Demonstration of the E-Cat QX - 24 November - Summary thread

Quote from Adrian Ashfield

There would be tens of millions involved in finishing the engineering and building an autmated factory. People with kind of money are not stupid and do due diligence.

Some people with that kind of money are smart. Others are stupid. How else do you explain things like the 2008 real estate crash and the $120 million wasted on Juicero? The history of business is chock full of disastrous investments made by stupid wealthy people.

There are also drastic non-investments. In the 1980s, DEC was the second largest computer company. DEC and all minicomputer companies drove themselves out of business by refusing to invest in personal computers. If they had deliberately set out to destroy themselves they could not have done it more effectively. It was as if their business strategy was dictated by their competitors. This was clear to me and to everyone else in the computer business at the time. Hundreds of billions of dollars in capital went down the drain. And you say people will not waste $10 million?

That is not to suggest that business people are especially stupid. You will find disastrous mistakes in every other institution. See, for example, World War I, especially the Battle of the Somme and the Gallipoli campaign; the invasions of Russia by Napoleon and Hitler; and the U.S. Army and Navy dispositions and lack of preparation at Pearl Harbor in 1941. In aviation, read about the R101 airship disaster or the Challenger explosion. In programming, look at the roll-out of the Obamacare website. See the book "March of Folly" for other examples.

History is full of stupid mistakes. There were actually more of them than most history books show, because they are often covered up or de-emphasized. Stupid mistakes made by influential people are often written out of the history books. If -- as I fear -- cold fusion is forgotten in the future, that will be a gigantic mistake. The people who made that mistake at places like the DoE and Nature will never be held responsible. Researchers such as Fleischmann will be blamed (if the story ever surfaces). Perhaps they do share a minor fraction of the blame, but they are more sinned against than sinning.

Trying to refine the analysis of an investor here:

An investor could be rich due to

1. luck, stock market is a kind of gambling, some makes millions out of pure luck taking high risks.

2. building a big portfolio through careful analysis and good judgement.

3. Having knowledge other people does not have.

4. Born with ton's of monney.

5. Having the right contacts.

6. having money means that you can buy knowledge, you get a positive feedback loop.

My conclusion is that the vast majority of investors would not be fooled by Rossi, but we do have 1,4) and quite a bunch of investors so I'm on the skeptics side on this matter.

Quote from Adrian Ashfield

It [Juicero] was a really bad, overpriced gadget that raised money from the gullible public. Rossi is not attempting to get money from the public.

Rossi's Doral test was far worse than the Juicero. He was not trying to raise money from the gullible public, but rather from gullible venture capitalists. It is the same plan. The same methods are used.

Quote from Adrian Ashfield

It ddoesn't answer my question. What could Rossi possibly gain by showing a reactor that didn't work, when that would be so easy to demonstrate?

You yourself demonstrate the answer to your own question! You still believe the Doral test and the Penon report, don't you? Your messages here indicate that you believe the latest test. So, if you had lots of money, you would invest it with Rossi. Right? If Rossi can find some wealthy people with your judgement, he will defraud them out of millions of dollars.

You believe the Doral test and the latest test are legitimate. I think they are both fraudulent. That is the key difference between our views. Debating about whether people with money make mistakes or not is irrelevant. The fact that you imagine such people do not make mistakes is mind-boggling, and it shows that you know nothing about history. But it is not the real issue here. The real issue is that you believe Rossi and Penon, but I don't. You think the Penon report is valid, but I think it is garbage. People here can read the report themselves and reach their own conclusions about who is right. There is no need for us to hash the details. The report is here:

http://coldfusioncommunity.net…/01/0197.03_Exhibit_3.pdf

In my opinion, anyone who reads the report and does not instantly dismiss it is technically incompetent. That includes you.

Quote from stefan

An investor could be rich due to

1. luck, stock market is a kind of gambling, some makes millions out of pure luck taking high risks.

2. building a big portfolio through careful analysis and good judgement.

I do not know much about investors, but I know a lot about people who make money by inventing or improving technology. They make their money by being good at inventing things, which is always hard work. Some of them are also good businessmen. Bill Gates is both a brilliant programmer and a superb businessman. He is also a ruthless competitor.

Some of the best inventors had poor business judgement, and they lost huge amounts of money. Thomas Edison was famous example. He made a lot of money, but he lost a lot more than he made. See the book "A Streak of Luck" for details.

I am talking about inventors and technologists, not scientists such as Fleischmann and Pons who make fundamental breakthroughs. They seldom make large sums of money.

I want to add

7. By being a good at business influence and develop the a good part of the investments into profitable successes

Quote from Tony

I find it hard to believe anyone actually investing in a factory without being sure of the tech first, especially in this case where they obviously chose to be very secret about what they are doing.

I suppose you are right. But then again, I have heard that some of the investors in Mills are big industrial companies. I know little about Mills and I cannot judge, but most people consider it highly controversial or vaporware.

I doubt that anyone would give Rossi billions of dollars at this stage, but they might give tens of millions. That's not enough to build a factory. It is only enough for him to buy more real estate, and to do more ridiculous fake, fraudulent demonstrations.

Quote from Alan Smith

Have a word with Mats Lewan - he has this in his possession according to his blog.

I asked him on ECW. My posts are moderated there, so it takes a while to hold a conversation.

(and I am being fairly well-behaved there)

Quote from Alan Smith

If you study the quote above Mary, you would see that Tony was not even talking about Rossi, he was talking about science. Which might not be the same thing. So your response to his post (below) is a non-sequitur and a reflection of your obsessions. Simply because you have a hammer, everything you see is not a nail.

Once again proving the old adage that one should really read things before commenting on them...

Quote from Tony

It sort of makes sense doesn't it? If you are the industrial partner you'd want to keep the information advantage as long as possible? It also puts some light on Rossi behavior. He is not really showing any effort trying to make everyone believe what he is doing... On the contrary he seems quite happy with some level of uncertainty. He might even protect his partner this way,

This theme always amuses me. "Rossi's stuff looks like a scam, with demos that look fake and prove nothing - but - hey - this is all because he wants us to think this"!

If Rossi wants no notice all he has to keep quiet and stop his continuous web-based self-advertsing. Including booking a room in a high-profile scientific conference centre. No-one would know about what he was doing.

Then - the other one - "this demo is so bad that it can't be a real fake"

Or - "I'm suspcious because so many people spend so much time criticising Rossi on the internet". The thing is, Rossi is good entertainment, whether you are a believer or not, he knows how to amuse his audience. Many here, including me, find him fascinating.

THH

What could Rossi possibly gain by demonstrating a reactor that doesn’t work?

Perhaps you actually don’t understand what a scam is. It is getting people to give you money under false pretenses - in this case, for a miraculous energy gadget. Of course he has to demonstrate it in some fashion to get people to give him money. And of course it doesn’t work. Otherwise, it wouldn’t be a scam.