Rossi vs. Darden aftermath discussions


  • Hi Ascoli,


    It's clear that none of us 'outsiders' can know who owns the URL journal-of-nuclear-physics.com, but I have to confess that this is not a very interesting question for me. Rossi obviously uses it. He either owns or is 'renting' it. But it's obvious that he is the one running JoNP. It's entirely consistent with his scamming history. Who else would so brazenly name a 'journal' this way but with content that clearly shows that it is not a journal at all, but rather a blog. I think that JoNP provides an important part of the strong evidence that Rossi is fraudulent. Who cares if he owns or rents the URL? He runs the website.


    Maybe I've misunderstood your point, because I don't see any reason for your conclusion that "no conclusion can be drawn on the nature of the Ecat affair ... until the questions about the JoNP raised by Krivit in 2010 [are answered]". The conclusions about the Ecat is obvious to anyone who has any technical competence and to most others who don't: Rossi has no LENR reaction. He's a fraud. He's a conman. RvD was extremely helpful in establishing that to a high degree of confidence. The only way to not come to that conclusion is to ignore heaps of evidence showing that this is what Rossi does, and has been doing for at least 3 decades. Whether or not Rossi owns the JoNP URL has no bearing on that whatsoever. The constant provable stream of lies that he emits on JoNP are highly supportive of his fraudulent behavior.


    What does anything about the Ecat have to do with URL ownership? Perhaps you believe there is some more complex relationship, and that pro-Rossi commenters here are involved in some collusion with Rossi and a behind-the-scenes JoNP owner? If so, I don't think that's at all likely. But with that unlikely premise, this conspiratorial group is currently doing a spectacularly awful job of promoting the Ecat, from my perspective. On the other hand, he did get 10.5M for crude stage craft, as I've stated. But watching Rossi is like watching a train wreck in slow motion.


    As a reviewer for peer reviewed publications, I can tell you based on my experience that I have no problem at all believing that Rossi has fooled a lot of Ph.D. scientists. Peer review is not at all like an engineering quality review. Peer review mostly addresses issues regarding the organization and content of the article in order to improve it for publication. Sometimes the review involves questions of evidence and errors in methods or conclusions. And while many papers are rejected because they are a mess, most of the time the reviewers give advice on how to modify the paper so that the submitters can try to revise and submit elsewhere.


    Its almost unheard of for a reviewer to actually verify the data, calculations or analysis of the authors. That's in stark contrast to an engineering quality review of some submitted design or product proposal.


    So it's not hard to get published. And while researchers don't assume that submissions are necessarily valid, they do generally assume that the submitting authors are not intentionally deceptive regarding their core findings. This assumption that researchers do not intentionally deceive, held by 'ivory tower' researchers (and that describes my professional community), is what Rossi has successfully exploited.


    But in my experience, this is self-limiting. Once someone establishes a poor reputation by being intentionally deceptive, the community of researchers tend to stay away at all costs.


    And RvD has provided boatloads of evidence to the research community that his reputation stinks.


    So I don't anticipate that Rossi will be getting any warm endorsements from any 'ivory tower' researchers any more.


    And I can't speak about the VC world, but I would think that RvD has effectively destroyed his reputation in the VC world as well.


    If so, he'll have to find new marks. Who knows, maybe his next con will be crowdsourcing. The problem with that is when you don't produce, you then reap an angry crowd.


    And Rossi most definitely likes the adulation of the crowd.


    Regarding your links:

    1) I don't believe there is anything 'funky' about JoNP other than that it is a blatant fraud created by Rossi himself.

    2) This paper has nothing to do with Rossi. The only connection I see is that Michael Melich, an early supporter of Rossi is the final author. Do you think it has additional relevance?

    3) I read this article by Krivit about 6 months after he wrote it, and find it to be a helpful summary.

    4) Broken link

  • Maybe I've misunderstood your point


    It's hard for people who have not followed Ascoli's posts to get the gist of his thesis because he's pretty cryptic about it. But the basic elements are something like this: Rossi was not acting alone but was one player in a larger scheme to make it seem like LENR is a real phenomenon. The University of Bologna bears responsibility for giving Rossi credibility by allowing its name to be associated with some of the earlier efforts that went into looking at the E-Cat. Jed Rothwell is possibly implicated in this scheme due to his advocacy for taking Rossi seriously a few years back on forums such as Vortex. And shadowy organizations such as the U.S. Department of Defense are somehow involved as well, e.g., through Michael Melich and his connection to the JONP website and to Jed; and such organizations have possibly been directing some of the show behind the scenes. The specifics are hard to pin down, but I think this is the general outline.


    I find this line of reasoning to be over the top. But I no longer assume at all that internet people will share with me a sense of what is plausible.

  • But it's obvious that he is the one running JoNP. It's entirely consistent with his scamming history. Who else would so brazenly name a 'journal' this way but with content that clearly shows that it is not a journal at all, but rather a blog. I think that JoNP provides an important part of the strong evidence that Rossi is fraudulent. Who cares if he owns or rents the URL? He runs the website.


    I agree, Rossi runs it. Do you know the background story though? Do you remember watching the video of Focardi when he explained it? Perhaps if you had watched that, you might not have the opinion you have (or maybe you would still hold tight to it, not sure).


    Focardi and Rossi prepared a paper describing their early results, and surprise surprise, the fraidy-cat journals wouldn't touch it. Too controversial. They wouldn't want to risk their careers now would they. Any kind of controversial science ought to be sidelined and shunned. Anyhow, they had this paper, and wanted to publish it somehow. So Rossi told Focardi that he'll just make his own journal so that they could publish their paper. Now, someone like you sig, will say "ah ha!, that is part of this great world-wide scam being foisted upon us all!" I call it being resourceful.

  • He is back fishing again, that (demo) is the bait, and he is hoping a big fat investor takes the hook. From his ECW interview today, Rossisays he has had a few nibbles, but so far no takers.

    Ok, I think I've figured out the error that gives the high claimed COP of the quarkx. They claim 0.1V over a 1ohm resistor. This means there is 0.1 amp flowing through the rest of the circuit regardless of the unknown resistance in the rest of the circuit. If the ecat has a resistance of 0ohm (unlikely) it has 0 power through it. If it has resistance of 1000ohm, it has 1000 times more power going through it than they claim by Power=current *current*R. By stating the current through the ecat, not stating the resistance of the ecat which is trivial to measure, and implying the ecat has near 0 resistance, might be misleading. The ecat has to have a resistance or there is no way for it to absorb power. They are measuring the power over an un-involved resistor and claiming that is the input power which does not make sense. Their measurement technique for input power does not seem valid whether the actual power is higher or lower.

    Rots of Ruck, to Rossi on getting any new suckers...err investors, with ANY "demos" or "experiments" designed, instrumented, and executed and analyzed by Rossi or his "representatives". He had best put himself on a budget with what's left of the $10M after lawyer fees and Rube-Goldberg plumbing and shipping container expenses, and hope the Florida real-estate market doesn't tank again.

  • I agree, Rossi runs it. Do you know the background story though? Do you remember watching the video of Focardi when he explained it? Perhaps if you had watched that, you might not have the opinion you have (or maybe you would still hold tight to it, not sure).


    Focardi and Rossi prepared a paper describing their early results, and surprise surprise, the fraidy-cat journals wouldn't touch it. Too controversial. They wouldn't want to risk their careers now would they. Any kind of controversial science ought to be sidelined and shunned. Anyhow, they had this paper, and wanted to publish it somehow. So Rossi told Focardi that he'll just make his own journal so that they could publish their paper. Now, someone like you sig, will say "ah ha!, that is part of this great world-wide scam being foisted upon us all!" I call it being resourceful.

    Yes indeed, absolutely groundbreaking, people posting all sorts of pseudo-science, non-peer-reviewed, unsubstantiated drivel on the internet, that is indeed revolutionary, new and resourceful (by the standards of the Brethren, as it were).

  • It's also rather ironic that the Brethren consider IH some evil conspiracy, when they gave Rossi $10M and all latitude he needed to definitively prove himself, and gain another $89M, and still have licensing rights for a good portion of the globe, thereby becoming famous, rich, a Nobel Prize winner, savior of humanity, but yet Rossi turns it down for simple refusal to allow independent test verification (ok-"re-verification" for the Rossi Brethren)..

    Darden had the opportunity to do an independent test verification when he collaborated with Boeing, but wasted the opportunity by supplying a wrong fuel and did not even try to remedy the error by sending the right one at a later time. It does not seem to me that he had a great need for a third-party test: maybe he preferred not having someone who can deny him when he accused Rossi of having a malfunctioning technology.

  • AR's probable LOGIC: Why should I work with critics, naysayer, skeptics, etc. when my technology is proven working, its a waste of time since no matter how you tell them how good the shit is, they wont believe it because they are non-believers.


    There is no money in it. I'd rather work with investors directly, it where the money is. More more more business and money.


    the 10.5m dollars this money was surely used for R&D.

    It is normal for an entrepreneur to work directly with investors: they usually have fewer prejudices and are less interested in theoretical quibbles: if an object works and can provide gains then it has an intrinsic value. Critics and skeptics may be less objective and be more interested in arguing on their own reasons than to make the truth prevail.

  • I've never read a single post here, where any of the Brethren have invested a dime in Rossi or LENR, much less would take a wager--other than IH; they must not have as much blind faith as they proclaim (and are not as naive as they appear in not giving any money to Rossi).

    Do you think that Rossi would make collections for funding his job? How should someone give him money? The first products to come to the market will be industrial plants and only large companies will have enough money to buy them. When the first domestic models will be available, I will surely put myself in the queue to buy one.

  • Just because the Ecat people say the case was about the IP (which the defendant might not have wanted anymore anyway) after the settlement does not change the fact that they received $0 out of the $270 million they sued for. This is a horrifically bad result for a civil case.

    I don't think Darden wanted the IP anymore: Rossi was particularly interested in recovering it (as he said in his interview with Mats Lewan and how he then proved accepting settlement conditions) so if Darden had returned the IP to Rossi in the pretrial phase they would never have come to the trial. Darden did not do it because he felt the IP had a great value. Moreover this was not at all a defeat for Rossi, who got the IP, the 1MW and 11.5M still in his pocket.

  • Rots of Ruck, to Rossi on getting any new suckers...err investors, with ANY "demos" or "experiments" designed, instrumented, and executed and analyzed by Rossi or his "representatives". He had best put himself on a budget with what's left of the $10M after lawyer fees and Rube-Goldberg plumbing and shipping container expenses, and hope the Florida real-estate market doesn't tank again.

    PS, Perhaps his "demo" will make for some good entertainment, The Wizard of Italy/Miami Take X, "QuackX Edition", Hopefully he will have some more professional and eyecatching bobbles and trinkets (he should spend a bit of the money and get some of the Disney Imagineers to spruce up his demos) than his insulation-entombed plumbing scrap "demos", say something with pretty flashing lights, glowing QuackX modules, dancing oscilloscope screens.

  • I don't think Darden wanted the IP anymore: Rossi was particularly interested in recovering it (as he said in his interview with Mats Lewan and how he then proved accepting settlement conditions) so if Darden had returned the IP to Rossi in the pretrial phase they would never have come to the trial. Darden did not do it because he felt the IP had a great value. Moreover this was not at all a defeat for Rossi, who got the IP, the 1MW and 11.5M still in his pocket.

    Well, most normal folks would definitely agree with your last sentence, in that Rossi got $10M (minus lawyer-fees and various expenses) and produced nothing (albeit his Hotdog Cooker Patent, and IP are worthless, so he can have that back, who cares), so he won in that sense. But I believe it was you, and others here, that said that Rossi would not stop until he got his $89M, because he was righteous and could absolutely prove his case, and that was why he filed it (I see you have changed your tune on this, again); so in that case, he LOST, he could not prove his case apparently, and folded like a house of cards when his kamikaze (and probably perjures ) bluff was called.

  • . But I believe it was you, and others here, that said that Rossi would not stop until he got his $89M, because he was righteous and could absolutely prove his case, and that was why he filed it

    With that agreement Rossi avoided that Darden would use his usual bankruptcy trick. If Rossi would won the trial than as he has done in many other cases (see Sifferkol) Darden would have immediately declared the bankrupt of IH. Rossi would have lost his IP and eventually also the money already received in that case.


  • Investors maybe.

    fraud charges no ..... I have to remind you that IH has reached a settlement.

    Paper .... maybe has been already submitted.....

    This is not a Brainstorm. Is just attempts to guess the future.

  • 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.


    PS: pretty standard form of Settlement and Mutual Release - I must have several almost identical (except names, dates, etc.) in my form file. Also, I noticed AmpEnergo was not released. Would someone refresh my memory as to their involvement.


    PPS: 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.

    I don't agree with you. Rossi obtained his IP. This was his main goal. He has not to restitute the first payment he received. It's clear this settlement was an amazing victory, giving the fact that the IP value is far bigger than the money IH had to pay to Rossi... Rossi is the only who guiñes something. About legal fees... How much could be? 1M, 3M, 5M? They are nothing compared to the risk of losing IP...

  • Ascoli,
    Some news on that popped up recently:
    The Playground

    Thanks for the info. These news were also pointed out in a devoted thread:

    News from FOIA, briefing about LENR (Department of Defense)


    I already saw them, and that's why I wrote that the DoD didn't answer.


    The request from the US House of Representatives begins with these words:

    "The committee is aware of recent positive developments in developing low-energy nuclear reactions (LENR), which produce ultra- clean, low-cost renewable energy that have strong national security implications. …"


    The Committee issued this text on May 4, 2016. Which could have been the "recent positive developments" they were referring to?


    Everyone, who followed the LENR public debate from 2010 onwards, knows very well that it has been almost completely focused on the Ecat. This has also been the interpretation given by a quite widespread magazine such as Popular Mechanics (1), which moreover mentioned some effective endorsements and presumed supports that the Ecat received from the DoD along the years. So the people, and presumably the members of the Committee as well, were waiting for some clarification on the issues raised by the magazine, ie an informed and update position of the DoD on the Ecat developments.


    Were the DoD people in charge of preparing the briefing for the Committee aware of these expectancies? Yes they were, as shown by the internal "E-Mails regarding the LENR Briefing" (2). But they chose not to answer: "No applause please!" they wrote each others.


    Instead they prepared a dull presentation, addressing only a couple of old LENR research areas: the muon-cathalized fusion (uncontroversial, but impractical for energy purposes), and the electrolytic cells (discredited). This stuff, that you can mostly find also on Wikipedia, has nothing to do with the purported "recent positive developments etc. etc..", so the DoD chose to answer only formally, but not substantially, to the Committee.


    (1) http://www.popularmechanics.co…874/us-house-cold-fusion/

    (2) http://documents.theblackvault…%20DOC_01_LENR_Emails.pdf

  • I don't agree with you. Rossi obtained his IP. This was his main goal. He has not to restitute the first payment he received. It's clear this settlement was an amazing victory, giving the fact that the IP value is far bigger than the money IH had to pay to Rossi... Rossi is the only who guiñes something. About legal fees... How much could be? 1M, 3M, 5M? They are nothing compared to the risk of losing IP...

    IH and their team of top scientists had exclusive access to all of the Ecat IP for years. They also had assistance from the Ecat people. They were never able to make the Ecat work independently as claimed. The "believers" and "followers" completely gloss over the fact that Ecat technology has never worked independently of direct involvement of the Ecat people. And, in my opinion, it never will.