Another layer of complexity lies in the fact that if Rossi has what he claims he has, he most certainly will be delayed (or killed) by forces that would be hurt by such an invention.
Well, then, we might consider investing in Alcoa futures, since JB has tipped his (foil) hat that the new excuse for Rossi not delivering, now that they can't blame evil IH, is conspiracy theories.
There may be high demand for foil soon!
Do you join @Shane D.'s and @maryyugo's prediction that Rossi only took back the license so he could con another fool (for even more money)?
I do not believe for one second that he "took back" the license. Not unless he returned the $10 million, and I doubt he has that kind of money. I do not think I.H. would settle for letting him have both the money and the license.
All the details of the settlement that have been disclosed are "Rossi says" meaning they are probably lies. Not just probably; I advise you to apply the Boolean NOT function to anything he says. Example:
It is broad daylight => it is dead at night
I have robot factories => I got nothing
The reactor produced 50 times input => the reactor produced nothing, as you see in Rossi's own report
Well, then, we might consider investing in Alcoa futures, since JB has tipped his (foil) hat that the new excuse for Rossi not delivering, now that they can't blame evil IH, is conspiracy theories.
There may be high demand for foil soon!
I'd rather be called a conspiracy theorist (although it is quite a lame insult) than be wrong constantly.
I am not pretending that i know anything about Rossi, the court case, LENR, etc. But i wonder, how thick can you be to maniacally continue typing if you are as blatantly and as often wrong as you are? Should you not take a rest for a day or two?
Picture yourself in a meeting room with twenty posters of this forum. You are physically present and in the last few weeks you have been screaming your predictions from the top of your lungs. Would you then still be hollering like you now do? It would give a very strange impression, right? It would be very embarrassing, is it not?
Cheers,
JB
3. The lawyers of Jones Day, Rick A. Smith and Murray have not succeeded in helping JT Vaughn and Thomas Darden to convince a judge that Rossi is extraordinarily deceptive despite working with him for years. While having contracts in place. And you, behind your greasy keyboard, from a far distance keep on hollering that Andrea Rossi is a fraud. Isn't time to move on.
If you've been paying attention, the evidence that Rossi is extraordinarily deceptive comes from Rossi himself. He is the one who simultaneously wrote to IH about the customer's urgent need for a drying process to be installed in their factory, when the customer was himself, and there was no factory, because Rossi hadn't even found the warehouse that he leased to himself yet. He is the one who created the super-secret 8 foot plywood wall in the factory he rented to himself and made sure nobody from either 'team' were allowed in the other side. He is the one who declared under oath that the 'customer' (JMP) has never produced or sold any product, while simultaneously claiming on JONP that the 'indipindent (sic) satisfied customer' would be the final arbiter and proof that his stuff worked.
So are you now claiming that Rossi lied when providing this evidence, or do you accept his statements under oath as true?
Either way, it would seem that we both agree: the inescapable conclusion is that Rossi is a liar.
It also is a fact that Rossi fraudulently represented JMP as a company he had no interest in. He and his lawyer Johnson signed a statement stating that. Yet he also stated under oath that he directed everything JMP did at the Doral site (and that was essentially all JMP did).
So, I try not to 'move on' from facts, as you suggest. That you are in the habit of doing so does not persuade me to change mine.
Cheers,
sigmoidal
Display MoreI do not believe for one second that he "took back" the license. Not unless he returned the $10 million, and I doubt he has that kind of money. I do not think I.H. would settle for letting him have both the money and the license.
All the details are of settlement that have been disclosed are "Rossi says" meaning they are probably lies. Not just probably; I advise you to apply the Boolean NOT function to anything he says. Example:
It is broad daylight => it is dead at night
I have robot factories => I got nothing
The reactor produced 50 times input => the reactor produced nothing, as you see in Rossi's own report
I have said it before and i will say it again. Please, consider to stop posting on non-technical stuff. It is painful to read and that you do not see that makes it even more painful.
Cheers,
JB
If you've been paying attention, the evidence that Rossi is extraordinarily deceptive comes from Rossi himself. He is the one who simultaneously wrote to IH about the customer's urgent need for a drying process to be installed in their factory, when the customer was himself, and there was no factory, because Rossi hadn't even found the warehouse that he leased to himself yet. He is the one who created the super-secret 8 foot plywood wall in the factory he rented to himself and made sure nobody from either 'team' were allowed in the other side. He is the one who declared under oath that the 'customer' (JMP) has never produced or sold any product, while simultaneously claiming on JMP that the 'indipindent (sic) satisfied customer' would be the final arbiter and proof that his stuff worked.
So are you now claiming that Rossi lied when providing this evidence, or do you accept his statements under oath as true.
Either way, it would seem that we both agree: Rossi is a liar.
We are all liars, including Rossi. And yes, Rossi operates under a peculiar definition of truth.
But that does not necessarily mean his technology does not work. And that is the point.
Cheers,
JB
I have no more Quatloos to bet, but I will make one more Bold Prediction, betting all rights and authority to the Bold Prediction ChallengeTM:
sigmoidals final Bold Prediction: Rossi, and none of us posting here, will ever see a valid, commercially viable implementation of Rossi's LENR+ 'intellectual property' in our lifetime.
Well, I can lend a few of mine. Then perhaps we can enter into the following, and I'll give you 10:1 odds. That an e-Cat of some variation will be released into the wild sometime in the next five years, and will have a COP > 1. Again, I'm going all in.
The primary reasons for my confidence (and mind you, my batting average is quite high):
1) Rossi prioritized getting the license back over a possible $89MM, and potentially more (due to the possibility of treble damages)
2) Rossi is now unshackled from IH
3) Because, Rossi
Display More
We are all liars, including Rossi. And yes, Rossi operates under a peculiar definition of truth.
But that does not necessarily mean his technology does not work. And that is the point.
Cheers,
JB
Well then, methinks you protest too much.
The evidence that he is both a liar and a con man is now readily available from the Federal Court docket, which is the basis of my conclusion.
And now you state that 'we are all liars, including Rossi, who has a 'peculiar definition of truth'.
But you also objected to me calling Rossi a lying con man (and please speak for yourself regarding 'all liars').
Further, you falsely asserted that because IH settled, this somehow shows that Rossi is not a lying con man. But that is a non-sequitur. IH's settlement does not change Rossi's own sworn testimony and JONP comments.
Now you are admitting that Rossi is a liar (because you insist we 'all are') and that his conning can be euphemistically stated as a 'peculiar definition of truth'.
I can always hope that you might recognize your confused statements and conclusions.
Cheers,
sigmoidal
Assuming that this is a true and complete (and executed) copy of the Settlement Agreement, I don't see anywhere in there where IH agreed to pay Rossi any more money or any portion of Rossi's legal fees. I was absolutely positive (sarcasm warning ELE), based on all of the pro-Rossi pundits posts, all of which were incredibly persuasive, well reasoned and based on inside information (more sarcasm ELE), that IH had agreed to pay Rossi tons of additional monies and some or all of his legal fees to be released from trap that Rossi had IH in. What happened? How did evil IH (more sarcasm ELE) escape from having to pay Rossi more money? Inquiring minds want to know.
Alas, I predicted (along with you, I think, or it might have been our other distinguished lawyer who recently joined) that no more money would change hands, and that Rossi would get the license back. In response, Erik W. said "If IH relinquished the license, I will conclude that they perceived themselves to be in a weak position indeed." Sig, THH, and Zeno liked Erik's comment, apparently signifying their concurrence. And indeed, that is probably the case.
QuotePPS: Ele is correct that I have not been a layer (not lately). However, I am still a California lawyer in good standing with the California State Bar.
Bill fewer hours. Plan a low-cost staycation with your partner, including a nice dinner and a hotel. Keep good hygiene. Enjoy. 
Well given that Rossi said that he would give 50% of his profits to child cancer research, . . .
I do remember Rossi making that promise on his blog, but he never said when. It is sort of like when Buffet says he will give nearly all of his wealth to the Gate's Foundation. Has he done that yet?
Kinda pathetic that you choose to ignore Rossi's own 'promises' and instead smear others for holding views well supported by hard evidence, but hey, to each his own.
You mean, like Smith's "expert" report?
Display MoreWell then, methinks you protest too much.
The evidence that he is both a liar and a con man is now readily available from the Federal Court docket, which is the basis of my conclusion.
And now you state that 'we are all liars, including Rossi, who has a 'peculiar definition of truth'.
But you also objected to me calling Rossi a lying con man (and please speak for yourself regarding 'all liars').
Further, you falsely asserted that because IH settled, this somehow shows that Rossi is not a lying con man.
Now you are admitting that Rossi is a liar (because you insist we 'all are') and that his conning can be euphemistically stated as a 'peculiar definition of truth'.
But that is a non-sequitur. IH's settlement does not change Rossi's own sworn testimony and JONP comments.
I can always hope that you might recognize your confused statements and conclusions.
Cheers,
sigmoidal
Keep on pretending you are the smartest. Everybody who does not agree with sigmoidal, "the Wizard with Words", is confused, although your statements are more than not outright false. Especially the bold ones.
You know exactly what i hint at (although you will always state you do not), but choose to keep on spewing your mantra. Ad infinitum.
If everybody is a liar it does not make sense to keep repeating that Andrea Rossi is a lying conman, you lying conman.
Cheers,
A lying conman
Display MoreWell, I can lend a few of mine. Then perhaps we can enter into the following, and I'll give you 10:1 odds. That an e-Cat of some variation will be released into the wild sometime in the next five years, and will have a COP > 1. Again, I'm going all in.
The primary reasons for my confidence (and mind you, my batting average is quite high):
1) Rossi prioritized getting the license back over a possible $89MM, and potentially more (due to the possibility of treble damages)
2) Rossi is now unshackled from IH
3) Because, Rossi
OK, thanks for your generous offer to a newfound Quatloo beggar.
I'm all in with whatever you provide me.
The tragedy (for us Peanuts) is that because the case was settled, we're back to 'Father Time' as the judge. (Which is where we were before this case was filed).
However, we're much more information rich than we were before, so I'm glad for that.
Regarding your statement 'my batting average is quite high', I conceded bragging rights to you, so no complaints from me on that, as I truly am surprised by the settlement (but you nailed it).
Interestingly, there are (at least) two aspects that we share confidence in on this new bet, even though we predict opposing outcomes:
2) Rossi is now unshackled from IH
3) Because Rossi
Bill fewer hours. Plan a low-cost staycation with your partner, including a nice dinner and a hotel. Keep good hygiene. Enjoy.
Is your partner a woodworker as well?
Cheers,
JB
It also is a fact that Rossi fraudulently represented JMP as a company he had no [ownership] interest in [which was true]. He and his lawyer Johnson signed a statement stating that. Yet he also stated under oath that he directed everything JMP did at the Doral site (and that was essentially all JMP did).
FTFY. Nevertheless, the JMP ruse is not a bright spot for Rossi, and it is the go-to for the lenr-forum.com, and will be for years to come, no doubt. One must appreciate nuance to see the forest from the trees.
You mean, like Smith's "expert" report?
Actually, the clearest most irrefutable hard evidence on the docket demonstrating that the Dottore is a lying con man comes from none other than the Dottore himself.
I do not believe for one second that he "took back" the license. Not unless he returned the $10 million, and I doubt he has that kind of money. I do not think I.H. would settle for letting him have both the money and the license.
All the details of the settlement that have been disclosed are "Rossi says" meaning they are probably lies. Not just probably; I advise you to apply the Boolean NOT function to anything he says. Example:
I know this must be difficult for you. And I mean that sincerely. Believing what you apparently believe about this dispute, none of the recent events could otherwise be reconciled. But the settlement agreement has been leaked. It is all right there, in black and white. I'll give the same caveat as woodworker: this assumes that the signed agreement matches what was leaked.
I know this must be difficult for you. And I mean that sincerely. Believing what you apparently believe about this dispute, none of the recent events could otherwise be reconciled. But the settlement agreement has been leaked. It is all right there, in black and white. I'll give the same caveat as woodworker: this assumes that the signed agreement matches what was leaked.
OHHH! This is not a jointly provided agreement? It's currently just Rossisays? (I should have looked more closely at the source).
Well then, I'm placing my millyun Quatloos and bragging rights for IHFB in escrow until there is joint endorsement of the settlement terms.
And I'm seeking some Quatloo council to protect my Quatloo interests (on contingency, of course) until this is all resolved. Maybe woodworker can represent me?
@Sig,
I'd place the probability of the leaked agreement matching the signed agreement at about 95%. I mean, after all, IH or any of the other parties would probably want to correct the public record if it wasn't. So far, that hasn't happened.
