Looks like Bob Greenyer's handywork.
Eric Walker
Verified User
- from Loveland, Colorado
- Member since Oct 5th 2015
- Last Activity:
Posts by Eric Walker
-
-
What you're asking for is often called a "lab rat" experiment in LENR circles. Everyone would like for there to be such an experiment. There is little to no dispute that there currently is not such an experiment. Different people will have different views of what can be concluded from this fact. But people are trying to get such an experiment sorted out.
-
Personally I would prefer anyone making claims not to post here unless they are willing to follow up on them in the manner of science, open or otherwise: replications, details of experiments, etc. If me356 cannot do those things, better for him to remain in stealth mode.
-
From my perspective I don't see that Rossi has proven his allegations against IH with a "preponderance of evidence".
Question: I think at this stage of the trial they're just getting the pleadings sorted out. One strategy at this stage of a trial might be to provide a minimum of evidence needed to get an allegation into the pleadings, so that the other party can be wrongfooted later on with further evidence. Even if we suspect that Rossi does not have the evidence to really substantiate his allegations at a later stage, is it possible that the behavior of his lawyers is still consistent with that kind of strategy, if such a strategy is ever employed?
-
At a high level I support any efforts by Google and Facebook to deprioritize fake news and extremist sites (assuming this is what you're referring to; not sure). In the US, we've got a lot of people who are easily swayed by scary but unsupported/unsourced claims and who haven't yet learned to engage in the kind of critical thinking needed to sort between various claims made on the Internet. This leaves people open to manipulation, and it's really starting to become a problem for us.
Even though LENR is fringe, I doubt LENR Forum will be flagged as extremist or fake news. Google are probably including a network analysis of which sites are linking to which sites, and we link out to few to none of the sites that would be in Google's crosshairs (just a guess).
-
It's not the judge you shouldn't irritate, it's the jury.
(1) Only if the case makes it to trial (rather than to a summary judgment). (2) Probably not good to irritate the judge in any event.
-
Brian Ahern posts on at least two other forums, including Vortex.
-
It would give key information in support of what is currently just a budding suspicion on my part: that Rossi's gig is more planned out than simply the ad hoc improvisations of a flamboyant inventor.
-
Great find, Can.
-
What would be great, but perhaps a bit of a longshot, would be some connection between Penon and Petroldragon or the thermoelectric devices affair.
-
That's Jones Beene's account. I would consider it a secondary source. I would not be surprised if the Thermacore replication employed potassium, which Mills was using early on.
-
apparently there was no potassium but this detail needs to be verified ... It' important to note, that no external heat, neither some potassium carbonate had been used in original Thermacore experiment ...
I'm interested in the matter of potassium in early Mills experiments, which I believe he used at one point. Are the two statements above separated by ellipses referring to the same detail, or to separate details? I.e., was it the case that there was never any potassium in the Thermacore replication, or is this something that must be further verified?
-
A good poker player does not give away his hand even under threat of "so called" sanction, which will in the end amount to no more than a slap on the hand anyway.
There is the risk of summary judgment as well, before the suit even gets to trial. Seems like a miscalculation to intentionally irritate a judge.
-
I can hardly believe the naivete of so many on this forum, expecting that researchers should spend untold amounts of time and money on work and then bequeath it to the world out of the goodness of their heart, for the goodness of all mankind; and simply for acknowledgement. Balderdash (actually I had something bit more profane in mind), it just don't work that way in the real world.
Few here would expect researchers to spend untold amounts of time and money on work and then bequeath it to the world out of the goodness of their heart, for the goodness of all mankind, and simply for acknowledgement. The expectation is that there are some among the people out there looking at LENR who are hobbyists, working on a dime, without big investment, who want to share their hobby with other hobbyists, as happens with hundreds of thousands or millions of people on the Internet everyday. (Think of open source software.) And that when someone seems to be in that mode of offering information as a hobbyist, he will divulge real details rather than coquettish hints. As hobbyists do everyday in thousands of venues. Apparently that was not me356's view of the matter.
Rossi would be an exception to this, and it is true that many people have imagined that a funded inventor would share IP-compromising information. In that context your point is a good one.
QuoteIn fact I suspect that any of you so called "professionals" out there who support this myth simply haven't discovered anything with potential yet. If (and that's a big if) you ever did I have little doubt that you would clam up too and start looking for a good patent attorney. Every person alive is looking for acknowledgement, but in terms of money and lots of it. Money is what makes the world go around and always has. Fame is just the icing on the cake.
Few here would claim to be a "professional"; most here, even if in a profession in another capacity, are here as a hobbyist of some sort. I am also pretty sure that some people would not clam up if they stumbled upon something; MFMP, to take one example.
-
Interesting observation: in this discussion we see fewer and fewer implausible arguments about the dealing with the 1 MW of power in the enclosed space of the Doral warehouse; the making of some kind of industrial product with that heat that is moved around and shipped out of the warehouse every day; the identity of the satisfied customer; and the reasons for denying IH access to the customer side at one point and refusing to answer questions. The majority of the arguments that remain are the kind a defence lawyer would make in an attempt to acquit a defendant who by all appearances was guilty: how can you be sure that ...; no one knows with certainty that ...; we don't have all of the evidence we need to conclude that ... (something about DN40 pipe), and without such evidence all bets are off; IH must have known this was the GPT but had ulterior motives; although Rossi's behavior was bad, IH's was equally bad or worse.
-
-
Rossi is clearly a distraction and potentially diversion of finance
Likely a diversion of finance. Even if Leonardo end up being liable for Jones Day's fees in addition to all of the money Leonardo received, they (Leonardo) may not have much left to hand over to IH once the trial is over.
-
Doc. 152, an order, now on the docket.
-
I think some of the participants here are interested in nailing down the details as much as possible in order to put the case definitively to rest, sort of like pursuing an investigative story even when the general conclusions are not in much doubt.
-