... and not remote monitored and controlled from QuantumHeat headquater in California???
How old-fashioned is that!
Get some sock-puppets for more stylish promotion.
... and not remote monitored and controlled from QuantumHeat headquater in California???
How old-fashioned is that!
Get some sock-puppets for more stylish promotion.
"Rossi: E-Cat Orders from Four Countries, Some Already Installed and Operating" ... with no evidence at all.
I cut out the surplus text
QuoteDisplay MoreMark Saker
March 24, 2019 at 8:04 AM
Dear Andrea,
For larger installations does the ecat sk remain similar (blue unit, same size inlet/outlet,etc) in multiple quantities or is it a different unit and the only similarity is the core module?
Many thanks
Andrea Rossi
March 24, 2019 at 8:12 AM
Mark Saker:
So far we prefer to supply the same blue module in multiple assemblies.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
So, Rossi’s client for 40MW heat will get about 2000 (in words: two thousand!) of Rossi‘s blue boxes (0.4m * 0.5m * 0.9m) - each one of them 24/7 monitored and remote controlled from Leonardo‘s headquarter.
I guess the conventional MIT nuclear people were elsewhere last weekend??
And where was Rossi?... The genius who has mastered LENR already years ago, as many here believe.
Btw, I am a bit suprised that nobody proposed this song for the playlist:
Why they chose to remain in the shadows, I do not understand. Maybe the stigma, maybe investors like to work quietly on their long shots. and noisily on the sure bets?
My guess is that when there are serious investors / scientists investigating LENR, they just don’t want to get associated with crackpots, amateurish researchers, scammers, self pronounced world saviours, conspiracy theorists etc. which populate the LENR blogs / represent LENR on the Internet.
Could be that the employees do not want their names on a webpage [...]
Could it rather be that Leonardo Corp doesn‘t have any employee?
Or can you show me the contrary from Rossi‘s depositions or Leonardo‘s tax statement?
Rossi never talks about „employees“, but only of his „team“, and I wouldn‘t be surprised if he counts you also in.
For instance, 7 years ago he claimed already 63 people... and growing:
QuoteAndrea Rossi, August 19th, 2012 at 2:01 AM
Dear Iggy Dalrymple:
As of today we are 63 persons, and growing up (three years ago we were 3, two years ago we were 6, last year we were 13).
Warmest Regards,
A.R.
New rule; only rock star videos allowed, are those when they are in their prime. That was one of my favorites until seeing that. Only old geezers accepted here from now on, are the CF old guard.
New rule?
Why do the l-f mods always have to change the rules to their liking?
Ok, it‘s your blog... and since you mentioned old geezers...
Bloodhound Gang - Fire Water Burn
Shostakovich: “The Fire of Eternal Glory“
External Content
m.youtube.com
Content embedded from external sources will not be displayed without your consent.
Through the activation of external content, you agree that personal data may be transferred to third party platforms. We have provided more information on this in our privacy policy.
Maybe, by members, he means all the voices in his head...
Just post any suggestion on his blog (JONP), and he will count you as a member of his team.
Rossi's every-day morning prayer claim... the silly puppet video...
I am so disappointed because the Academy didn‘t nominate Rossi‘s terrific e-catSK movie for any Oscar.
There would be at least 10 categories, where Rossi‘s production could have scored:
BEST PICTURE (“The earthshaking demo from the Miami-Beach condo”)
ACTRESS IN A SUPPORTING ROLE. (“The dancing ballerina”)
ORIGINAL SONG. (“I believe in the e-cat”)
ANIMATED FEATURE FILM (“The e-cat sock-puppets show”)
ACTOR IN A LEADING ROLE. (“Dt. Andrea Rossi”)
PRODUCTION DESIGN (“Frank A.”)
CINEMATOGRAPHY (“The e-catSK from seven different angles”)
ANIMATED SHORT FILM (“Rossi and Gallileo”)
VISUAL EFFECTS. (“The plasma ball”)
MAKEUP AND HAIRSTYLING ( -self explaining-)
QuoteDisplay MoreBob Greenyer
4 hours ago (on ecw)
People may or may not be aware that I am both Clairvoyant and a Remote Viewer (no training). My latest premonition was that my kettle would fail 3 days ago and it did yesterday, I have never considered it failing in many years of owning it, I cannot force these predictions they just happen. I have predicted everything from my aunt getting gangrene in her big toe and having it amputated (2 years before it happened when I was a young child), my fathers exact death date, the volcano in Iceland erupting (2 years before it happened), the worldwide financial crisis (many years before it happened and one principal reason I relocated my life to Czech) - even my hairdresser cutting his hand for the first time after more than a decade of cutting hair. In each of these cases, I told other people, even many people of the coming event.
Around the turn of 2012/13 I had another premonition, this time in a dream, that neutrinos were key to LENR, in fact, I went as far as to discuss it with MFMP members and I had a concern that in a world powered by neutrino driven devices, a cosmic event could cause a massive global technological failure - I considered a script for a film based on the concept! (I actually wrote a treatment for the eruption of the volcano in Iceland long before it happened). However, my view is that any additional flux of neutrinos will be small compared to the continuous flux from the sun - sometimes I slightly misinterpret what I see, so my prediction may simply be about having a world driven in part by neutrinos.
In Early 2017, I realised HOW neutrinos might play a central role in LENR, this is a CENTRAL part of 'O-Day' for which I am releasing segments of the explanation & scientific evidence as I can.
[...]
Excellent. Seams like a wise decision. Since you only make a fool out of yourself when you try to respond...
Display MoreI am sorry Alan, but you and IHFB are one and alike. A trait that for some reason is high on my pet peeve list... hypocrisy.
IHFB says he is unbiased and you state "failure to condemn" is not support. IHFB's and your posts clearly state otherwise and this is simply BS.
It is true you NEVER condemn Rossi. Not for lying about customers, "salting" test samples" and much worse over 11 years of fraud. No you do not condemn or hold him responsible for anything, even when proven seriously wrong. Yet you often throw "shade" on IH and NEVER say anything POSITIVE about them even though they are supporting TRUE researchers with serious funding. These true researchers are happy with IH. Only crooks like Rossi, who when caught, call them snakes and clowns.
NO, your posts clearly state you support Rossi and condemn IH. This is fine, just admit it. Do not be like IHFB and be hypocritical. Man up to your true position. Most people can respect a person if they are upfront and engage with integrity. However, the "Unbiased One" and now "The one who does not condemn" are simply being hypocritical and statements otherwise are complete BS, as proven by their own posts.
Hiding under the "failure to condemn" when refusing to give an assessment of a clearly sham demo, when promising a detailed report prior to attending clearly shows that you cannot be trusted to give unbiased or complete information. This damages your credibility, event to the extent of the "Atom Ecology" drama. This is most unfortunate.
No you owe me nothing, but you do owe yourself better.
So sad but this is true and has been for a long t..... all Rossi supporters cannot defend Rossi on his merit, his work, his statements or anything as such. So they therefore simply attack and try to discredit Rossi's opponents. They cannot defend Rossi by any working product, positive data, demos, customers etc. So they resort to arguing heat exchangers, missing windows, pages on "possible backout offers", conspiracy theories and worse. Not one iota of actual positive proof can be made, so they attack others.
I am afraid this same pattern has started with the Atom Ecology drama. Big claims, no data. Secret people visiting, yet almost a year later no revelation. Principal party lashing out with unprofessional vigor. We are coming up to the 1 year anniversary and yet nothing more is known than day one. Not promising, unfortunate.
By the way..... somethings CLEARLY SHOULD be condemned. You seem to have to problem casting shade on IH for unknown and unproven allegations yet on absolutely proven and known fraud from Rossi, not a word. That by default is support and not confusing at all!
Why the heck does such a comment end up in the „clearance items“?
Gosh, I never thought anyone would ask me that! But maybe you have a point. You usually do. OK, so do any of you Rossi fans *not* believe in LENR? Be honest, and speak up. Promise we will go easy on you if you do.
Well, that’s like asking those companies which gladly shipped to Rossi’s PetrolDragon their toxic waste for a cheaper price, whether they really believed that this entrepreneur can transfer toxic waste to oil.
Surely they did!
And surely Rossi believed that he can make money oil from this toxic waste.
All here defending Rossi believe in LENR
How would you know that?
Some could defend Rossi just for some other ordinary reasons, isn’t it?
Does a snake oil seller have to believe in the effect of snake oil?
It is amazing how much effort and time goes into digging in all these old sayings and conversations years back in time....
If at all time should be better invested to find out what is the real deal now after the Jan 31st presentation, after the launch and marketing and sales campaign on ECW, e.g. who is Rossi's 40MW customer and global player/partner at the same time, where is his robotic factory, who he has hired (there has to be a huge team in manufacturing,, servicing, installation etc.), which agency he had approached for certification, how this certificate looks like, is there any local authorization to do businesses, report revenues, taxes and expenses, - usually stuff you could find, read, search for or download for serious companies that are registered and do business in the US.
What is the purpose of this “did Rossi make an offer for an IP buyback” dispute anyway?
Is it in order do claim that, after that fiasco they had with Rossi, IH still didn’t want to sell the “e-cat IP” back to Rossi because it would be so valuable?.
Hey, unless I am very much mistaken, in the settlement agreement IH returned the “e-cat IP” without any “money back”.
(Sorry for my ignorance about what meme the Rossi aposthels want to heat up again.
But since the time I have seen what infamous BS this Kevmo guy spreads on the internet - I am talking about his hatred posts like this one - I don’t read his drivel anymore. )
Former French President Pompidou who died in 1973 said: "There are three ways to ruin yourself ; women, gambling and research. The most enjoyable is with women, the fastest is with gambling, but the safest is with research."
Actually, the quote goes like this:
https://www.google.com/search?…ruin%3B+women%2C+gambling
https://www.brainyquote.com/fr…n/georges-pompidou_126633
But there are many derivatives - people modify quotes to their liking...
If your scenario is true, Rossi fans may still have some reason for hope. Yeah. That would mean Rossi either; never gave up the real formula, or IH could not get the exact ingredients Rossi used to make it work. And the story lives on.
Oh Lordy,
the Rossi alcolytes will always stay hopefull, regardless how ridicolous this whole e-cat farce (with fake customers, absurd tests and “ERV reports”, fantastic “robotized production lines” claims, secret customers, laughable “demo in the condo”, etc. etc.) gets.
Even if Rossi would say now that the e-cat story was nothing else than a hoax, the conspiracy theorists would spin this as a cover-up maneuver, they would claim something in the line that “big oil” bought Rossi.
It’s much easier for the remaining Rossi supporters to remain in a self-delusion than to admit that they - although so smart - have been fooled all time long.
IMO, Boeing should have been fully informed of that beforehand. At the least, it was rude of IH to lead them to believe they were there to test the real deal, when in fact they were not. Especially so when taking into consideration Boeing offered their time and talents free of charge.
Are you sure that IH didn’t tell them beforehand?
It seems to me that when Darden’s writes in the e-mail to Childress "I was hopeful, but also worried due to the change I made to the fuel based on the material supply issue" he is talking about something which both parties are already aware.
Anyway, in case that they didn’t tell Boeing in advance, a simple explanation would be that they couldn’t get exactly the same ingredients (e.g from the same supplier Rossi told IH), so they tried the best substitute and didn’t tell Boeing (exactly what they did) because it would reveal part of the IP of the fuel.
Keep in mind: The secret fuel recipe, which Rossi had given to IH only after he received the 10 mio, could include such exotic ingredients as powder from a grinded horn of a unicorn.
Rossi might very well have taken precautions which make it very difficult for IH (or anyone else) to create exactly “his” fuel mix.
QuoteAnd if you look further in that exchange, it muddies the picture as to intent. In particular pg 115, where Childress sent a follow up email to ask he be provided "the correct fuel"...in order to determine the Ecat's validity, along wth some other requests. TD never complied, and Boeing was never given another chance to test. Why?
Firstly, it makes sense to me that Childress asked for a unit with the “correct” fuel, after the attempt to measure excess heat from a unit with a “slightly modified fuel” failed completely (no excess heat at all).
And for me the simplest answer to your question “WHY didn’t IH send one” would be: Because IH couldn’t fullfill the requirements from Childress, which were:
1. The unit has the correct fuel in it
2. The unit is preminarly tested by IH and shows that it works
3. The unit has to be delivered within a couple of weeks
http://coldfusioncommunity.net/rvd-depositions/#Cassarino
Not sure if Darden ever explained why he gave the Boeing tester (Childress) fake fuel. I have not read Chidress' depo in a while, but maybe if you read it you will find your answer. At the least, it is an interesting read, as are all the depos.
Your comment (“fake fuel”) insinuates that IH wanted to mislead Boeing.
When I read the deposition from Chidress, I can’t find anywhere that he felt misled.
Darden wrote him in a e-mail: "I was hopeful, but also worried due to the change I made to the fuel based on the material supply issue."
I can’t find anything in the deposition which indicates that Chidress wouldn’t have been informed in advance of that.