Rossi vs. Darden developments [CASE CLOSED]

Quote from Alan Fletcher

This is a court case, not an experiment.

As Mats said in a recent interview (*) , the data filed so far is the tip of the iceberg. Both Rossi and IH have filed close to the minimum required to keep the case alive, so it can reach the jury. Rossi is under no legal obligation (and would be unwise) to present any defense at this stage except to answer the counter-complaint "deny and demand strict proof thereof").

Rossi is correct in declining to answer any questions relating to the case.

I still don't understand why deep-insider Dewey is leaking/signalling information about the case, which may or may not be true, and may or may not be presented in the case.

* Mats recent article is from October, and so doesn't even take into account recent court filings.

Display More

Finally a reasonable post from someone who understands the US legal system. Thats why scientist should not practice law and Lawyers should not do science.

Quote from IH Fanboy

@Jed

Because Rossi knew that IH had no plans to pay.

YES, YES, YES and YES!

Quote from Alan Smith

Easy. He has this great invention you see....

Good one Alan, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha......

Quote from Dewey Weaver

Yes

Okay Dewey. If you can show that there was no phase change and that the flow meter was installed on a gravity fed return pipe on a downward grade without a U-joint, and that the flow meter was significantly overstating the flow (enough to account for all of the excess heat that would otherwise be apparent even in a no-phase-change scenario), then you will have successfully proven that Rossi's device produces no excess heat.

That is a tall order. But if IH can show this, even your most ardent skeptics will have very little left to go by.

I don't care about all of your other "evidences." Show us that the flow meter was significantly overstating the flow, and that there was no phase change, and you win. Not only the court case. But the court of public opinion. Now, go forth and conquer.

And if you can't do that, then you will continue to have at least one skeptic in me.

I have a preliminary grey logic augmented ray trace render of the view normal to the backside of the container.

But you aren't going to like it...

Alan Fletcher, as quoted by RR above #2781

Quote

This is a court case, not an experiment.

As Mats said in a recent interview (*) , the data filed so far is the tip of the iceberg. Both Rossi and IH have filed close to the minimum required to keep the case alive, so it can reach the jury. Rossi is under no legal obligation (and would be unwise) to present any defense at this stage except to answer the counter-complaint "deny and demand strict proof thereof").

Rossi is correct in declining to answer any questions relating to the case.

I still don't understand why deep-insider Dewey is leaking/signalling information about the case, which may or may not be true, and may or may not be presented in the case.

* Mats recent article is from October, and so doesn't even take into account recent court filings.

Display More

One of the interesting issues here is what determines the information that is released. I'm unclear about Rossi's exact legal position. He is the Plaintiff for the $89M and therefore must surely disclose enough of his case now that IH can do proper discovery? We have zero evidence from him or Penon, and quite a lot from IH, though obviously much less than they actually have.

I'd think (not knowing the US legal system) that he has some risk in this case of a Summary Judgement against him simply because from what has been released his case is so very weak. That would encourage him to submit some of the hard evidence to contradict the "it is clearly not working" meme that frankly looks inescapable, and the equally inescapable: "Rossi is a bare-faced liar" meme.

However, the lack of meaningful response makes more sense if Rossi has given up on (maybe never expected to win) the $89M, brought that action for PR reasons and perhaps hubris now knocked on the head by his lawyers, and is worried about the counter-action which puts him at some real financial and possibly worse risk.

Dewey's info will I'm sure not be false, though his interpretations and assumptions may be. A misplaced flowmeter, as indicated in the verbal description we have of the plant from Penon, would exactly explain the "water heating" component of the data with other temperatures being more or less correct, and seems now pretty definite. The simplest solution is usually correct, and this ticks the boxes.

Quote from Dewey Weaver

Ah yes Malcolm - quite nice! Some lovely associated naming conventions that we may be able to apply here - kind of surprised that similarly named R SPs have not surfaced yet.

New to the game are the Knatterpout, Poof-Poof goes your money, Phut Phut you or Pouet-Pouet in your suet options to choose from. While not related, I'd also to take the opportunity to add "spread-out porcupine" to the list as well.

He's going down down down down down.

Oh God, and here we go again. Would you guys quit encouraging him. He's like a kid who found a new scatological knock, knock joke to tell around to his little friends.

Quote from oldguy

My view is that there was never much steam and the system was pressurized and perhaps with some antifreeze that kept it below its boiling temp and that Penon lied in his test plan and didn't use the absolute gauge he promised or that Rossi swapped it out.

Yes, and President Trump is Hitler's long lost grandson, sure, I'd believe that. NOT!

RR: assertion is not a convincing method of counter-argument.

Rionrlty - I would encourage you to stop dumping your BS and open your eyes for the facts to realize that there is nothing that supports Rossis case so far. If he sticks to remain quite on his end despite facing his lawsuit being dismissed completely and then deal with a well prepared countersue of IH - good night for him and all his blind supporters and propaganda machines...

The cavil-orgy of IH supporters' factoids has continued this night too. Weak, unconvincing, implausible however noisy and claiming wisdom.

Paternalist style.

Flowmeter evidence in hand IHFB - Planet Rossi is going down down down down down. (Dewey Weaver) [ kindergarten jargon and logic]

Rossi loses 5 different ways on the flow meter. Only one needs to stick with the Judge.

There 18 major flaws (of which the flow meter matter is 1) in his case / claims some with substantial subcategories. (Dewey Weaver)

[ valid only with a list of the 5/18 fatal flaws]

YES- Dewey Weaver's answer to :"Do you have photographs that clearly show the flow meter was installed incorrectly? (IHFB)

[valid with the photography or (in part) a detailed description of where was the instrument positioned]

The pipe was 40mm. (Jed Rothwell's bold statement)

[incredible- prove it. Jed considers that the fact that Penon has not answered to Murray is a certain proof that the Exhibit 5 says real things. It is obvious that Murray was sent in a mission of cavil, calumny, flaw finding, and he has accomplished the task in a clumsy way. If somebody visits your house and then asks you why you are hiding pink and blue invisible unicorns in the bathrooms, would you answer to him?

Be convinced that the Exhibit 5 has received a documented answer in Court, was not answered with factoids as you and Dewey do-

PP- proofs please- diagram, photo ...]

In a recent blog editorial I spoke about "economical friends" defined as - with such friends you do not need enemies (find example

around, please.)

Exhibit 5 is, metaphorically exactly the opposite- an "economical enemy". With such bantam weight enemies you do not need friends to cope with.

peter

Quote from Rionrlty

I equate it to the "Trump haters" in the U.S. after recent election.

Is that because in general the sides in both those cases seem to be split according to their levels of intelligence?

Quote from Paradigmnoia

I have a preliminary grey logic augmented ray trace render of the view normal to the backside of the container.

But you aren't going to like it...

Cool. I assumed you were joking about your recursive ray tracer. Get it uploaded!

Edit: You're still joking, right?

What is it about this sector that attracts people, sans the Planet Rossi SPs, with little or no ability to process reality? I think this is bigger than the "Rossi Effect" and not good when one contemplates how the sector is going to "grow up". I wonder if other correlations are possible?

I think one needs an open mind (or a maybe just a contrarian streak) to even start to look at the evidence for LENR. The problem with this is sometimes minds can be a bit too open, or too reflexively contrarian.

But whilst we're flinging mud about people who lack the ability to process reality: Who was it that decided to give Rossi 11 million dollars?

Quote from Zeus46

.... Who was it that decided to give Rossi 11 million dollars?

Who's deceptive and entirely fake "Masterpiece" was it, that triggered IH's decision, probably made "in good faith"?

Zeph - Darden knew the up front risk in doing transactions with this controversial figure and had thought that all the way through. He clearly stated that to me along with all of the early co-travelers. In fact, the quote was something along the lines of "I'm going to do something crazy that is going to cause a ripple and I want you follow the ripples". Brilliant actually! I think the rest of that story might be interesting history one day but it is too soon to tell. The Planet Rossi chapter will be closing in the not-too-distant future and, fortunately, the real work has continued, sadly with no Ni-H in the present experimental mix.

Quote

YES- Dewey Weaver's answer to :"Do you have photographs that clearly show the flow meter was installed incorrectly? (IHFB)

[valid with the photography or (in part) a detailed description of where was the instrument positioned]

Peter, most of us don't reckon that others deliberately lie. I have not found it to happen often myself. While Rossi does it you really should not judge the rest of us by his standards.

Dear Dewey

Quoting you:

Peter, most of us don't reckon that others deliberately lie. I have not found it to happen often myself. While Rossi does it you really should not judge the rest of us by his standards.

I was simply asking for facts you tell me Rossi tells lies. The flowmeter also told lies and how?

The entire plant was lying, how?

Murray has told the truth, where are the proofs- steam pipe and flowmeter over the reservoir?

I just found a paper telling "factoids are not small facts" Please be generous and give us- your discussion partners- facts of the proper size.

thanks,

peter

Quote from zorud

Who's deceptive and entirely fake "Masterpiece" was it, that triggered IH's decision, probably made "in good faith"?

Zorud, I can't tell if you are agreeing with, or disagreeing with, my statement about reality processing abilities.

Dewey, in truth I respect anyone who has a tolerance for that level of risk in their investments... But wouldn't do it myself.

THH - I think there is a certain portion of the populace that lies all the time and assumes that others do as well because that is their standard & living frame of reference. There is also a certain portion of the populace who lived / lives under regimes with shaped narratives and alt versions of the reality and that is their frame of reference. Then there is the certain portion of the populace that lets hope against hope dominate their naiveté no matter what the reality or their reality dictates. Its quite fascinating and, among other things, may influence how the rest of this story gets told. We'll see what happens to the remnant of remaining Planet Rossi believers in the coming months. I predict they will remain under the P.R. tractor beam / spell regardless the outcome.