Rossi vs. Darden developments [CASE CLOSED]

Quote from Forty-Two

In case Smith/IH would omit photos which shows important stuff, that wouldn't help their case at all, because it would be easy for Rossi to add such photos into the docket and discredit IH.

You would think this yes, and if it were any other group besides IH, I would agree. But IH has thrown up all kinds of FUD for over a year now, only to be exposed later on. I think they use it as a tactic to put public pressure on Rossi in the hopes he would come to the negotiating table. Apparently hasn't worked too well yet.

Quote from IH Fanboy

You would think this yes, and if it were any other group besides IH, I would agree. But IH has thrown up all kinds of FUD for over a year now, only to be exposed later on. I think they use it as a tactic to put public pressure on Rossi in the hopes he would come to the negotiating table. Apparently hasn't worked too well yet.

IHFB,

Indeed, i think you are right.

Rossi is too emotional to deal with these tactics and instead started fighting even harder. After May 22, when it is clear if the judge dares to overrule the magistrate or not, they will sit down again is my gut feeling.

Both parties are in a hurry. IH needs to start rebuilding of what is left of their reputation and both parties feel (German saying) the hot LENR breath of their competitors in their necks.

Shortly after May 22 will be a good time to talk. If they cannot come to an agreement then, they will fight each other to death (and in Rossi's case that might be literally).

Cheers,

JB

Don't forget project AURA. Although not directly connected to this dispute, its outcome will make ripples that might cause some bobbing up and down in all directions.

First sentence of IH's Statement of the Case:

"Plaintiffs claim to have invented a technology called the "E-Cat" capable of violating the law of conservation of energy by producing far more energy than it consumes."

280, p. 4

Not surprising that IH is infusing the dispute with this FUD. They draw from experts who are LENR-know-nothings. They raise the specter of the violation of the law of conservation of energy, a common line of attack for anti-LENR interests. IH's intentions are becoming more transparent with time.

Quote from IH Fanboy

First sentence of IH's Statement of the Case:

"Plaintiffs claim to have invented a technology called the "E-Cat" capable of violating the law of conservation of energy by producing far more energy than it consumes."

280, p. 4

Not surprising that IH is infusing the dispute with this FUD. They draw from experts who are LENR-know-nothings. They raise the specter of the violation of the law of conservation of energy, a common line of attack for anti-LENR interests. IH's intentions are becoming more transparent with time.

Display More

These guys keep acting so ambivalent one constantly wonders if they screw-up, if they are desperate or if there is a hidden intention. Sure, they want to win this case, but this sentence is very awkward.

So awkward that all the guys on this forum that defend IH constantly, and have high hopes for the progress of the LENR field in general, probably also start to see that the company they defend is not helping that progress at all.

Not sure if the below has already been posted. I found it quite funny. From Abd's blog;

Quote from THHuxleynew

I'm inclined to agree - after all we don't want a conversation from which Rossi supporters, due to intellectual deficits, are nearly all banned....

Although I would consider myself a former Rossi supporter, in light of your consistent misunderstanding and misconstrual of my statements and arguments, I'd suggest you dismount from your high horse before you fall off.

Quote from IH Fanboy

It isn't his style. I don't think that you believe this yourself. Why would he be so open in his depos about the JMP ruse (which is quite damaging to his position) and then cherry pick a big lie on the heat exchanger in the mezzanine, thereby risking his entire case? I think you are all in dreamland on the heat exchanger, just like you were on the spoliation.

Edit: I accept that the spoliation issue isn't finally resolved yet and situations can change. So maybe I'll hedge a little and say you were all in partial dreamland on that issue at this point.

Quote from IH Fanboy

Do you believe this Darden-says? That is one whale of a story, and probably exaggerated, in my opinion. After all, if Darden really believed that his dummy reactor produced the same results as his high-COP IH-built reactors, he would have never sought to attract tens of millions of outside money, with Rossi being core to the investments.

So let me get this clear. You reckon Rossi is telling the truth, because "it is not his style" when the Court documents are littered with Rossi deceptions laid bare.

But Darden risks criminal prosecution for perjury by claiming Rossi's devices have never worked in a specific test conducted by Dameron when in fact they did, and others would know this?

That is bizaare. Rossi could have been doing some stuff using steam in the mezzazine, I agree. He could even have added a heat exchanger there for Summer weather when an extra 20kW would have made his container very unpleasant, but the photographic evidence of a closed window, and the lack of physical evidence, counts against this. But Darden perjure himself over something that must be known to others?

Quote from joshg

Although I would consider myself a former Rossi supporter, in light of your consistent misunderstanding and misconstrual of my statements and arguments, I'd suggest you dismount from your high horse before you fall off.

Looks like Annesser, with his twisty interpretations, is your friend here! The Rossi case, which your idee fixe of worldwide anti-LENR conspiracy requires you to hold, rests on interpretations of the facts and speculation about evil motives. It is a push to make things fit it. Not that I claim to understand what is in other people's minds. You do this. You are convinced Darden's actions cannot be explained except to make him a criminal. That is a pretty confident reading of other's psychology. I realise your own study makes that of interest to you, but it is hubris and plain nasty to think you can establish criminality on so little evidence, just as it is prejudice to fit all facts into a supposed certain anti-LENR conspiracy.

Quote from THHuxleynew

Looks like Annesser, with his twisty interpretations, is your friend here! The Rossi case, which your idee fixe of worldwide anti-LENR conspiracy requires you to hold, rests on interpretations of the facts and speculation about evil motives. It is a push to make things fit it. Not that I claim to understand what is in other people's minds. You do this. You are convinced Darden's actions cannot be explained except to make him a criminal. That is a pretty confident reading of other's psychology. I realise your own study makes that of interest to you, but it is hubris and plain nasty to think you can establish criminality on so little evidence, just as it is prejudice to fit all facts into a supposed certain anti-LENR conspiracy.

This post simply proves my point about your poor reading comprehension abilities. It is also clear evidence that are stuck in a Manichean worldview with respect to the issues and people involved in this case.

Quote from IH Fanboy

First sentence of IH's Statement of the Case:

"Plaintiffs claim to have invented a technology called the "E-Cat" capable of violating the law of conservation of energy by producing far more energy than it consumes."

280, p. 4

I have to agree that this is a strange statement to make.

Not sure where IH are trying to go with this.

It seems to misrepresent LENR and in turn leaves IH open to attack as a bunch of idiots, who invested in something that is supposedly "capable of violating the law of conservation of energy".

I hope this sticks to a contractual dispute between IH and Rossi and does not turn into an attack on LENR, I think more than enough damage has been done to the reputation of the field.

While, some, still, believe, in, Rossi, and, others, do, not, I, think, we, are, all, supporters, of, LENR.,

(Not, 100%, sure, about, apostrophes, so, I, am, not, taking, any, chances, on, offending, Alan,).,

Those are comma's

Quote from ZenoOfElea

I have to agree that this is a strange statement to make.

Not sure where IH are trying to go with this.

It seems to misrepresent LENR and in turn leaves IH open to attack as a bunch of idiots, who invested in something that is supposedly "capable of violating the law of conservation of energy".

I hope this sticks to a contractual dispute between IH and Rossi and does not turn into an attack on LENR, I think more than enough damage has been done to the reputation of the field.

While, some, still, believe, in, Rossi, and, others, do, not, I, think, we, are, all, supporters, of, LENR.,

(Not, 100%, sure, about, apostrophes, so, I, am, not, taking, any, chances, on, offending, Alan,).,

Display More

It is how you alert a Judge to the fact that Rossi's claims are extraordinary rather than just being a new slightly better type of solar cell..

Not the way you would, if tactful, talk to LENR guys. And of course it is scientifically incorrect if LENR is real and the LENR effect releases nuclear binding energy. OTOH, since no-one knows what LENR is, if it is real, maybe it does violate conservation of energy!

I think, while tact is fine, winning a Court case for IH is more important and they are fine with Rossi having to prove that his devices work (since they don't).

Quote from Zeus46

Those are comma's

Doh! it's worse than I thought.

Time to go back to school.

I think those of us who are skeptical (to put it mildly) about Rossi's claims have made it pretty clear what it would take to change our minds. Pretty simple, really.

My question for "open-minded" people like IH Fanboy is: what would it take to convince you that Rossi has nothing and is a con man? Surely there must be something that would do it.

Quote from interested observer

My question for "open-minded" people like IH Fanboy is: what would it take to convince you that Rossi has nothing and is a con man? Surely there must be something that would do it.

Parkhomov's experiments are disproven. MFMP demonstrates that me356 has nothing. Gullström's collaboration with Rossi is shown to be farcical. Levi's original test with no phase change is satisfactorily explained (besides by THH's clamp FUD, which has been roundly refuted). That would be a good start.

Quote from IH Fanboy

It isn't his style. I don't think that you believe this yourself. Why would he be so open in his depos about the JMP ruse (which is quite damaging to his position) and then cherry pick a big lie on the heat exchanger in the mezzanine, thereby risking his entire case? I think you are all in dreamland on the heat exchanger, just like you were on the spoliation.

Edit: I accept that the spoliation issue isn't finally resolved yet and situations can change. So maybe I'll hedge a little and say you were all in partial dreamland on that issue at this point.

Rossi was not open about the JMP ruse. He now claims that in his emails to IH, the emails where he pitched the customer, the "plant" that he would be "running" was the JMP plant and not the 1MW plant.

Read those emails again, read Rossi's depo, read the term sheet, and tell me what Rossi is referring to when he says he will run the plant.

I believe he is lying and that he is only admitting to the JMP situation because he has no choice. But twisting it by claiming that IH knew about it all along.

This isn't being open about the JMP ruse. This is about getting caught red handed and (IMO) lying to get out of the situation.

Quote from IH Fanboy

Parkhomov's experiments are disproven

The concept that you cannot prove a negative seems to be totally alien to true believers. There will never be proof that the e-cat does not work. There cannot be. But far more important is that there is not and likely will never be proof that it does work. The inability to see the distinction seems to be a common syndrome in these parts.

@IO,

Then I guess the question is more appropriately asked of you. Would the combination of the following convince you that the e-Cat works?

Parkhomov's experiments are replicated by another team. MFMP demonstrates that me356 has what he claims. Gullström's collaboration with Rossi is shown to be non-farcical. Levi's original test with no phase change is replicated by another team.