Clearance Items

Wow. Just wow.

Quote

maryyugo wrote: Cat and mouse is right. Rossi is the cat and the investors are the mice.

axil wrote Don't you ever sleep?

Vampires never sleep. I'd expect an expert on the supernatural like you to know that.

(Edited for context)

Quote from Bruce__H

Do you know what happened as a result? I am looking for evidence that Darden et al made public money "disappear".

I guess the state got to collect the collateral... Which was mostly future projected income from the project ... and I guess they got the land back (but they already had that.)

Quote

... After what EIT representatives believed was full disclosure by EnCap, and EIT and DEP staffunderstood that EnCap had no other resources it could pledge in addition to a bank letter of credit, EIT and DEP staff agreed to accept some collateral that was not likely to materialize for many years. For instance, EnCap pledged its rights to Brownfields reimbursement that would not materialize until after successful completion of the vertical development. ... ... became aware that EnCap had failed to disclose to EIT/DEP a potentially significant source of income that could have been used as additional collateral.

Quote

When will we be able to buy a domestic E-Cat QX?

Interesting question. The thing Rossi showed, even assuming it worked, would be of little use due to low power, no practical means of extracting power in useful amounts and unknown efficiency (COP). What exactly would this person think they were buying were this person most probably not Rossi talking to Rossi? We need a name for that. Rossigasm?

Quote

Beaten to it [lost reputation <-my insert]only by Krivit.

Nonsense! But irrelevant if true. Any infelicities on the part of Krivit hardly excuse Lewan's terminal gullibility and the harm he and Rossi have done to legitimate LENR research. Simple logic: there is no connection.

Anyway, Krivit exposed Rossi early on for the lying crook that he was proven to be by the sworn depositions in the Rossi vs IH vs Rossi case. IH would have saved millions in legal fees and would be in a much better position now to continue to research LENR had they bothered to read Krivit's Rossi pages and had they bothered to do a proper test as he, I and many others continually asked for.

Quote from Eric Walker

And I showed conclusively why your assertion about TC's paper being conspiracy theory was both tendentious and manifestly incorrect. It is the technical details that matter. They place Bob Higgins's analysis and that of TC on the same level. You will not be able to counter that argument with one about the reputability of the source, which is ad hominem, as you demonstrably know.

Please stop trolling this place.

If your assertion is that TC's conclusions are defeated by illegitimate ad hom arguments, you will need to point out the specific arguments and how they undermine his conclusions.

Well, as I said before. I do not agree with you Eric. I believe your bias is blurring your ability to make the correct judgment in this case. But that's my opinion of course. As I also said my opinion is that it is a HUGE difference that TC is anonymous and that he implies both Rossi as "handling" the fuel in ways that (and thereby nullifies those evidences) and accuses the scientists of being "not independent" of Rossi without supplying any proof of there dependence. These are serious accusations from an anonymous handle you seem to take as seriously as a real person. Also I conclude that these ad-homs seriously affects the bias of the report. We can thereby safely assume that TC would leave out any evidence of a working reactor from the report. It is a simple hit job done on limited data from a distant wannabe. Nothing more to it.

Quote from Eric Walker

Your contention will find no purchase

Another absolute? I believe it is for the future to tell, don't you?

Quote

...implies both Rossi as "handling" the fuel in ways that (and thereby nullifies those evidences) and accuses the scientists of being "not independent" of Rossi without supplying any proof of there dependence.

Rossi handling the fuel and doing most of the testing is well documented in the depositions in the case Rossi vs IH vs Rossi. Those are sworn statements attributed to real people under their real names. Not only were the Swedish scientists dependent on Rossi, they also failed to develop their own methods for testing the high temperature ecats. In fact they used exactly the same instruments and methodology developed by Penon and described in the earliest supposedly independent test (Penon's) of those devices. That was several years ago-- in July of 2012 actually. THAT far back! Same crappy work more recently. Essentially nothing about the defective method and measurements by Penon on that date has changed up to now as far as the work done by the Swedish scientists is concerned. This is the original report: https://www.scribd.com/doc/105…ctradius&medium=affiliate Note that Penon used a method and the same instruments as Rossi so he was not independent either, if anyone was foolish enough to suggest that he is/was.

As I wrote many times, there was a reliable way to test hot ecats instead of the flaky nonsense devised by Rossi, Levi and Penon. It was Giancarlo and his group and their high temperature mass flow calorimeter. https://gsvit.wordpress.com/20…te-calorimetria-a-flusso/ (Google translate works well with this document, at least for an English translation)

So to summarize yet again: The Swedes and Levi used the wrong method and were in no way whatever independent of Rossi in ANY of their published test protocols and results. There was a much better way to test high temperature ecats by high accuracy mass flow calorimetry instead of ridiculously error prone thermal camera measurements and they did not avail themselves of it. I will also add that the fact that Rossi built the hot cats without any sort of safety barriers, other safety systems or even forced cooling strongly suggests that he knew full well that they were harmless electrical heaters and not potentially extremely hazardous nuclear fusion reactors.

Quote from JedRothwell

How far can you tell? Did they offer to show you the site halfway through the test? I was in contact with them and they did not seem happy to me. Who told you they were happy?

Nobody has denied that IH/Darden brought both Woodford and potential Chinese investors to demo the Doral facility, have they?

Quote from Eric Walker

Readers will be the judge of whether you have successfully shown that TC's paper is a simple hit job, different in kind from Bob Higgins's analysis, by arguing at the level reputation, anonymity and conclusions about experimental methodology in the section on isotope changes in the fuel.

Yes they will. At least I got the opportunity to hear myself talking, as a lawyer once told me after doing his best at a seemingly hopeless task. Hint: it did turn at well in the end...