Display MoreSurely even you are not claiming MFMP, TC, Bob Higgins, GSVIT are all wrong on this subtle but large error?
Are you saying that every scientist who measured Rossi's device made the same errors? That would make Rossi the greatest magician since Houdini.
Let me point out - maybe you did not know - how Rossi does it.
Most people doing experiments of this type reckon a control experiment is needed. It lets them debug their equipment and check what they are measuring is real.
Rossi is not a scientist. It is astounding that over a year, there had to be times when he wasn't even around (like Jed said, he wasn't even on the same continent during at least one test) that someone didn't bother to take a thermometer to the device? The Swedes measured his device when he wasn't around. It is astounding.
Rossi is on record as saying that controls are not necessary because they provide no information.
Rossi is not a scientist. All of this criticism of him as a scientist doesn't mean squat to him. He said to judge him by the market, "in mercato veritas". Well, by his own preferred method, there is nothing in the market so it means there is not much veritas in him.
And he is as good as his word. his experiments have almost never had a control. Where there has been a control it has been under different conditions or protocols from the real experiment - hence no control at all. And in the Lugano test Rossi convinced the testers (or the testers convinced themselves) it was two difficult to use a simple thermomenter AKA thermocouple except at very low temperatures where it did no good.
This failure to measure temperature is on the scientists surrounding Rossi, not on Rossi.
Now you can perhaps see why almost everyone here reckons Rossi technically incompetent as well as a liar?
Someone who can pull the wool over the eyes of so many scientists is not technically incompetent.
The above are all incontrovertible facts, in the public record. I'd like you to acknowledge them.
You seem to have an odd definition of incontrovertible. Kind of like when Jed says that anyone who reads the Penon report would obviously see fraud, but yet the Penon report has been admitted to evidence and there was no summary judgement of fraud.
Rossi vs. Darden developments [CASE CLOSED]
- barty
- Closed
-
-
Display More
Kevmo
We have some guys here who actually understand the legal stuff - a good idea for you to pay attention to them.
At least one of them has demonstrated an astonishing lack of understanding on a couple of legal points.
There are so many things wrong with this statement I'll just point out the non-legal one.
Having got this far, and spent some $3M or more on legal fees, Rossi (or his lawyers if on contingency) is going to want to recoup them - if he has a case. Similarly IH. So withdrawing such an offer (assuming it was ever made, which seems highly unlikely) can be perfectly well argued.
And there are 2 lawyers on this thread that don't seem to be able to argue the case very well.
I can't for the life of me work out why this one insignificant issue so concerns you.
It's simple, and it is represented in the hypothetical that I bring up in various iterations that so few are able to process. It is like watching someone trying to process "if the sky were to turn green our skin would turn purple" but all they can ever get out is that the sky doesn't turn green, they cannot process the hypothetical. So here is the hypothetical that you will not process: If IH goes through the legal shenanigans to get Rossi's supposed offer onto the docket and the judge pushes hard for a negotiated settlement, would it be in IH's interest to accept Rossi's supposed full refund and relinquish claims to the IP?
On the other side, if you think one of the gadzillion blog lies of Rossi paraded in front of Jurors is going to have more effect than the more relevant letter boasting about how he lied to his previous partner to break a contract, or vanishing heat exchanger, well then you are just far away from everyone else.
What does this even mean?
Quite apart from the fact that a dissection of Rossi's blog (if such a comment is admissable) is going to be argumentative and distract the Jury from the main point.
There are already items from his blog that are getting admitted. Wouldn't you like to see Rossi's feet held to the fire over blog entries? And how is it that someone who would like such a thing is tainted as a Rossi sycophant, hmmmm?
-
The way you intersperse your response is making it very difficult for me to respond directly.
QuoteI was told that blog entries were inadmissible. Now we know they have been admitted as evidence.
Whoever told you that blog entries are always inadmissible was: (1) not me; and either (2) wrong or (3) actually making a much less general statement which you misunderstood. Both 2 and 3 are possible; given what I've seen of your antics so far, I'd say 3 is more likely.
QuoteAnd for the 987th time, you will not answer a hypothetical but I'll ask anyways because I like to see how lawyers twist. Does the fact that some of the blog entries have been admitted mean that the supposed offer blog entry is more likely or less likely to be admitted as evidence?1: That's not a hypothetical.
2: I don't know how much more clearly I can say this: the fact that a particular blog entry has been admitted makes it neither more likely or less likely that the "supposed offer" entry would be admitted, because each and every individual entry offered as evidence must be admitted on its own merits. The admission of other entries from the blog makes no difference. At all. Of any kind. None.As far as your tl:dr lawyer stuff, that's known on planet Earth as the law. It's possible that nobody listens to it on Planet Moonbat, but a copy of it will be in a well-thumbed book on the judge's bench in Florida. And the judge pays attention to it. If she doesn't, she gets overturned on appeal.
QuoteI have been saying this is a vehicle to get the 5 week trial whittled down to 20 minutes.
You are wrong. As in, so far from 'right' that you cannot see right anymore because the curvature of the universe is blocking your view.
The statement is almost certainly inadmissible, and even if it's admitted it doesn't demonstrate what you think it demonstrates. There are no circumstances in which the alleged indefinite offer to settle from months in the past would settle a suit over whether Rossi completed his performance and is now owed millions of dollars.
-
It takes a special person to stay loyal to Rossi. He has told so many lies in his depositions that it will be impossible for him to avoid perjuring himself on the stand in Miami. His very deliberate plan to use sock puppets and the Planet Rossi special person spin machine in creating confusion and assembling their "story" from nits and staged exchanges is not working - there are too many intelligent lovers of fact and truth on his tail. The remaining real folks who are left need to realize that history has shown that things don't work out very well for those used by Rossi in his past schemes. He gets what he needs out of them and dumps them like cold leftovers. Fortunately, the moment of truth is upon him and he is going to have to answer for his actions and lies. No amount of internet spin is going to change that - no matter how hard they try.
-
So what are you afraid of then?
-
So what are you afraid of then?
As for me, I'm afraid he may get away with it. I'm afraid he will be slippery and confusing enough on the stand that the jurors will just think he is having problems with English language comprehension. Personally, I have no fear whatsoever that he has anything that works. There is no empirical evidence to suggest otherwise, and large amounts of evidence of a deliberate scam.
-
TTM - Are you afraid to use your real name? While we're on the subject, who said anything about being afraid besides you and what point are you trying to make?Is this just more attempted Planet Rossi digital bully-floamage? To answer your question - I'm not afraid of anything on Planet Rossi or planet earth.
-
Calm down Dewey. From all your ranting and slashing around here I got the impression you are afraid that something might not go the way you want it with the trial on course.
If that impression was wrong then it is ok with me.
BTW: didn't i already tell you my real name?
-
Sifferkoll - I'm almost starting to feel sorry for you again. The numbers of lies in Rossi's depositions are staggering. I don't think we'll be able to get to all of them.
And what is with your ongoing "hand on the Bible" thingy? These are signs of some bad juju siffer.
-
TTM - nice Planet Rossi try. It seems the opposite is true. Why are you afraid to share your real name?
-
Complete .RAVI and Labjack data files for the Dogbone replica test in April 2017
Thanks again for that link.
Are the .RAVI files for the Feb 2015 Thermal Validation still around? Small segments of Optris video from that test would be useful, if possible.
-
Ah, so being physically close to Rossi or the ecat will change your outlook and clarify the reality of the technology. This could well be the true Rossi Effect, certainly IH seemed to succumb for a period. I wonder if its strength adheres to the inverse square law?
-
TTM - nice Planet Rossi try. It seems the opposite is true. Why are you afraid to share your real name?
Please read my posts before you answer. Like I already said I told you my real name a while ago my disputatious friend.
-
We're learning a lot about Siffer today. I'm going to hold off on my new nickname for him while he continues to lay down some track.
From the Planet Rossi collective:
1. Repeat it enough and it will become true. (nuff said about that)
2. The market is the true measure of a working device. (mercerto veritas or some mumbo jumbo like that - had a hard time typing that one with straight face / fingers).
3. You have to be close enough to the master to see the truth. (which is not true as I got pretty close to the master and his reactor with an IR temp gun - saw the truth and got thrown out).
What else can we add to Malcolm's inverse square law initiative?
-
TTM - I remember that. Was that your real real name? As fear seems to be is top of mind for you - what are you afraid of?
-
Dear Dewey,
Maybe you could sit and enjoy the match, you and the pacemonitor share enough facts to give any rational reader a hint on the result, so no need to worry about the result.
I'm more worried by your desire to participate to the match, but unless you reach the bar, we are in the tribune, and the police of the tribune watch us.
Wan't some popcorn?
Or you can watch "Orange is the new Black" on Netflix thinking about ... someone you will love there.
-
Alainco - thank you for your comments and observations. There is a method to the madness. Planet Rossi is running a planned script for this season - there is more to come. Always remember - I don't speak for IH.
Best,
Dewey
-
As an interested observer, I am completely mystified by those who continue to argue with the handful of remaining Rossi supporters here. Clearly contradictions, outright lies, ridiculous rationalizations, and impossibilities give these people no pause whatsoever. Trying to reason with them is utterly futile. Planet Rossi may have its fascinations but keep in mind that the rest of us don't have to live on it.
-
I don't know about you, but to me it is pretty obvious that if you are the actually measuring stuff in first person (like the Uppsala team, Mats Lewan, etc) then you are infinitely better suited to assess reality than sitting in some kitchen on the other side of the planet guessing and making stuff up that suits your agenda ad hoc (like most people here).
If you bother to read and then do the necessary work to understand the literature on the Lugano report, then you are in a much better position to understand the Lugano team, Mats et al. Whether the reading is done in an armchair or on the moon makes no difference.
I can't see that being charmed by them is either here or there when it comes to evaluating scientific competence.
-
Well, you certainly are afraid of saying anything with your hand on the bible, isn't it so Dewey. Those fantasy bible entities of yours must be really scary. ... Yeah, why don't you tell me why it is so important that you dodge it every time? Could it be because you tell nothing but lies? [ ... etc. ... ]
@sifferkoll 's account suspended for two weeks. It was just a matter of time. Next time will probably be permanent.
