Clearance Items

    Oy vey. I unleashed a monster. This thread is a free for all zone...up to a point. So how about we eliminate outright cursing like the F bomb for sure, and anything that ends, with "hole", starts with an "sh", or for that matter, anything the over active, sinister side of your brain, can think of?


    Kevmo IMO, has introduced some sorely needed defense to the pro-Rossi side of this discussion. He says some good things, yet it is being lost in the verbiage.

    Oh gosh, you had to ask me that! :) IMO, if you get beyond his prickly nature, he is a very smart guy. I respectfully disagree with him in almost everything he says about the IH/Rossi lawsuit, and Doral. But he makes some provocative, and poignant observations about Rossi that make me think.


    Is that enough?

    Dewey Weaver wrote:

    Shane D - KevMo is a factless feckless hurler of Rossi lie bombs. What has he stated that can be backed up by a speck of truth?

    Then go ahead and dispute my posts, point by point, lawyerboy. Why don't you start with that post to you about the independent 3rd party report?



    You seem incapable of putting together more than 2 sentences without resorting to a logical fallacy. That makes YOU the feckless one, since you claim to be the... uh... legal expert around here, and yet you're exhibiting freshman level fallacies, lawyerboy.

    One of us will have to buy the other

    a drink someday R67.

    I am putting this here rather than in the toxic waste dump (congratulations on allowing that to develop.)


    Shane said over there referring to the kev person: “IMO, if you get beyond his prickly nature, he is a very smart guy.”


    I am genuinely sad to hear you say that. That’s all I’ll say about it.

    It has always been toxic. What did kevmo change? At one time or another, many who ventured there, were at first deemed too radical because they were strangers, but after a time accepted. You yourself were controversial at first, and now one of the regulars. Same goes for Adrian...who we all miss now. Give it a little time, and so will he be accepted...hopefully.


    Like I said, get beyond his abrupt style, which many here have, and he is no different from any Rossi defender, or skeptic.

    Well, let's just keep in mind this little gem, shall we? Blast from the past.



    interested observer wrote:


    How many times has the Pons-Fleischmann Anomalous Heating Event been replicated in peer reviewed journals?


    I can assure you that my comments on this forum are not moving science in any direction, nor are they intended to, nor could they. As for your comments, they are the usual bizzaro world stuff I have seen for 6 years from people who are so obsessed with LENR that they consider anyone who doesn't share their beliefs to be bad people. It is no wonder that LENR fandom is often described as a religion and a fanatical one at that. Talk about pathological behavior! I do wonder whether outside the LENR temple folks who act the way you do are normal people. I suppose I will never know.

    Forty-Two wrote:

    Please, in case someone wants to discuss POLITICS with Kevmo, go and choose from here

    https://disqus.com/by/disqus_vbSJFZ4cDj/?

    one of the blogs frequented by him.

    That ones are better suited for such discussions than LENR-forum.

    You're sorta doxing me out of context. What I said was "This is fantastic. You're bringing POLITICS into the discussion? That practically proves that you ain't much of a lawyer, if ever you were one."

    "Tell me one last thing," said X. "Is this real? Or has this been happening inside my head?"

    Y beamed at him, and his voice sounded loud and strong in X's ears even though the bright mist was descending again, obscuring his figure.

    "Of course it is happening inside your head, X, but why on earth should that mean that it is not real?"

    There are 32 posts above this one, removed from the Rossi-SK thread as (variously) off topic, insulting, irrelevant etc. There are some in there that are relatively harmless but included in order to attempt the creation of some kind of continuity . Some other posts which would fit into the 'bad' categories listed above have been left in place, in order to show something of the cat-fight that goes on when perfectly reasonable people are let off the leash.


    ETA- now 34.

    Alan Smith wrote:

    There are 32 posts above this one, removed from the Rossi-SK thread as (variously) off topic, insulting, irrelevant etc. There are some in there that are relatively harmless but included in order to attempt the creation of some kind of continuity . Some other posts which would fit into the 'bad' categories listed above have been left in place, in order to show something of the cat-fight that goes on when perfectly reasonable people are let off the leash.


    ETA- now 34.

    When you shunt the response but leave the original insult, it looks like the one side had no response.

    woodworker wrote:

    You were definitely not the only one predicting the possibility of a settlement. IIRC, I not only discussed the possibility but also discussed possible terms, e.g., mutual walk-aways, which were the terms of the settlement. And as to IH being forced to settle, again IIRC, it was Rossi/his attorneys who indicated that they wanted to settle after opening arguments. I suspect that hearing the litany of lies that Rossi had already admitted to may have made them apprehensive about the outcome of a trial.


    As to the possibility of evidence being introduced at trial proving that IH was attempting to screw Rossi over by wrongfully sharing the IP, there is absolutely no evidence of that is any of the discovery made public, especially not in Rossi's deposition. IIRC, he admitted that he had no concrete evidence of such behavior (my memory could be wrong on this point, but I am too tired to double check). And despite what you see on TV or in the movies, there is almost no chance of something coming up in the trial that wasn't disclosed in discovery. That is known as trial by ambush, judges don't like it and if you try to hide something in order to surprise the other side at trial, the judge may very well rule it inadmissible. But I am sure you learned that in Evidence or Trial Advocacy or Civil Procedure.

    You'll find my response shunted over to the Clearance Items thread.


    When moderators shunt the response but leave the original contention, it looks like the one side had no response.

    woodworker wrote:

    So for all of your whining about people not answering your questions, you completely fail to answer his question as to why you believe the current Rossi widget is real. SO LET ME ASK THE SAME QUESTION: WHY DO YOU BELIEVE THE CURRENT ROSSI WIDGET IS REAL? Or is your answer going to be an excuse again.


    You also complain about personal insults but then you do the same by saying that "to be candid, I'm not really all that interested in your answer," which I interpret, at a minimum, as an implied insult to the person's intelligence, reasoning ability and, possibly, integrity. And just to be clear, based on your posts to date (going back some period of time), I have absolutely no doubts about your lack of integrity, and possibly your intelligence and reasoning ability.

    You'll find my response shunted over to the Clearance Items thread.


    When moderators shunt the response but leave the original contention, it looks like the one side had no response.