Posts by IHSupporter

Bob, I have seen no evidence (but I may have missed it) that Penon actually sent the devices to the manufacturer and got reports. I sure have not seen any results of such claimed action.

The problem is that Penon took the devices and not just mailed them from Fl to the manufacturer (the best I can understand) In other words, even if some devices were sent to the manufacturer, what evidence is there that they were the ones used and that they were unaltered before sending them on.

The issue is that Rossi, et all must provide evidence and I have seen so little of it from them.

Most of these things would have been resolved if there were controls used and test runs to verify calibrations. I know it is hard to do control runs at 1MW but that is the region of operation they chose. If it was science instead of just a show, a pre and post test should have been done. And to verify that IP was transferred it needed to be someone else other than Rossi at the controls to show it was indeed transferred to someone else. It is a sloppy mess. If Rossi could not turn it over to IH to run then I don't see how he can claim that workable tech was transferred.

Taking the instruments out of the country that may be evidence against you does not sound like a wise option.

My understanding (?- though not to clear) is that he did not send them directly to the manufacturer but took them himself (delivered to himself). That is why tomorrow's spoliation hearing should be interesting.

Can you imagine a person under investigation removing his gun from a scene and mailing to one of his out of country addresses? Not a good idea. How does would that sound to a jury as an analogy?

Quote from IH Fanboy

I think it is perfectly reasonable, and expected, that the ERV would maintain custody of the instruments. Would it really be fair to either party for the ERV to have left the instruments with one or the other parties? Not understanding that criticism.

a much better option was for him to put them in the shipping container and leave it there under seal so no one, not even he could alter them.

Quote from IH Fanboy

I think it is perfectly reasonable, and expected, that the ERV would maintain custody of the instruments. Would it really be fair to either party for the ERV to have left the instruments with one or the other parties? Not understanding that criticism.

but why not return them after he had the manufacturer checked them (that is what he had promised)

I am still want to know how you or anyone explains why the pressure readings from April (the 30 minute ones) were all below atmospheric pressure for Miami on that day. They were IH's devices as I understand.

Your argument above - why would Rossi destroy the plumbing and not leave it for examination.

Quote from Paradigmnoia

Was the pressure sender screwed into a blind hole where the pressure never changes?

Interesting idea. And it is items like that which make the spoliation arguments even stronger. How can Rossi claim the results to attack IH if he destroys such evidence? In Penon's test plan the pressure gauges would have been outside the container and thus the pipe they fitted in were destroyed and he sent the gauges out of the country never to be seen again.

Where was the temp sensor placed? Out side on the now destroyed plumbing?

Reading the latest batch of docs, it seems like IH has a strong case for spoliation of the evidence. destruction of data and email, destruction of the plumbing, heat exchanger.....

And then Penon took the instruments out of the country and never returned them so they could be checked by IH. I am not a lawyer but the argument is convincing to me.

IF I understand it the judge could throw the case just on that alone or perhaps do the forced adverse interpretation of the info. related to the items. That would mean the jury would have to do things like assume the instruments were not correct, the heat exchanger was not sufficient, the emails were negative to Rossi's case and so on. We should know tomorrow

Alan F - yes,

but they are countering Rossi since he declared war on them. It may be nit picky but it seem like the Judge is a stickler for letter of the law and 23 hr 30 min is not what was agreed to.

If you were 4 points behind playing football and you got to the 1 yard line in the final minute would you think you won because you were so close? Would the bookie pay as though you won?

And take a look at Dewey's email in this latest batch (262-4) #3 pressure readings on inlet and outlet.... flows over a range of flow temperatures.... things that look like they were not done.

We may look at it as trying to see if there is an LENR effect but to the courts it is if Rossi did what was agreed to and did not misrepresent anything to achieve gain (that is what fraud is). It is about sticking strictly to what is written and representing things correctly so that the one paying is not mislead.

Again, IH may have been clueless but working with naïve innocent people is not a legal excuse for misrepresentation or fraud.

IHFB - They may have been clueless early on, but that does not give Rossi the right to run a scam. I think they have awoken and will fight to the end. Rossi made a mistake when he turned it personal against Darden and Vaughn. Darden will not easily "roll over".

Quote from PeterMetz

In a civil trial it's supposed to be the "preponderance of evidence" that determines the outcome. That means 51% takes it. But how do you account for lack of evidence (no pictures etc) or even spoliation? For me it doesn't look very good for Rossi and after you factor in this it's even worse.

Yes, it sure looks like IH had put up more evidence in defense that Rossi has in his attacks against IH.

Most of what Rossi has presented were attacks on IH's defense issue and almost none on proving their primary positions. If just one or two items of Rossi's claims are found to be discarded by spoliation then it seems to me that it will be all over for Rossi.

Preponderance- yes. Not only that remember that Rossi chose the Fed. court system which requires a unanimous verdict. Just one juror has to think that 50.001 % of the evidence looks good for IH.

I am so looking forward to Thurs. (spoliation hearing)

It sounds like IH are going to go after the 10M as well. The test it was based on did not have the level of energy agreed to and not the number of "engines" and it was stopped before the time required.

Quote from IH Fanboy

Shane,

I understand that the JMP ruse is the go-to now for anti-Rossites. It is sensational. Rossi's admitting of the scheme under oath is a blockbuster. The jury will eat it up. I get it.

But I think it would be ill-advised to put on blinders to all evidence because of it. Don't just take in the evidence that appears damaging to Rossi. I would encourage you to take in all of the evidence.

Always keep in mind that Rossi vs Darden (this thread) is about the law suit Rossi brought against Darden. About Rossi attacking Darden. It is not about if LENR is real. It only take one item of evidence favorable to the defense to let the defendant (Darden ) go and it only take one juror to think there is a lack of evidence or a questionable item for IH to win.

It seems that you spend all your time trying to defend Rossi and nothing offered as proof of guilt by Darden.

ele - looking back, I see no way that the flow data was taken by Penon. It doesn't seem to have a remote logging but it had to be read off the meter by someone (who was not Penon).

Do you have some proof that Penon was able to remotely view the data directly from the meter and not through someone else reading the meter?????

My guess is you will not answer directly. You often seem to avoid the real questions.

ele- Please give reference , proof, that Penon took data from his system. Rossi said he had to deliver it at a set time each day. Do you believe Rossi?

Notice that IH requested the raw digital data 3 times in court and Rossi refused to deliver it and the court is considering sanctions on those grounds (not sure what became of that)

Quote from Alan Smith

Well, the HVAC guy I spoke to calculated that a building like the one in Doral could dissipate 150-200kW all on its own. And I was under the impression there were ventilators in the roof? And bi doors, which were mostly left open.

As for Gullstrom's whereabouts, you are guessing, aren't you? I would merely like to point out that since the invention of the steamboat crossing the Atlantic is no longer perilous and fairly fast.

mostly left open.... You mean that all the doors were open all night long with no security?

Quote from ele

Aha very smart. This test was run by Rossi because the reactor was his own and he was the only person really able to run it.

IH had make profit from that test rising million of dollars from investors.

If you say that only he could run it, then you must admit that he did not transfer the IP as he was required to.

THe pressure numbers in the exhibit (data for April 1 2015) were less than the atmospheric pressure at Miami for that day.

Can anyone come up with a reason for that other than the measurements are wrong or that there was something

pulling a vacuum on the customer's side?

Sure looks to me like another "nail in the coffin" for the Penon data.

Quote from LENR Calender

Sure, Penon wasn't there most of the time. But we do have this type of automated pressure data available:

http://coldfusioncommunity.net…01/0194.16_Exhibit_16.pdf

I am asking why a pressure of ~ 1 bar abs has been deemed to be impossible when the pressure drop to the JMP side is only a fraction of a bar.

but that is just one day and does not at all match the barometric pressure of Miami for that day:

https://www.wunderground.com/h…=&reqdb.magic=&reqdb.wmo=

Notice that on April 1 2015 the pressure in Miami moved from 30.1 to 30.2 (1.019 bar to 1.022 bar)

The values in the exhibit were never over 1.0028.

All the data in that exhibit are SUB atmospheric for that day.

Why would the pressure out of the unit be below that of the atmosphere???????

unless there was a vacuum on the customer's side.

And if that was true, the boiling points and everything would be incorrectly read.

Is it just me or does it seem strange---- If Rossi really had and did what he claimed and if he was going to attack a multimillion dollar company, that he would do things like:

Present the raw minute by minute data

Present photos of the system

Present the instruments used and their manuals

Have had redundant measurement systems

Get Peon to produce the manufacture’s calibrations (remember he said he sent them off after the trial)

Produce written documents with signatures showing agreement.

Produce records to show he did claim it was a GPT before Aug late into the trial

Produce documented dates for mergers and incorporation

Go out and have those day laborers testify

Have the landlord testify as to the windows

Produced receipts from Home Depot as to the pipes and dates he bought them.

Produced tax records to show he paid on the 10M.

Show that he does have an extension on his work visa and is not breaking the immigration laws.

A diploma to show he really has a doctorate and is not just masquerading as a doctor.

And on and on........

But he has not produced a preponderance of evidence against IH as I see it. It is up to him to prove his case against IH.

jed - "

Again, there is absolutely no way of knowing exactly what is exiting the E-Cat.

Exactly! the agreement specified that the ERV measure the flow OUT of the system not the flow into the system. That was never done.

Penon did not use the instruments they promised in their test plan, he did not measure the pressure or flow, only took what he was given via Rossi. They discarded the steam trap. And in the end they destroyed the piping. Sure doesn't sound like the work of honest people.

Perhaps they had something but is sure doesn't look like they have evidence to attack IH with and very little legal ground to stand on.

Quote from LENR Calender

Edit: got pressure wrong initially

http://www.tlv.com/global/TI/c…-loss-through-piping.html

^ I used this calculator to get steam pressure loss according to the data provided by Murray and Penon

Pipe ID: 78mm

Pressure: 1 bar abs

Temp: 103

Flow rate 1500 kg/h

Pipe length 6m

Pressure loss is 0.09 bar

Explain how this precludes the supposed steam from having an output pressure of ~1bar where measured by Penon.

Display More

The pressure was not measured by Penon. He only listed what Rossi gave him. He was required to measure the pressure by the agreement but he did not do so.