Rossi vs. Darden developments [CASE CLOSED]

  • Perhaps they are, we have no way of knowing, unless they chose experts we know too, and the chosen are happy to announce the fact.. On the other hand I do suspect that there might be a few people not well known to any of us as 'LENR friends' in Upsalla who know which end of a candle you are supposed to light.


    So - you are now speculating beyond the perfectly good information.


    You state that the Lugano team are experimenting with Ni-H and claim to have positive results, however they will not release any details at this stage.


    That is fine - material information of an unknowable sort - since the same team have shown very bad previous judgement and it must be a leap of faith to think they have got better when they do not recant past mistakes.


    That (you imply) they are gaining useful input from others at Upsalla more competent than them is always possible but speculative, as is the use they make of such better advice. It is as with me356 "I've got good results but you can't know what they are yet" is not helpful, and history shows no credence should be given to it.


    They are under no obligation to publish any details, but it would be unwise to take their claims of positive results seriously till they do. When they do, all will depend on the quality of the results. More IR thermography is a big no-no.

  • If I were a Juror reading the voluminous detailed and technical posts here from the likes of Jed, Sigmoidal, THHuxley, Paradigmnoia and others I think they would come across as boring, self rightious, opinionated nerds who were writing simply for the purpose of seeming intelligent and above it all, sort of like one speaks so as to be impressed with the sound of his own voice. On the other hand the posts of IHFanboy, El, We-Cat-Global, JoshG (and others) are for the most part succinct and to the point, which makes them come across sincere and honest. Again, this case will not be decided on voluminous boring technical facts, but on whether the testimony comes across as sincere.

    Oh yes but if you ware a Juror reading this forum that is so full of biased people and who express opinions instead of facts, or make biased interpretation of facts would be an act against the law. Jurors must evaluate only what is disclosed in the Court and the documents produced by both parts.

  • Para - you continue to amaze! Is there a date on Rossi's note-to-self from JONP?


    Dewey, I sent that info to your IH email address many months ago.

    (I'm pretty sure there is another one also, but searching Warm Regards and reading the associated posts that come up makes me feel ill after a while)


    http://www.journal-of-nuclear-…&cpage=59#comment-1152251

  • the same team have shown very bad previous judgement and it must be a leap of faith to think they have got better when they do not recant past mistakes

    THH the only people who thinks about the Lugano Team as people who has done mistakes is you and the other guys who forms the "Voice of IH Gang" here.

    It is an interesting fact that the Universities and some Industries are financing Bo Hoistad and the other Professors.

    I presume that honored and qualified Universities as Uppsala or Bologna have internal resources capable to evaluate papers and results. The Lugano report is still there and the Professors are financed and going on with the research. This fact is quite important and means that there ware no substantial errors in the original report.


  • THH the only people who thinks about the Lugano Team as people who has done mistakes is you and the other guys who forms the "Voice of IH Gang" here.


    Not true - you are perhaps out of touch with most people? Or, as Abd has documented in another place on a different topic, lying? I raise this only because you have made so many documented false statements here...


    The Lugano report is still there and the Professors are financed and going on with the research. This fact is quite important and means that there ware no substantial errors in the original report.


    Again there is no dependence between Lugano report correctness and whether Upsalla profs can find new punters to fund research. Except that it it were generally considered correct there would be billions now going to fund them or IH. Since when have typical Rossi LENR funders worried about integrity of tests?


    THH - watch you don't stray to far in your choice of words. Describing anybody funding what goes on in a perfectly respectable university as 'marks' has connotations of which you are entirely aware.


    EDIT marks -> punters

  • On-going work and co-operation between Upsalla University (definitely), Volvo Cars (probably) and Rossi over the last 2 years is simply a material fact. It tends to suggest (at the very least) that they are all stupid and possibly deluded, or perhaps building what they consider to be an un-rebuttable body of proof that Ni-H works. Which do you consider to be the most likely of these two scenarios?

    I have no technical information to impart, merely a confirmation that they are working on Ni-H with positive results, passed on in full. As I said that is a material fact, as is the presence of Rossi's colleague. I apologise if it doesn't accord with your weltschmertz, it is as they say 'an inconvenient truth'. I think more will be revealed by summer's end, in the meantime, they are locked down, no visitors no publications.


    At this point, I would put any results from the professors in the same category as a claim from AR. It would need independent verification. They have not responded with requests for additional information about their previous testing procedures in a trustworthy way (or even a non-trustworthy way). They have just not responded to any basic questions other than to say, "I asked several colleagues to look at this and they all thought we did a good job." Case closed.

  • I raise this only because you have made so many documented false statements here...

    THH or the statements are false or are documented. Tertium non datur

    I inserted that link just because it could be interesting for many readers here to at least know that there exist a version of the fact published by Rossi himself.

    Abd was banned from here because of his insults. Is quite an honor to be personally insulted on his personal little blog.


    Surfing the net I have also found some interesting link about Darden gang criminal behavior.

    Seems provided by a guy who published a long comment in the JONP. I normally do not read Rossi's blog but found that googling through a site called Rossi Blog Reader.

    I propose here the full original post:


    Hugh H. Maguire
    May 8, 2017 at 9:11 AM

    Dear Andrea Rossi,

    I’ve been following your tracks on and off for more than two years now. When the news of your lawsuit with Cherokee Investment Partners and their subsidiary Industrial Heat reached the public scene, I was not all that surprised. There are at least two known instances in which Cherokee Investment Partners, acting through companies they controlled, were involved in bankruptcies after being funded for reclamation and development programmes they did not complete. Main links may be found here (http://www.nytimes.com/2005/10…ew-jersey-style.html?_r=0) and here (http://www.postandcourier.com/…63-a818-6c0a67cdfa5f.html), but there are others, as the stories are well known.


    At this point I ask myself: is it possible that IH’s refusal to pay you the agreed fees for licensing your technology, after running an undisputed test for over one year (during which its employees were always present, subsequent to taking part in the construction of the power plant itself), and paying the relevant fees to Mr Penon as consultant on the operation of the plant, is part of a long-term plan targeted from its very inception not just at yourself, but at outside investment partners? We, as the public, are now aware that the Doral site was visited in February 2015 by Woodford, well-known in the UK as a high-profile investment management company, and that Woodford was apparently convinced of the technology, to the point of investing approximately £32m in IH. It stands to reason that, if the issue of litigation turns out unfavourably, IH might be tempted to file for bankruptcy, just like EnCap, Ashley I, and Ashley II. And yet somehow remain in possession of the know-how related to your technology, which may have already been leaked to other companies involved in LENR research: the ones Cherokee or their subsidiaries have reportedly (Brillouin?) invested in. At this point, it would be just a matter of window-dressing on the patent market. 
I am by no means a conspiracy advocate, but I find these facts extremely disturbing. Corporations have no morals, no matter how appealing their public facade might appear. When one is willing to charge even one’s own inside clients for unjustified expenses (http://www.bizjournals.com/tri…ners-reaches-100-000.html), there are no limits to the extent of possible malversation.


    Sincerely, Hugh H. Maguire.

    ---------------------------------------------------------


    Nice material . I think that a full read of the proposed links will be quite interesting.

  • Most forget that the QuarkX was first unveiled in July 2015 (22 months ago), at almost the exact same time Rossi refused Murray entrance to the 1MW in Doral. Odd timing no doubt, and could easily be seen as Rossi's attempt to divert IH away from their growing suspicions about Doral.


    He first called it the "new Hotcat", then changed it to Mme. Curie, and finally settled on QX. The R/D for it was supposedly done "in the control room"...which was the air conditioned module next to the Doral 1MW plant.


    Surprised Fabiani was not questioned about the QX in his depo, as the control room was his hang-out. Especially so after his interview with Lewan in the fall of 2015, where he claimed seeing incredible things.


    Anyways, early claims of QX performance were fantastical -electricity, light, and heat, all at once! Nowadays, not so much...just heat. This past Feb, Rossi had promised a demo, then backed out in Jan. , claiming pressures from the law suit, and re-set (started over) his march to whatever his definition of Sigma 5 is.


    As Bob points out; here we are almost 2 years later, with absolutely no proof the thing works, talking about it, and not the Ecat. Another win for Rossi.

  • Nice material . I think that a full read of the proposed links will be quite interesting.


    I read all that when when it came out. Only thing interesting about it was the corruption of the politicians involved. Well, acvtually even that was not all that interesting, as govt. corruption is the norm, rather than the exception.


    Any business that wants to do business with government, soon finds out...and trust me on this, that if you are not willing to "pay to play", do not waste your time. The corruption is seldom a direct cash payment nowadays, and usually involves a ,more indirect route. A good example being...donate to my charity, "sponsor" free dinners and drinks at our annual government get together in Miami, etc.


    Cherokee did what they had to do.

  • IHFB,


    I do not hold it against the businesses themselves. Few can survive without dealing with govt. That is where most of the money is. Not their fault they have to get their hands dirty. It is the corrupt bureaucrats, politicians, and public unions that leave them no choice, that are to blame.


    If it makes you feel better about them...most hold their noses when having to do what they have to do.

  • This sounds like desperate nonsense. I thought you were bigger than this... But never mind, I'm afraid we will just have to wait -I suspect they are being super-cautious just to anooy everyone.


    Alan - I have very little respect for the Lugano guys. If they got their feet burned and are silent now because no longer involved it is bad enough, but understandable. To be claiming new results in the same area without correcting such an egregiously wrong report is a poor show indeed.


    I'm very confident that they do not have clear excess heat. (If they did the requirement for silence would mysteriously change).

  • Perhaps they are [consulting with experts], we have no way of knowing,

    During the test I heard that they were keeping it secret and not consulting with anyone. I do not know whether they are consulting now. I doubt it. The fact that they never responded to questions from people such as McKubre does not bode well. They do not have the right attitude for academic researchers doing ground-breaking experiments in a poorly understood, new field.

  • At this point, I would put any results from the professors in the same category as a claim from AR. It would need independent verification. They have not responded with requests for additional information about their previous testing procedures in a trustworthy way (or even a non-trustworthy way). They have just not responded to any basic questions other than to say, "I asked several colleagues to look at this and they all thought we did a good job." Case closed.

    I agree, reluctantly. Putting this in the category as AR may be going too far, but I agree their credibility is shot. As I said, this is not how academic scientists are supposed to act. This behavior is okay for lone inventors or even corporations such as Brillouin, but not for professors.


    "Not trustworthy" and "not even non-trustworthy" is a good summation.


    You can be secret, or you can be credible. You have to choose. You cannot have it both ways. It irks me when people who keep secrets demand respect. The only thing they deserve is to be ignored. They may have a good reason to keep things secret, but they do not deserve to be taken seriously.


    This does not only apply to science. No one gets a free pass or automatic credibility. If I claim I have written the Great American Novel, you have every right to say "send me the opening chapter" before you take me seriously. Even if I am a best-selling author, you should demand that. If I am a national politician running for president and I claim I have a secret plan to defeat ISIS, you should demand I share that plan with the military and then have them say whether they think it is viable.

  • That is no way to do scientific research. They made that mistake during their long test at Lugano. They should have consulted with experts at every stage. Heck, they should have consulted with me -- a non-expert. I would have asked them "what color is the reactor incandescence?" I think it was orange, not white, which means their conclusions and their entire report are wrong, and they wasted months.


    I asked them that after the report was published. They never responded. They invited technical questions but I do not think they responded to any of them. That's is an outrageous violation of academic norms. People who do things like that are bound to make stupid mistakes.

    And all this time I thought you were and expert.

  • I agree, reluctantly. Putting this in the category as AR may be going too far, but I agree their credibility is shot. As I said, this is not how academic scientists are supposed to act. This behavior is okay for lone inventors or even corporations such as Brillouin, but not for professors.

    I should probably clarify. I don't believe any of the profs are in the same category as AR generally. I just mean that their results would need to be replicated before putting much stock in the results.


    They are similar in that they say, "trust us, this is valid and real. We consulted with independent experts, and they all agree that we did it right." They're not similar in that, AFAIK, the profs are not running scams for money.


    The followers of LENR need to demand empirical evidence from any inventor before they are taken seriously. Brillouin doesn't have much excuse, in my estimation, as they are known to follow this forum, but never respond to criticism and continue to raise money.

  • IHFB,


    I do not hold it against the businesses themselves. Few can survive without dealing with govt. That is where most of the money is. Not their fault they have to get their hands dirty. It is the corrupt bureaucrats, politicians, and public unions that leave them no choice, that are to blame.


    If it makes you feel better about them...most hold their noses when having to do what they have to do.

    Which is exactly the argument I used in an earlier post in defense of Rossi's actions. Both government and big business seem to adhere to a different set of ethics than most individuals are held to. I believe that everything that Rossi did, good or bad, was simply trying emulate and play the so-called game by the same rules as IH held itself to. Only as an individual he gets tagged as scammer, fraud, liar, schemer and charlatan, while IH acting through its myriad shell companies is just behaving normally, as any good business would.

  • Alan - I have very little respect for the Lugano guys. If they got their feet burned and are silent now because no longer involved it is bad enough, but understandable. To be claiming new results in the same area without correcting such an egregiously wrong report is a poor show indeed.


    I'm very confident that they do not have clear excess heat. (If they did the requirement for silence would mysteriously change).

    This sounds eerily similar to a lot comments I heard in the early 1990's regarding F and P and the University of Utah and it eventually drove them underground for an extended period. Oh wait, that seems to be exactly what the Lugano group has done. Strange, very strange.

  • If you are all so sure Rossi is a scammer, you should not be so nervous about every person who posts in this thread with a pro-Rossi pov. Jefferson said: "When I hear another express an opinion, which is not mine, I say to myself, he has a right to his opinion, as I to mine. Why should I question it? His errors does no injury, and shall I become a Don Quixote to bring all men by force of argument to one opinion? If a fact be misstated, it is probable be gratified by a belief of it, and I have no rights to deprive him of the gratification...".


    The IH story is not persuasive. None gives 10 million of dollars to obtain a mere IP "promise". IH people had their assurance by Rossi about IP and signed the agreement. How can they say they were not sure Rossi has produced excess of heat?


    The Lugano test was not a trustworthy test? Really? When did IH discovery it?


    I don't want to explore all topics raised by the parties. I will read the judgment.


    I just note that the IH "leitmotiv" about the fact that Rossi machine didn't work is not persuasive...


    But, if you think Rossi in a "scam artist" and IH are good samaritans, feel free to think it...


    My idea is that experts will be listened by the jury. They will decide the case. And ERV cross examination will play a central role.

  • Rossi presented his witness list to the court, and the Lugano profs are labeled as a "might present"... or something like that, on his behalf. If any of the Swedes (Levi...no way) do actually travel to Miami and take the stand (testify) in defense of Rossi -which I doubt, it would be a sad reflection on their professionalism, that they are more willing to face a jury of laypeople to defend their findings in a court of law, rather than a jury of their scientific peers in the court of scientific opinion.

  • Which is exactly the argument I used in an earlier post in defense of Rossi's actions. Both government and big business seem to adhere to a different set of ethics than most individuals are held to. I believe that everything that Rossi did, good or bad, was simply trying emulate and play the so-called game by the same rules as IH held itself to. Only as an individual he gets tagged as scammer, fraud, liar, schemer and charlatan, while IH acting through its myriad shell companies is just behaving normally, as any good business would.


    Rion,


    You are taking this much further than what I said. To be clear; I said government is inherently corrupt. Businesses like Cherokee...so as to survive, have held their noses and adjusted to deal with that. I never mentioned Rossi, nor was I even thinking of him when I said that, but since you weave him into the narrative...he (Rossi) takes corruption to a level even the govt. would be envious of. :)


    Unfortunately for him, govt. can get away with it, but he can not...hopefully.

  • Italianlawyer


    It goes without saying that people are entitled to their opinion, and you are certainly no exception.


    And merely expressing your opinion with little or no evidence or explanation is also certainly your right.


    Several others here have a deeper interest in Rossi's 'findings' and have spent much more time looking at the evidence supporting and refuting his findings and behaviors.


    As a lawyer, you might be interested in the legal proceedings.


    Even though I have a technical background as an Electrical Engineer and a researcher in an unrelated field, I am quite interested in the legal proceedings as well, despite having no formal legal training.


    Here is a brief summary of Rossi's claims and IH's counterclaims. Rossi filed 8 claims against IH. These can be seen in Document 001 on the Docket here, 4 of them were dismissed by the Court. The remaining 4 claims are:


    I. IH Breach of contract (for failure to pay $89 Million after successful 350-day GPT).

    III. Unjust Enrichment (IH got money unjustly from investors based on successful working E-Cat)

    IV. Misappropriation (IH used Rossi's licensed IP inappropriately)

    VI. Fraudulent Inducement (IH fraudulently got Rossi to agree to license his IP when they never intended to pay him the $100.5 Million total.)


    IH has 5 counterclaims against Rossi (and none of them were dismissed by the Court). These are in document 132, briefly summarized:

    I, II, V - Breach of Contract (in various ways)

    III - Fraudulent Inducement (the Doral 'test')

    IV - Florida Deceptive and Unfair Trade Policies Act (FDUTPA)


    A former commenter here named Abd Lomax has done an outstanding job organizing these files, and you can see and search all of them here:

    http://coldfusioncommunity.net…en-docket-and-case-files/


    You can look at these claims and counter claims by reading at Abd's site, or by clicking on the 'Court Docket' tab at the top of this website.


    At this stage in the game, all parties have agreed to a list of undisputed and disputed facts regarding the case. This is all listed in Document 290.


    On May 23rd, the Court, overseen by Judge Altonaga will have a hearing to address all parties' Motions for Summary Judgement (which can only be granted if the Court believes it can rule on undisputed facts, as listed in Document 290). Also, the Judge will rule on IH and Rossi's Motions for Sanctions against each other, and all parties Motions in Limine regarding admitting or denying Expert Witness testimony and evidence. Essentially, both parties' Motions for Summary Judgement ask the Judge to dismiss all counts charged by the opponent, and grant all charges against the opponent (Rossi's motion is a bit less ambitious, but for simplicity's sake, you can think of them that way). And again, the Judge is only supposed to grant motions for summary judgement based on uncontested facts. Her rulings on sanctions and Motions in Limine are supposed to be based on accepted case law regarding rules for evidence.


    So, if this interests your legal mind, you can look into these and make predictions regarding how the Judge will rule regarding the issues she will be addressing at that May 23rd hearing.


    And I, and many others here, would be very interested in your analysis and predictions regarding the outcome of this May 23 hearing. It's an important one, because depending on the Judge's ruling, there's the possibility that there will be no jury trial regarding Rossi's claims against IH, or even for IH's claims against Rossi.


    Or, much more likely, there will be a jury trial, but it may be limited to deciding narrower issues than have been brought up by the opposing parties.


    Who knows, you might learn something through the process.

  • Back here again with Lugano?

    Build one, don't fuel it, and do everything else the same (IR camera settings etc.).

    Voila! The same COP as Lugano will be result. (But it won't be a real excess heat).

    WITH NO FUEL IN IT!!!


    For that matter, just build a simple smooth alumina cylinder with no fuel with a much simpler heater set-up (single phase, maybe even DC, for example)

    And do the rest same as Lugano with the IR camera.

    The darn thing will still make a (not real) COP similar to Lugano!

    WITH NO FUEL IN IT!!!


    The upcoming MFMP Lugano Thermal Validation Repeat (Or whatever it is called) can't come soon enough as far as I am concerned.


  • If the Doral Plant worked, there should have been over $800000 worth of Ni62 in those reactors.

    If Rossi substituted IH's fuel, he had better be able to account for their Ni62.

    That's right, IH's ashes and IH's fuel in the other "domestic heater" reactors also.

    IH paid for the Plant 100%. Paid in full. They own all of it, reactors, fuel, ash, and even the rusty water stains and magic over-pumping metering pumps.

  • Recall that finding a customer was not a requirement of the GPT, and that the terms of the GPT made no reference to a customer.

    Moreover I remember a statement from JTV (I can not find the document now but I'm sure that it is in one of his deposition) where he explicitly says that they never cared about the Customer because they were just interested to the result of the test.

  • If the Doral Plant worked, there should have been over $800000 worth of Ni62 in those reactors.

    If Rossi substituted IH's fuel, he had better be able to account for their Ni62.

    That's right, IH's ashes and IH's fuel in the other "domestic heater" reactors also.

    IH paid for the Plant 100%. Paid in full. They own all of it, reactors, fuel, ash, and even the rusty water stains and magic over-pumping metering pumps.


    Paradigmnoia ,


    Fine that you bash Rossi, but isn't that better done with stuff that is better understood?


    Apart from the nonsense numbers mentioned in regards to the price of Ni62 by you and others, the market in this product is very illiquid and if one would really require 25kg the big boys would jump in and make sure the price would drop, the transmutation part (if any) of the Rossi-effect has AFAIK never been analyzed. Rossi himself was very surprised by the Ni62 findings. Bob Greenyer recently reported transmutation to Ag and Au.


    Perhaps Thomas Darden should check out the reactors for some Pt-190. Supposedly that is an expensive isotope as well. Or is that statement as retarded as yours?


    Cheers,


    JB

  • However, I make the prediction (and I believe that this isn't a bold prediction at all) that we won't see any e-cats, fat-cats, hot-cats, gas-cats, mouse-cats, e-tigers, phantastic-cats, QuarkX or any other one of Rossi's miracles in the shelfs of home-depot for the next 100 years, simply because all e-cats are just scrap, like the scrap Rossi left to the Italian tax payer for clean up after the PetrolDragon fiasco.

    You keep on fishing in the same old waters ...... Rossi has been absolved of those accusations. If you enjoy digging in the past, take a look even at the past of IH: Ele has brought here some interesting links http://www.nytimes.com/2005/10…ew-jersey-style.html?_r=0 and http://www.postandcourier.com/…63-a818-6c0a67cdfa5f.html)

  • You're right. I don't have any factual evidence that IH lied about the failure to replicate, simply that they reported they had succeeded and then later, after the fact, conveniently changed their position. While this does not prove that they were successful, or otherwise, it does cast reasonable doubt on the situation. The fact is that when a poor, hard working, abused individual inventor is forced into combat against a large multi-billionaire corporation, most ordinary people (typical Juror) will side with the individual. My best example of that is the Preston Tucker Trial in the early 1950's. Personally I don't trust for a minute that IH would pay the 89 mil if they could find a way out of it. I think it is likely that they confirmed the technology and figured to push Rossi into settling for a much smaller amount, but he then surprised them with the lawsuit.

    I fully agree with you. IH's candor is somewhat improbable and convenient. They say they were deceived and that they understood it too late, but in the meantime their first tests on the Ecat gave positive results and their praise to Rossi's technology (also present in various Darden interviews) allowed IH to raise several funds.