IHFB,
Keep reading, everything I said is in there.
Speaking of which, kind of slick of you to mention he noted the container, and piping in there. No one has ever doubted that, but I can see how you interpreted what I said. When asked, he (Stokes) noted that the heavy equipment normally expected in, or around, a manufacturing area, was not there, but some small tools were...like I said.
Getting late, but if needed, will deal with this tomorrow.
rionaltry,
No I am an engineer working in the energy field and have never met, been approached by or asked by anyone anywhere in this this ridiculous Ecat charade.
Click on my user name and you will fine responses on Discuss before this blog started.
Like most, when I first saw this article in January of 2011, I was intrigued and have followed it closely since.
However, after 6 years and a grand total of nothing but "Rossi says"
My experiences and observations of same leave me to believe that Rossi is a pathological, liar and a delusional quack.
@ Shane,
Context matters. He also admitted to not having any knowledge about the type of activities that were being performed using the steam. Anyway, small potatoes. The big take away from this is that there was steam.
I also believe that IHFB is quite honest when he says he is not being paid by anyone but acts of his own free will.
You may very well be right.
Anyway, for which kind of Rossi apologist would you feel more sorry:
For someone who defends Rossi because he is just that batshit insane gullible that he (still) believes this charade?
Or for a guy who desperately defends this e-cat farce because he fears to sink together with Rossi in one boat?
IHFB,
Yes he did say there was steam, but not high pressure steam. I'd be careful with that, because that may be the "serpentine pipes" with "heating strips" on them, that Bass helped put up.
Anyways here is what Stokes says about the JMP side:
| Q. You're almost done. Come on.
2 A. One megawatt is one million watts. That 3 is the equivalent of 10,000 100 watt light bulbs. 4 Try to visualize 10,000 100 watt light bulbs and know 5 there was nothing on the other side of that gray wall 6 that would have consumed that much energy. 7 Q. How about half of that much energy? 8 MR. ANNESSER: Objection to form. 9 MR. NUNEZ: Object to the form. 10 THE WITNESS: Not at the time I was 11 there. 12 BY MR. PACE: 13 Q. How about a quarter of that much energy? 14 A. Not at the time I was there. 15 Q. How about a tenth of that much energy? 16 MR. ANNESSER: Objection to form. 17 THE WITNESS: Possibly. |
I checked, and everything else I said is in 207-52. Looks like I still have a clean, no FUD, record.
@Shane D,
I think that exchange is hilarious, but okay, I'll back off on the FUD accusation. I actually highly value your presence here, despite our more recent differences (you at one time were one of the only others "on the fence" so to speak, and it's been lonely since you went full IH).
And as for the steam, the steam ought not to be high pressure according to the data. So that fits. And you must admit, having a disinterested party testify that there was steam is a pretty big reveal.
Wrestle with me on an intellectual level.
Ok - why didn't you answer me here:
I did already here
You didn't reply to my request: Please cite where IH says that they were seeing COP 5, 9, or 11 with their own built devices!
What you did is: You first spread "fake news", and when caught on it, you tried to wiesel out.
COP of 5 and 9 with IH's own reactors: 214-22.
As for the claimed COP of 11, IH stated: "We tested our plant . . . for four days." Now, you pointed out that the excerpt available in the deposition appeared to be referring to the Ferrara test, although it doesn't state that in the deposition. And the Ferrera test was a 2 day test not a 4 day test. Erik followed your comment stating that important context had been omitted from the excerpt, with which I agree. I then conceded that upon closer inspection, it probably refers to the Ferrara test. The timing of the test is similar, although the 2 and 4 day discrepancy, and the fact that IH (presumably JT Vaughn) states that "we tested our plant" seem a bit curious, don't you think?
the fact that IH (presumably JT Vaughn) states that "we tested our plant" seem a bit curious, don't you think?
No, I don't think it is strange that JT calls it "our plant", since it is in IHs possession now.
Erik followed your comment stating that important context had been omitted from the excerpt
I believe it was Roger's comment.
Eric (sorry for the Erik misspelling above), I think it was you who stated that important context was omitted:
So if there was water under a bit of pressure, and slightly above sea level boiling point, then it would leak as steam.
If steam were going 30 m to the upstairs mezzanine, and the pipe itself was not creating a restriction (who knows about the restriction of the custom radiator thing built from tubes), then a DN200 pipe would seem appropriate.
So if there was water under a bit of pressure, and slightly above sea level boiling point, then it would leak as steam.
So you think that by and large there was no phase change? And you think that for all of Rossi's previous tests there was no phase change? That nobody ever noticed that? That Darden, JT Vaughn, Murray, Dameron, Dewey, and all of the others who visited the Darden plant would never have noticed that?
Isn't it interesting that (at least from the depositions that I have read so far), none of them have ever claimed what you are claiming. Jed has been a big advocate for there being no steam, but as far as I can tell, it has been only Jed (and now you). [Edit: Dewey might have suggested it before, but I could be wrong. Can't seem to find it right now.]
And even if there was no steam, and the water was heated to slightly above sea level boiling point, there would still be a massive release of excess energy, assuming the flow meter was correctly positioned. And see, it all comes back to the flow meter. This case will be decided on that issue.
There is something screwy around June, July (?) when the COP to just only heat water to the verge of boiling leaps from around 5 or 6 to around 10 or more
The water meter will be critical. There is only one. Where is the pulse data?
The 24 pumps won't cut it. They can't pump 1500 L an hour.
Fabiani's deposition says he gave data to Murray on a Zip drive at a Jones Day meeting.
There is a copy of one tab of that file somewhere in that last batch, that someone had.
There was Fabiani data from somewhere for the Fabiani, Penon, and FPL daily kWh plots.
I want to see the daily incremental count on that water meter.
None of this counts by itself in 36s and 27s (or whatever) bullshit.
Display Morerionaltry,
No I am an engineer working in the energy field and have never met, been approached by or asked by anyone anywhere in this this ridiculous Ecat charade.
Click on my user name and you will fine responses on Discuss before this blog started.
Like most, when I first saw this article in January of 2011, I was intrigued and have followed it closely since.
However, after 6 years and a grand total of nothing but "Rossi says"
My experiences and observations of same leave me to believe that Rossi is a pathological, liar and a delusional quack.
Believe it or not I recall similar things being said about the original F and P, back in 1990. Yes, I am old enough to remember and didn't believe it about them back then.
