Rossi vs. Darden developments [CASE CLOSED]

Quote from monty

foot path? canal?

Sorry my first language is not english. You have to be a bit more clear in whatever you want to say.

He's just doing PR, like you but cleverer metaphors...

Quote from sigmoidal

Well, he wasn't alone. There's Penon and Fabiani (where are they BTW?). There's Johnson (who I imagine is not too happy he ever met Rossi at this point). And Bass, poor chap.

But I don't think that Rossi is merely a con man. He must be a delusional con man. Because only a delusional con man would have preemptively sued IH.

Think about Marianne Macy, or even Jed at one time. These are people trying to help make the world a better place, who unknowingly played into Rossi's delusional con.

Darden had the bucks to call Rossi's bluff. So Rossi, in the Masterpiece of all masterpieces, uses Darden's money to sue him for another $89 mil.

Here we are, waiting for the cards to be laid down in a Florida courtroom.

I suppose until then there's still hope for your story, whatever it is. Or Ascoli65's Big Conspiracy theory.

But the clock is ticking.

Display More

I agree Rossi is a delusional com man. and that he possibly has accomplices. But the whole point about con-men who are delusional and inspirational is that they can get people (even - perhaps especially - tech people) working for them who believe their stuff and are perfectly honest. You need in this situation to be either of limited technical competence or very inclined not to ask questions and just do what you are told, accepting orders unthinkingly. Rossi seems good at finding such people. Just think: he manages to fool (still) Mats who is a good deal more sophisticated and cleverer than many.

So the argument that you need too many people to be "in on it" does not wash. You don't.

Why do you think Rossi was in that container 24/7?

Quote from THHuxleynew

He's just doing PR, like you but cleverer metaphors...

Dear THH,

I was contrariated seeing nobody defends poor Dewey;

DeJAvu Enclave attacks usually in packs.

I like metaphors- these are simply infantile.

What are the functionalities of these metaphors- expressive, explanatory, exegetic and exploratory? (see my blog)

English is a wonderful language deserves to be protected against vulgarisation.

As you see, Rossi Planet can also attack in packs.

Let's be more serious let's rise the level of conversation here.

Peter

Quote from Rionrlty

Why should they when the have such as Dewey and Jed to do it for them?

You agree with me, then, that IH has not been attacking anyone. But let's apply your logic to you: why would Rossi need to attack IH when he has you to do it for him?

Quote from sigmoidal

Obviously you disagree, and have postulated a Big Conspiracy.

I find that silly.

Since this first time, you kept repeating this mantra many times till now.

I never used the word "conspiracy", nor it is my intention to suggest anything of that kind. I have not enough information to do that, and, in any case, it's not my scope. I just would like to know something more about the Ecat story.

Almost everyone who writes on the web belongs to one of these two parties: either (A) those who think that the Ecat works (ie it is capable to produce some excess heat), or (B) those who think that this affair is a big scam conceived and carried out mainly by Rossi. I personally cannot believe neither of these two options. So I'm looking around for finding a complementary explanation (C). In doing this, it is inevitable to review all the many relationships which Rossi had with several important and expert people of so many public institutions that incomprehensibly gave him a strong support all along the Ecat decennial saga, and reflect on them.

Strangely, this effort is considered by someone the same thing as postulating a conspiracy. It isn't, of course, but the insistent insinuations toward this erroneous interpretation could be considered "per se" a strong indication in that direction.

Anyway if you deem that either (A) or (B) option already provides a satisfactorily explanation of the Ecat affair, I have no reason to convince you to change your opinion. I find more useful discussing with someone, if any, who is looking for a third option (C), or has useful information, and sincerely wants to share some of them.

Ascoli65: you've been at this for years with your fervent arguments about the Rossi affair. The definition of conspiracy is "a secret plan by a group to do something unlawful or harmful" and that is precisely what you argue for incessantly. It doesn't matter whether you use the word or not. You think the Rossi affair is part of a conspiracy. Say it aloud. It will set you free.

Quote from Ascoli65

Anyway if you deem that either (A) or (B) option already provides a satisfactorily explanation of the Ecat affair, I have no reason to convince you to change your opinion. I find more useful discussing with someone, if any, who is looking for a third option (C), or has useful information, and sincerely wants to share some of them.

Ok, thanks for explaining. However, I'll mention that there is a saying used often in data analysis that might apply here: "If you torture the data long enough, they will confess to anything."

If you are bound and determined to fit the evidence into option C, when the evidence fits quite easily into B, a tortured argument can always prevail in cramming the explanation into C.

So yes, I see some tortured interpretation of evidence in your C.

But this is what forums and blogs are for, so by all means, have at it.

Quote

(B) those who think that this affair is a big scam conceived and carried out mainly by Rossi. I personally cannot believe neither of these two options.

I think quite a few people feel like this. I don't share that - at all - but the arguments for this disbelief always interest me. I think it is partly that we are unwilling to think that so many people - and credentialled academics - could be so seriously wrong without a lot of help. That is the genius of Rossi, and it is shared by con-men throughout history. That does not incidentally prove Rossi a con-man: though a good case could be made that he is on other evidence now public.

Quote from interested observer

The definition of conspiracy is "a secret plan by a group to do something unlawful or harmful"

It depends on the specific dictionary you look at. For instance The BusinessDictionary (1) specifies that some jurisdictions consider it a crime in itself. I'm not, and I've never been, interested in any possible juridical aspect of the Ecat affair. I'm only interested in clarifying the actual facts, in order to better understand the interconnections between the scientific and the political worlds, because they have huge potential implications on all of us.

I also know that when someone begins to attribute to someone else the intention to postulate a conspiracy, he is not at all interested in clarifying the true specific details and circumstances of the facts he is discussing about. Usually he has other aims, different from mine.

(1) http://www.businessdictionary.com/definition/conspiracy.html

Nevertheless, I did make these selected areas brighter by lowering their camera emissivity.

Quote from Paradigmnoia

Nevertheless, I did make these selected areas brighter by lowering their camera emissivity.

I thought, in your original disagreement with rb0, that you were saying that. And the pics from the camera take into account per pixel cal presumably and hence if that is wrong they are wrong. That is nice to know, though not surprising.

Quote from Dewey Weaver

I see that RiRi and Monty are rested and ready for another round of attempted zombie narrative shaping on behalf of Planet Rossi.

Monty - bring some facts to the party and try to convince me otherwise.

Or better yet - why are you here?

Here I am back. Don't worry. The thing is that nobody has enough so called "facts" to decide this game yet. Only the principals and their attorneys know all of them and they aren't telling each other, let alone including us in the background. The fact that we now know you are paid directly by IH makes anything you say suspect.

Quote from monty

Hi Dewey.

Nice to see you and the "planet rossi" monkey on ur back still alive and well

I don't want to miss the end of this already epic saga!

Quote from sigmoidal

Well, he wasn't alone. There's Penon and Fabiani (where are they BTW?). There's Johnson (who I imagine is not too happy he ever met Rossi at this point). And Bass, poor chap.

But I don't think that Rossi is merely a con man. He must be a delusional con man. Because only a delusional con man would have preemptively sued IH.

Think about Marianne Macy, or even Jed at one time. These are people trying to help make the world a better place, who unknowingly played into Rossi's delusional con.

Darden had the bucks to call Rossi's bluff. So Rossi, in the Masterpiece of all masterpieces, uses Darden's money to sue him for another $89 mil.

Here we are, waiting for the cards to be laid down in a Florida courtroom.

I suppose until then there's still hope for your story, whatever it is. Or Ascoli65's Big Conspiracy theory.

But the clock is ticking.

Display More

I still don't buy it. Your scenario is just to outlandish for consideration. Think about it.

Quote from Eric Walker

You agree with me, then, that IH has not been attacking anyone. But let's apply your logic to you: why would Rossi need to attack IH when he has you to do it for him?

I represent that remark, but all these theories of massive and complicated fraud are just too outlandish for consideration.

Quote from Rionrlty

I represent that remark, but all these theories of massive and complicated fraud are just too outlandish for consideration.

Perhaps you meant, "I resent that remark" (not sure).

Which complex theories of fraud are you referring to? My point was only that IH have not been attacking anyone.

Doc. 144, a notice of hearing, now on the docket.

Quote from Rionrlty

Your scenario is just to outlandish for consideration. Think about it.

I've certainly thought a lot about it. Here's something for you to ponder.

Since the initial lawsuit, IH has told a consistent story. You know the context regarding their initially positive relationship and signed contract, so I'll skip that and paraphrase their assertions:

1) Rossi's 24 hour test did not last 24 hours (albeit by a small margin) and did not meet the power output agreed to.

2) Rossi fabricated a non-existent Italian regulation as an excuse for why it could not run for the full time and full power for that test.

3) When in NC, IH could not get the E-Cat to produce excess heat, even when Rossi was there to help.

4) Long after the agreed to 1 year GPT time had ended, Rossi, Johnson, et. al. came up with a 'scheme' to move the plant to Florida to produce heat for a 'real customer'.

5) Rossi, Johnson, et. al. stated to IH that the real customer was independent from Rossi and Leonardo.

6) Rossi, Johnson, et. al. stated to IH that the real customer was connected in some manner to Johnson Mathey,

7) Rossi, Johnson, et. al. hired James Bass to pose as a Director of Engineering of the real customer.

8 ) Rossi refused to let IH's engineer in to see the E-Cat.

9) Once Rossi finally did let in IH's engineer, he determined that the E-Cat could not be producing 1 MW

See how specific these are? See how easy it is to refute them if they are untrue?

1) If the test really did run for the full 24 hours and at full power, Rossi should be able to show that with instrument records.

2) If there was6 an Italian regulation, Rossi can just cite it.

3) If the E-Cat did produce power in NC, Rossi should be able to describe this in detail and provide supporting evidence.

4) If there was a real customer, it is easy to show evidence from tax records, employee records, invoices, shipping records, etc.

5) If JMP was independent from Rossi and Johnson, they can provide the filed Florida (or wherever) records showing that.

6) If JMP was connected to Johnson Mathey, they can just get them to testify to such.

7) If James bass was the Director of Engineering of a real customer, he should be able to testify and provide evidence of that.

8 ) If Rossi did not prevent IH's engineer from coming in, he could testify to that.

9) If Rossi's E-Cat did produce 1MW, he would be able to cite evidence that contradicted IH's engineer.

If these allegations by IH are untrue, IH is a sitting duck!! They really must be a bunch of fools there.

What do we know so far from Rossi?

1) Rossi concedes this.

2) ?

3) ?

4) ?

5) We have FL incorporation records showing that Johnson is the President of both JMP and Leonardo.

6) We have an email (provided by IH) showing Rossi telling Johnson to name JMP 'Advanced Derivatives of Johnson Mathey', while subsequently we have Rossi claiming on JONP that there is no relation of the customer JMP to Johnson Mathey.

7) We have an email where Rossi (not JMP) is telling Bass what to say when visitors come to see the E-Cat. We don't have Bass's testimony however.

8 ) Rossi concedes he prevented IH's engineer from coming in, asserting that he thought he might be there to steal IP.

9) ?

What is Rossi's assertion?

- IH didn't have the money to pay the 89 Mil and never intended to. (IH has 50 Mill in holding, and has evidence it had access to 150 M more).

- IH lacks standing, and violated the contract by transferring the IP to IPH (which wholly owns IH).

- "I deny [essentially everything], and demand strict proof"

(Not very specific)

Penon is in Italy the Dominican Republic and is not talking scheduled for deposition 2017-02-21, Fabiani is in Russia and hasn't responded to the court on time (but he did reply within the Court's grace period still has a few days before sanctions kick in).

Think about it.