Rossi vs. Darden developments [CASE CLOSED]

Quote from [email protected]

Is there a central acronym listing? What is GPT? If the new contract is what supplanted the old contract then was the ERV report just a comic book? If Rossi was selling heat to someone else, what is that to IH? They had no use for that heat he was supposedly selling to himself. At some point this heat contract you like so much harkens back to the IP contract with the independent agreed third party and the independent third party ERV report.

I don't know why Rossi isn't selling stuff across Europe. That isn't part of this contract case so address it elsewhere, and ask Rossi. Otherwise I could go on about why the patent office doesn't allow cold fusion patents and all kinds of obfuscations. So, stick to the subject at hand.

It is quite telling that you do not know what the guaranteed performance test is since it is the primary critical issue in the entire case. You need to do your homework and stay up. Rossi set up a 3 year sell of steam to a company he controlled claiming it was independent of him and his lawyer in Feb and then much much later (Aug/Sept) well into its operation claimed it to be the GPT mentioned in a contract that specified three signatures and had a time restriction that was past. It was that late claim of "GPT" by him that is at issue in all his claims. You need to know those items to develop any rational view of the case. Rossi's change in calling the work in Doral a "GPT" instead of a simple sale of heat is what set IH's ultimate rejection of the later reports and work in motion. After all, why would they complain until Rossi started to call the sale of heat the GPT and demand money on that time lapsed agreement.

Quote from [email protected]

And allow me to say that you show the level bullshit and meanspiritedness that I have come to expect from lawyers, affirming once again that y'all have such a lousy reputation.

edit:

And you completely missed that Penon gave his deposition, which a was significant oversight in your introduction to this group. How's that for grasping legal issues, lawyer man? By all means, publish again the Law Firm you represent so we can all know who to avoid if we need legal assistance.

He (WW) can post his information himself and has done so. Check the forum and try to stay up.

However, you asking for such information from someone here is doxing and grounds to have you banded from the forum.

I just thought of couple more questions for Rossi that Jones Day I am sure have in their binders:

Isn't it correct that the agreement between you and the "independent" company provided that said company was supposed to pay you / your "independent company" $1000 per day for heat as long as the 1MW unit

produces it (and a little less per day if a little less is produced)?

How many payments were made?

Where did the money from the payments go?

You controlled this company, did it ever have the monies to pay approx $350,000 a year.

Why did you fraudulently lead IH to believe that this company had the money to make such payments when you knew it did not?

Question to be asked repeatedly: Were you lying then or are you lying now? Why should the jury believe you now when you admit to repeatedly lying before?

Quote from [email protected]

I regularly bet at PredictIt.org. I get great odds and I know I'll get paid. And I don't have lawyers putting words in my mouth that weren't there in the first place. With a bitch like you and how you talk, I should expect to get 25:1 odds. You willing?

Quote from [email protected]

I regularly bet at PredictIt.org. I get great odds and I know I'll get paid. And I don't have lawyers putting words in my mouth that weren't there in the first place. With a bitch like you and how you talk, I should expect to get 25:1 odds. You willing?

You seem so confident and yet you want odds? To quote the orange haired shi*-gibbon in the White House, Sad. Sorry, straight even.

Quote from woodworker

I just thought of couple more questions for Rossi that Jones Day I am sure have in their binders:

Isn't it correct that the agreement between you and the "independent" company provided that said company was supposed to pay you / your "independent company" $1000 per day for heat as long as the 1MW unit

produces it (and a little less per day if a little less is produced)?

How many payments were made?

Where did the money from the payments go?

You controlled this company, did it ever have the monies to pay approx $350,000 a year.

Why did you fraudulently lead IH to believe that this company had the money to make such payments when you knew it did not?

Question to be asked repeatedly: Were you lying then or are you lying now? Why should the jury believe you now when you admit to repeatedly lying before?

Display More

Rossi sent invoices for the steam but IH never billed or accepted any payments.

My understanding (such as it is) is that they never believed that the steam was delivered as Rossi claimed even from the first month.

Kev: I'm sure Fred Flinstone will show that IH had some credibility issues as well, such as telling their investors the Flinstone IP worked when they supposedly thought it didn't, that kind of thing.

Me: I'm pretty sure they never did that. Rossi-warnings were a Darden thing.

Weird China PDF:

http://chinauspark.com/appUpda…5/20140925152226_9375.pdf

"A number of LENR technologies are demonstrating significant progress;
one in particular may be ready for commercialization"

This is their advert. Note the cagey phrasing. No statement of the risks. But, you may be certain that they would give any investor such a statement (and they did the ones here, because one of them said he thought Darden over-egged the riskiness of Rossi).

When were they so happy with Rossi's reactor? A long time before the test. The dummy reactor? That showed that a Rossi test could be 100% wrong. The Swedes however and Penon etc were all saying tests were OK. The Ferrara tests, after that, were pretty convincing. In retrospect (and I at the time) it is easy to see Rossi is a flake. IH bet that he must have something, rather like you KeV they read Mats book (or equivalent) and in spite of reservations felt it was too good a chance to miss.

Quote from [email protected]

So your answer to the question of why no one thought to bring a thermometer was that Rossi wouldn't allow it. I find it amazing he got away with this much chicanery over 8 years. Mats Lewan is selling hundreds of thousands of his books. You should write your own counter-argument book and make money off this. Rossi truly is a fantastic magician if what y'all are saying is true.

Well I guess we have different view about this. I don't find Rossi such a fantastic magician. As I explained above I think all of his tricks has been busted. But I think he is a very skilled con man.

I admit that I am surprised that some people let him get away with this much chicanery over all those years. The fact that Mats Lewan and presumably also the Swedish scientists still have hopes for Rossi is the main reason I still follow this story. But there has also been people that didn't allowed the chicanery. Like Krivit, Jed and eventually IH.

We should also remember that there are numerous examples in the history of frauds that fooled many intelligent people. It easy to sit as a bystander and say I would never be fooled by this. But the power of a skilled con man is very big. I think mainly because we people often want's to think the best of other people.

Quote from oldguy

He (WW) can post his information himself and has done so. Check the forum and try to stay up.

However, you asking for such information from someone here is doxing and grounds to have you banded from the forum.

Thanks, OG, but let me respond. Dear Kev: As I have previously posted, I am a semi-retired bum. I don't represent any firms or anyone else in the matter.

I don't understand why so many people find it difficult to believe that Rossi could have conned so many for so long.

Enron: claimed millions, if not billions, of value for contracts of fiber optic nonsense. Arthur Andersen, then a Big 6 accounting firm, signed off.

Bernie Madoff: took very wealthy allegedly sophisticated investors (including funds) for billions. You want to talk about measurements - his accountants were a two member firm, allegedly responsible for signing off on billions and billions in money management accounts.

Trump: got elected. And don't get me started on him. As an FYI, I worked for Hillary's campaign as a legal volunteer in Las Vegas (although I am from Cal and licensed there my activities did not constitute the unlicensed practice of law in Nevada), both of Obama's campaigns in Cincinnati and John Kerry's campaign in Cincinnati (ditto). All unpaid to be clear.

People still buy Iraqi Dinar and Zimbabwe Zim expecting some huge magical GCR (global currency revaluation).

The Juicero (Google it if you don't know): VC money chasing an incredibly stupid idea.

Dr. Shockley: Nobel prize winner yet was convinced that mega-doses of Vitamin C would cure cancer.

I have some suspicions on why IH bought a bill of goods: they hoped it would work, they really wanted it to work and they wanted to make a shitload of money.

The list of cons that have taken in intelligent, sophisticated and savvy people is long and illustrious and will only continue to grow and grow. That, along with the fact that I like to watch legal train wrecks, is why I follow this site and similar sites (The Fogbow and Quatloos). Falsehoods unchallenged only grow. Our civic duty, and I mean this seriously, is to challenge such falsehoods as they are greatly injurious to our society. I don't like it when someone gets lied to and fleeced, whether they are wealthy or poor. Not meaning to preach, but I just don't like assholes.

End of sermon for today.

PS. I take this just as seriously in the legal arena. When I see lawyers perpetuating bullshit, I try to call them on it as well.

I don't understand why so many people find it difficult to believe that Rossi could have conned so many for so long.

Enron: claimed millions, if not billions, of value for contracts of fiber optic nonsense. Arthur Andersen, then a Big 6 accounting firm, signed off.

Bernie Madoff: took very wealthy allegedly sophisticated investors (including funds) for billions. You want to talk about measurements - his accountants were a two member firm, allegedly responsible for signing off on billions and billions in money management accounts.

Trump: got elected. And don't get me started on him. As an FYI, I worked for Hillary's campaign as a legal volunteer in Las Vegas (although I am from Cal and licensed there my activities did not constitute the unlicensed practice of law in Nevada), both of Obama's campaigns in Cincinnati and John Kerry's campaign in Cincinnati (ditto). All unpaid to be clear.

People still buy Iraqi Dinar and Zimbabwe Zim expecting some huge magical GCR (global currency revaluation).

The Juicero (Google it if you don't know): VC money chasing an incredibly stupid idea.

Dr. Shockley: Nobel prize winner yet was convinced that mega-doses of Vitamin C would cure cancer.

I have some suspicions on why IH bought a bill of goods: they hoped it would work, they really wanted it to work and they wanted to make a shitload of money.

The list of cons that have taken in intelligent, sophisticated and savvy people is long and illustrious and will only continue to grow and grow. That, along with the fact that I like to watch legal train wrecks, is why I follow this site and similar sites (The Fogbow and Quatloos). Falsehoods unchallenged only grow. Our civic duty, and I mean this seriously, is to challenge such falsehoods as they are greatly injurious to our society. I don't like it when someone gets lied to and fleeced, whether they are wealthy or poor. Not meaning to preach, but I just don't like assholes.

End of sermon for today.

PS. I take this just as seriously in the legal arena. When I see lawyers perpetuating bullshit, I try to call them on it as well.

Quote from [email protected]

You're the one who demonstrated confidence, lawyer man. I posted up thread that I'm still trying to figure Rossi out. You obviously didn't read that post either. You ain't much of a lawyer. Give me those odds or STFU.

Sorry, I don't find either of those choices acceptable, so will continue to post consistent with this site's guidelines. However, I am glad that at least one of my detractors now seems to admit I am a lawyer (another person said I wasn't a "layer" and I have to sadly admit that, at least lately, they are correct.

Quote from [email protected]

The quoted document was AFTER the dummy test. And IH had no other development in their portfolio that matched this: "Creates excess energy between 3 and 20 times the energy required to

operate the device depending on the model of reactor and operating

temperatures at temperatures between 120 and 500 degrees Celsius

需要温度为摄氏120至500度，能产生所需消耗能源3至20倍的能量"

Please give your reference as to how you know what other developments IH was working on at the time and what their operating temperatures where. You should know that COP of 3 in pressurized electrochemical systems have be claimed by others.

Quote from THHuxleynew

Not true. Rossi in his deposition has not shown any staisfied customers. He may have some invoices, orders, etc, for vapourware, but no working devices. If he had, do you not think he would boast of them?

Rossi is not obliged to talk about customers in his deposition. This trial is focused on a breach of contract: all that concerns the next development of its technology (QuarkX, robotic factories to produce it, and so on) are not relevant in this trial and need not be dealt with.

Quote from THHuxleynew

As for Focardi witnessing Rossi's assertion how could he possibly know? Rossi's devices are all electric heaters, the issue is whether they deliver more heat out than comes in. And Focardi has not to my knowledge supported Rossi's statement anywhere. Please link direct evidence (not RossiSays).

Focardi every time supported Rossi's statement! If you want the links that prove it, you can start reading these interviews:

http://www.focus.it/scienza/sc…rgio-focardi-201108091506

http://www.queryonline.it/2011…la-conferenza-di-focardi/

I hope you have fun with the Italian language......

Quote from THHuxleynew

You could do it on the ash, too, by substituting the reactor. I'm sure that CCTV coverage would have gaps where one file stops and another starts, gaps between fuel loading and test starting, etc... the idea that Rossi could not do effectively what he wanted here because of eagle-eyed scientists scrutinising his every move is absurd.

I refer to the Optric cameras and PCE, not CCTV (https://www.lenr-forum.com/forum/thread/4745-rossi-vs-darden-developments-part-2/?postID=62572# post62572). The scientists have processed the data from the recordings of these tools and so they would have notice a stop in the recording (if you think that Rossi has somewhat tampered with the reactor during its operation, he should have inevitably stopped the test to do so) . So even though the scientists have never intended to control Rossi's work, they had some working instruments that made it in their place.

Quote from oldguy

I notice how you like to twist things and go to negatives. I did not call anyone a liar I only asked if you believed it.

I do not twist things ..... I just use logic. You made a rhetorical question that implied a single possible answer. It is clear that you do not believe that those things said by Rossi are true, so a logical consequence is that you are calling him a liar. Since one of those things has been confirmed by Focardi, I asked if you think he has lied too. It's a simple concept ... if you commit a little more you can understand it.

Quote from oldguy

Oh yes, could you point me to where Focardi said the device was working to heat a factory. I missed that. I only find "Rossi says".

Of course I can. Here are two links, from which the following sentences are taken:

https://dibattiti.wordpress.co…gylab-intervista-focardi/

Quote

Il consumo di nichel e idrogeno è basso, per intenderci non è a flusso continuo. Senza apportare né nuovo nichel, né nuovo idrogeno, né ulteriore quantità di catalizzatore, si è osservato che il processo dura anche mesi. Nel primo esperimento svolto dall’Ing. Rossi, si era riusciti a riscaldare gli uffici per un paio di mesi con il solo uso di questo sistema senza utilizzare il riscaldamento a gas.

("si era riusciti" : we have been able to)

http://www.radiocittadelcapo.i…usione-fredda-ni-h-75679/

Quote

No, da un certo punto in poi il sistema va da solo. Il problema è farlo partire, innescarlo, ma una volta che si è innescato può anche funzionare da solo e possiamo ridurgli l’energia. L’importante è che c’abbia una certa quantità di energia, perché ogni fenomeno produce energia termica, quindi scalda localmente il sistema. Funziona in questo modo. Ha funzionato in un caso per più mesi, e abbiamo scaldato gli uffici di Rossi, in questo modo.

Quote from SSC

I do not twist things ..... I just use logic. You made a rhetorical question that implied a single possible answer. It is clear that you do not believe that those things said by Rossi are true, so a logical consequence is that you are calling him a liar. Since one of those things has been confirmed by Focardi, I asked if you think he has lied too. It's a simple concept ... if you commit a little more you can understand it.

Your logic is faulty. For example asking if you believe him is not saying anything at all about me thinking he is a liar or not. For example he could just be self deluded and have faulty measurements. Again you seem to gravitate to the negative and cast others in the worst possible light.