necessarily hold, but one I agree could be true.


    Sorry,

    THH

  • Joshg wrote:

    I think your view that LENR hasn't had convincing, unambiguous proof-of-principle evidence that it exists puts you in the minority here.


    That is true. I am sure that most people here think otherwise. And the people here are probably the majority of all the people on earth who share that view.

    joshg wrote:

    You really think LENR is the wet science dream of some people on the internet?


    Pretty much. Oh, I am sure that there are literally hundreds of people out there who share that dream with those who live on the LENR websites. I can only imagine how empowering it must feel to be one of the elite couple of thousand people on a planet of 7 billion who alone know the truth. The rest of us unwashed hordes have to muddle along in our ignorance.

  • All,


    I am sure the following hypothesis has been mentioned before. Just in case a too fast written down idea;


    Parking Rossi for a year in a very depressing business unit, so he could not get in the way of IH's new business ventures, knowing that he would never be able to get his hands on the USD 89 million carrot, not only was a cheaper option for IH than to outright ditch him, Rossi would be better controllable as well. Moreover, IH would annihilate Rossi after the setup-to-fail test. They knew about the "fake customer", they knew about other flaws, but just did not care. Keep your friends close, but your enemies closer.


    Rossi fell for the offered carrot, but along the way figured out that he would never receive the performance fee and that IH pulled his leg. He then had ample time to meticulously prepare the court case, in his view his only viable option, while at Doral. Despite that Rossi thought he could pull-off the test, his technology works you know, he now started cutting corners when he encountered problems. Moreover, he started to predict the court case and IH's action and make sure that he could cover his tracks where he thought that would be necessary.


    IH realized too late that they faced one tough son-of-a-gun and started to prepare for the case too late. Until the very end they could not comprehend Rossi being so bald as to sue them. They offered him a rudimentary exit deal and had already prepared for a phase without Rossi, IH being the sole owner of Rossi's IP.


    So when Rossi started biting them (what a clever and disciplined man that he could sit in a container for a year and not bark once!), IH had to come-out with guns blazing. They had to reassure their business partners that this court case would just be a small blip and that after they crushed Rossi, it would be business as planned. Now that Rossi is quite succesfully upping his odds in the case, going from standing no chance to a jury trial, and who knows what he will pull from his hat during the trial, IH and affiliates are getting nervous. If they lose the IP, they lose everything. If they lose too much precious time, they lose their partners. A "siberian dilemma" unfolds;


    1. Continue the trial, but face further costly delays. And how to price the very small chance that you lose everything?

    2. Strike a deal with Rossi, knowing that he will come back for more and accept a very big dent in your reputation.


    Cheers,


    JB

  • Parking Rossi for a year in a very depressing business unit, so he could not get in the way of IH's new business ventures, knowing that he would never be able to get his hands on the USD 89 million carrot, not only was a cheaper option for IH than to outright ditch him, Rossi would be better controllable as well.


    Rossi fell for the offered carrot


    The problem with this interpretation comes from Rossi's own testimony where he says he was desperate to do this specific test and the emails which make it clear that he refused to do a similar test (without a customer) on IH premises so that IH could fully monitor it.

  • I honestly couldn't care less about your opinion of my credibility on this or any other issue.

  • Despite that Rossi thought he could pull-off the test, his technology works you know, he now started cutting corners when he encountered problems.

    Nope. His 1-year test was bad from the start. He did not cut corners or make it worse over time. You can see that in the Penon report data.


    I.H. urged him to improve the test during the year, but he did not.


    (I do not know about the other tests.)

  • Let me repeat that they told me about some of the technical problems.

    Why they (IH) told that to you ?


    I do not want to give the impression that anyone at I.H. betrayed company secrets,

    The discussion was strictly technical.


    Even with a technical discussion company secrets can be transmitted.



    My impression was that Rossi was once again doing a sloppy, inconclusive test.


    So you heard only IH. You have not seen anything directly. And you are defending IH based on your impression that derives only from what IH has told you.

  • To my certain knowledge that is not true. Long before the lawsuit was filed they told me they had doubts about Rossi's test, for reasons that I fully agreed with. You are making up false assertions about events you know nothing about.


    You should stop doing that. Either you stop it, or you should clearly accuse me of lying. There is no middle ground here. I say, unequivocally, based on my experience, that you are wrong. This is not a technical dispute. This is a black and white, matter-of-fact about what the people at I.H. said to me, and to others. If you insist you are right, then you are calling me a liar. Go ahead and do that if you want, but let's not sugarcoat it.


    I am sure you have no real evidence for your assertion, because I am sure it is not true. I do not think you are lying but I know for a fact you are wrong -- mistaken I suppose.


    Your certain knowledge = IH/Cherokee says


    Saying that you are right and your interlocutor is wrong is hardly an argument, since your premise is based on what some people have told you, and what they've told you before turned out to be far from truth