Posts by The Real Roger Barker

Quote from Shane D.

Jed,

Roger has been around a long time. I have never have known him to be serious. Never. He is mostly, well actually only, about irritating Mary (wig/HARD, etc,). His recent foray into the science of LENR with you, is just another of his sophomoric pranks. Trust me, it will not do your standing any good to engage him any further.

And to you Roger...when will you grow up?

Shane, I have always been serious about LENR. Yes, I troll @Mary Yugo, this is no secret. However the likes of Jed never frequented ECN so it was impossible to have a proper discussion with someone like him. ECN was full of people who loved patting themselves on the back, amongst other things.

On this forum I can ask the hard questions of JedRothwell . So far he has provided some interesting information which at face value looks good but when you do a deeper dive you find yet more questions.

Now Jed is claiming there was no working reactors because all the researchers died. Is McKubre dead? What were P&F doing during their multi-million dollar engagement with Toyota? Surely a time and money investment as great as that should have given us a working reactor by now.

BTW, there appear to be a number of people posting as Roger Barker hence why I'm the real Roger Barker.

Quote from JedRothwell

I doubt you have read any. You don't seem to know anything about the claims.

Do you see all those numbers, graphs and tables in the papers? Those numbers came from instruments. That's called "evidence." Experimental evidence.

(No, of course you don't see that stuff, because you have not looked at the papers. My mistake.)

I resent this Jed Rothwell. I have read the papers and yes, on paper it looks conclusive, but as I've said many times before, where is the follow on work? Where are the working reactors? Where are the stable long term demonstrations? Even if I was to believe everything in the papers my questions still stand especially after P&F were given tens of millions of dollars to further their research and came up with NOTHING.

Quote from JedRothwell

I do know how much money it was, but in my opinion they made great progress. Read the paper by Roulette and judge for yourself. The project was terminated because of greed and stupidity, not because it failed technically.

I am tired of reading papers. They just make claims without evidence. As I've said before anyone can make claims but where is the hard evidence? 25 years after P&F we still don't have a working reactor despite tens of millions having been spent on research.

JedRothwell

If P&F had so many successful replications then why were they not able to progress their work after having millions in funding from Toyota? $40 million says wiki ...

Quote from JedRothwell

I have answered that question maybe six times here already. Stop asking.

For that matter, you could read the literature and find out for yourself. Reading, thinking for yourself . . . what a novel approach!

No you have not answered anything. You point us towards some documentation but this is not proof of anything. I too can write up a bunch of stuff and make grandiose claims. The bottom line is there is no working reactor after 25 years of "successful" experiments. I need hard evidence. I am sure others demand the same thing as well. Until then it's just smoke and mirrors.

Quote from interested observer

Ganging together 50,000 2000-degree gizmos is a piece of cake! Cheap power for the masses! Looking forward to seeing one soon.

You'll be waiting a long time.

JedRothwell

interested observer asks a valid question which is inline with what I am asking. What needs to be done to take these "thousands of successful replications" to the next level?

Quote from JedRothwell

The question is not hard. I answered it several times. It is annoying that you pay no attention to my answers, so I shall respond once more only. Funding was cut off and researchers were fired because of academic politics, mass media attacks, and because people like you are hostile to the research and you have the mistaken impression that the effect was never replicated. Beaudette describes this in his book, and I explained it to you several times here, and pointed to statements by the people who attacked cold fusion such as these:

http://pages.csam.montclair.ed…lski/cf/293wikipedia.html

The researchers eventually grew old. They retired and died. If a young researcher were to suggest doing a cold fusion experiment, he would be fired.

First, cold fusion is based on experiments, not equations or theories. Second, you cannot produce a working reactor if you are dead. You cannot produce one if you are a alive when you have no money and you will be fired for discussing the idea.

Display More

@maryyugo Jed is making some interesting arguments. How about you join me in double teaming Jed here. Truce?

Quote from AlainCo

this is not scientific, as normally a good lab experiment would convince to search.

anyway you seems to have the wrong way of mind that is very common today, and this explains why transistor was only accepted when it was, if not perfect, usable enough.

It remind me a lesson from the Army : "if you disobey alone, it is forbidden. if you do it in group, it is a form of obedience"

In this day and age of rapidly advancing technology, why is that after "conclusive" tests were performed over 20 years ago we still have no working reactors?

Quote from maryyugo

Oh for cripes sake, the so-called megawatt plant was until very recently nothing but a grotesque collection of cobbled together pieces of crap that Rossi called ordinary ecats -- 50 or even 100 of them at one time. The supposedly latest reincarnation with six modules, far as I know, has never been seen pretending to run by anyone yet. Rossi has talked about being ready for market since 2011 when he supposedly had 12 + sales of the "plants". And according to Rossi, he was holding back the consumer version only because it needed "certification" by mystery certificators who were ever so busy doing the work... in 2012. I guess certificators must do a very slow process. How anyone can still believe the low level garbage that is Rossi's scam is absolutely mystifying. One must really have to work at that hard to rationalize for Rossi's obvious errors and plentiful, constant lies.

Certificators! That's a good one Mary.

Quote from JedRothwell

If that's too many details or you find it hard to understand, here is an introduction to the work, by me:

http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/RothwellJreviewofmc.pdf

Well this looks pretty conclusive but these tests were done over 20 years ago. What happened? Why is that after 20 years we are where we are i.e. no working LENR/CF reactors? That is the hard question, is it not? I too can write lots of equations and make grandiose claims in a paper but if I cannot produce any working reactors then what good am I?

I will take my team and read. We shall discuss.

JedRothwell Please advise if this is the doc you are referring to: http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/McKubreMCHcoldfusionb.pdf

Quote from JedRothwell

Go to LENR-CANR.org and use the index system. Or look on the first page.

You won't do that of course. People like you never do. You will complain that I do not spoon feed you information that I have put on the front page!

I will and I will get back to you.

Quote from Roger

I don't understand what's going on anymore. You troll the hell (and it's hilarious) out of poor MY who's obviously a professional troll with a mission to debunk LENR, yet it seems you think LENR is a big nothingburger.
Is this another good cop/bad cop tactic?

LOL! Yes I do troll Mary once in a while although I know there are many other Roger Barker impersonators out there, hence why I'm The Real Roger Barker. Are you one of those impersonators Roger?

You might find this surprising but I actually agree with a lot of what @Mary Yugo says. Hir concerns about calorimetry and in particular insertion and positioning of probes are totally valid.

Quote from maryyugo

Well I don't know who "Roger Barker" is if that is what you are asking. I suspect a pseudonym and also I don't give a sh*t who this thing is. If you are asking why the impersonations are from the individual ayhole who sometimes signs himself as "Roger Barker", then it's because I recognize the impersonator by the style which is similar to the style he or she (or it) used on ECN. And by the fact that there are posts in his style immediately above or below. That's not proof of course, but this is no court of law. Very few people have as little taste and decorum in forums. And yes, LOL, I suppose intuition. It's sort of obvious actually given this pitiful, stalking troll's history. Why they chose me, I have no idea. There used to be some nut case on e-catworld.com and ECN who signed as rats123, IIRC and who did somewhat similar things. And others stalked me in other weird ways, for example Jim Bowery during the Defkalion video demo threatened me with a beating by thugs over the talk channel. Very distinguished.

Rossi must draw stalkers sort of like sh*t draws maggots.

Alan Smith

Have a look at this abuse I'm getting from @Mary Yugo here. Are you going to reprimand hir for this tirade? For someone who claims I don't give a sh*t' heshe sure is spiteful.

As I said I am here to have some fun but also ask the hard questions. I have already questioned the calorimetry methods being used by the experimenters. Calorimetry has always proven to be a challenge when detecting low levels of heat.

Alan Smith

BTW I see you've closed off my Roger Barker thread. Why did you do this? What's wrong with a bit of humor? In these drab and dreadful days we live in what do we have besides a bit of fun?

Quote from Alan Smith

The Real Roger Barker . Roger, you are being tiresome and ridiculous. Pd/D LENR is a lab experiment that while it works will never (IMHO) provide a means of powering the world. There simply won't be enough Palladium. However, it is a 'gateway drug' which if taken seriously can provide insights and theoretical support for more accessible forms of LENR such as Ni/H, Pb/H (yes, really) and so on which could be the answer we seek. A bench-top system or a military gimmick is all Pd/D really offers the world as a whole.

On another note, I think you should seriously contemplate what value your posts bring to this forum, and try to raise your game. On current form you would not be a huge loss.

There you go. A threat to ban me just because I questioned the validity of LENR! Is that how things are run here? My questions are valid!

JedRothwell claims there have been thousands of replications of Palladium based LENR. I never said anything about powering the world with Pd/D LENR. I asked about why there were no working reactors. Even if it was to cost $100k to build a single working reactor, which barely lit a 5w bulb, and then run that for a period where it ruled out any known methods of energy production, you would have yourselves a winner. The cost to build it, the availability of Pd etc, would be irrelevant. The field of LENR would become mainstream science and we would no longer need a forum like this to denigrate each other.

I have asked Jed for a link to the McKubre papers he quotes regularly but as of yet he has not provided. I want to review this document and then we'll discuss. Savvy?

Would I be out of line if I was to post another ode?

LENR the wonder you are!

So near yet so far

Success by the thousands they tell me

But no real evidence that I can see

Oh, LENR ... so bizarre

Quote from maryyugo

That is a pompous, inane and asinine remark (note to admins: I am addressing the remark, not the person)

Mary, kindly leave such talk for other places.