Posts by Bob#2

Quote from Wyttenbach

..........We have absolutely no clue what a paranoid researcher & a bunch of cheaters did do.

Just to remind you: IH said Mizuno could not be replicated. At the very same time they enter a patent for his work. That's how money greedy cheaters work............

This shows severe lack of discernment at worst or ignorance of the facts at best!

We have MOUNTAJNS of clues and a VERY LARGE amount of FACTS about Rossi and IH.

I have read the under oath depositions from the trial. Have you? Rossi's own testimony revealed the liar and fraud he is. There is no question about this.

Do not believe me? Ask moderator Shane, he has read them!

The depositions clearly show that IH gave Rossi every chance to succeed and he defrauded them in return at every chance. There is NO doubt.

Rossi's OWN actions since then show his lying and fraudulent nature. He dropped the 1mw plant himself DURING the lawsuit, proving he himself knew it did not work@?!

This has been discussed adnausieum. You either have blinders on and have not looked at the facts or like some, have tied your own work so inticately to the " eCat MUST BE REAL", that you cannot now admit it is a fraud!

IH has and STILL is supporting several LEGITIMATE researchers. They are even in good standing with Mizuno. (Mizuno apparently despises Rossi! Good judgement, you should take note.) They are truly advancing the field. Yet you defend Rossi! Amazing.

I suspect the foundation if your "greedy" opinion of IH is based solely upon your social political views, similar to a few others here........ capitalism is inherently evil.... so it must be derided, regardless.

It is better to side with a convicted felon and proven liar/fraud (Rossi's own under oath depositions) than to give any positive credit to a capitalistic group such as IH......even if they have shown by action, that they do want to see environmentally beneficial technology advanced.

Take note of this....

People who have had actual contact with IH, such as Muzuno, Rothwell, Cravens, Letts, Higgins and many others do not have anything bad to say about them.....

The only people deriding IH are Rossi supporters who never have met or worked with them and refuse to believe or even read Rossi's own under oath depositions! To them, facts do not matter... Rossi must be real, the eCat must work......therefore IH must be the bad guys.

Yet on the other hand, other than Penon and Fabioli(sp?) , no one stays with Rossi, other than the internet cult following, whom Rossi intellectually abuses daily.

A total lack of judgment or simply political determinism?

"Perhaps someone could clarify this."

Never mind. After reading the link and seeing that RG is still giving Rossi credit and judges Rossi's eCats as legitmate, I do not need clarifying. That judgement speaks for itself.

Quote from JedRothwell

So, Russ George discovered all of this long ago, but he deigns to give Mizuno some credit for replicating Russ George. That's sweet of him. It is a shame he never published. Something about hiding a light under a bushel comes to mind. I suppose you would set yourself on fire doing that.

I am confused. I thought the atom-ecology reactors were next to proven and being verified by important visitors? I took it that the AE reactors were pretty much a lock for proving excess heat / LENR reactions.

Now are they to be dropped and replicating another's design (Mizuno's) taking front stage instead?

Perhaps someone could clarify this.

Thanks.

Quote from Walter Pegeto

Translating what you says in layman's terms, we can state that a large part of the international scientific community, like in the middle-age, follows sheeply a religious paradigm that simply does not work?

Sorry to repeat again the same mantra, but all this stuff looks to me as yet another conspiracy theory.

Being an "outsider", not a doctorate in maths, physics or chemistry, but an engineer with a working back ground in all three, I find this subject very interesting.

We have some of the "LENR" crowd, totally convinced that it is mainstream "mind control" that is keeping LENR from being acknowledged in science circles.

Some believe that it is "big oil" etc. that is keeping LENR from being used to solve the world's energy supply.

Some persons who propose radical or novel theories, that their "obviously correct" system is not accepted because it does not toe the line with the main stream dogma and is being consciously buried by them!

Often, all the above groups site supporting evidence of "The dark ages", "Galileo's persecution", "Wright brothers ridicule", etc. etc. as previous proof that these things still happen! Not did happen, but seemingly present them as evidence that they still DO happen.

Now, I am not saying that there is NO / ZERO / Nada resistance to new ideas. Yes, there always is, humans are involved. But one cannot compare the "dark ages" to today. This is simply trying to defend and excuse lack of acceptance of one's pet ideas.

The reason for this is the advance of 1) total knowledge base and 2) wide spread communication of ideas. (Mostly due to the internet)

When Newton set forth his laws, they were not fully accepted. Yet they were proven correct. F=M*A was demonstrably proven. Proven widely and at will over time.

However, Einstein's theory "superseded" this. Technically, F=M*A is not correct, as faster than light travel would be allowed. Yet for most day to day situations, the formula works just fine. F=M*A is fine for day to day "Truth", but not for relativistic scale.

My point is that with each advancement, the knowledge base is expanded. The "Dark Ages" was an infant in knowledge and thus much silliness was rampant. Our knowledge base has expanded dramatically since then. This does not mean that we will not find new insights, new theories, but it is less and less likely that we will find revolutionary, 'turn the world on it's ear" models that will total undo all the past knowledge. Very unlikely.

So when someone proposes a new model that completely disrupts the existing, accepted one, it is nothing like the dark ages. There has now been untold number of experiments, educated people, proofs etc. to give credence to these models. This does not mean that they will not be refined, nor improved, nor better understood but it is increasingly unlikely that they will be completely over turned. We may even find more "advanced" models that supersede the SM under certain circumstances, just as Einstein did with Newston's laws.

But it is unlikely that the current SM will be found totally wrong and void.

This is not because of it being "Accepted by main stream", but because it has withstood the scrutiny of thousands of scientist over time, both experimentally and theoretically. Yes, it will change, it will be modified, it will be expanded. Completely over turned? Logically, probably not. I would be very surprised.

This is NOT the dark ages.

Those who have the ego to think their new, revolutionary insights surely are correct and that the thousands of other well educated, bright and insightful scientists are wrong, are quite remarkable. If they then start to state that their new theory is not being accepted because it is "outside" mainstream and is being "buried", then they have become unremarkable. It is far more likely that this revolutionary theory is not accepted simply because it does not stand muster or scrutiny. (Perhaps has not been published in a well formatted paper and widely circulated, but then it will have to pass muster still)

Stating with conviction that the current SM is completely wrong and invalid and that one has the real answer, is a very big statement and casts a shadow on many very educated and smart people. We are not just talking standard IQ's here. We are talking genius level. Saying they are all wrong is truly remarkable and requires a remarkable ego indeed.

Quote from RobertBryant

for replicators it is irrelevant if TTHnew believes

From the certain antagonistic and juvenile attitude that RB has, I doubt that many replicators find value in RB's posts and beliefs.

Quote from RobertBryant

I don't pay much attention to JB.

I imagine most have stopped paying attention to RB's posts long ago as it is quite clear that RB has only personal insult and derogatory responses to anything that

does not agree with his view. If it is not to RB's liking, it is worth of put down.

Quote from RobertBryant

Since when is IH the gold standard of scientific research?

Since when is RB the authority on LENR researchers and the pen-ultimate sage? Heck, I have never heard of RB before but he acts as if he is the "Defender" of the faith. (Although it needs no defending, especially with insult and juvenile, repetitive taunting).

I HAVE seen and read MUCH about IH's principal Darden's work on environmental causes. I have seen his actions and mature responses (compared to Rossi's fraud) during the Rossi debacle. But then I suspect RB still believes Rossi to some extent.

I would CERTAINLY listen to Darden far more than someone who repeats juvenile blatherings. (hmm.... who fits that bill?)

Jed seems to trust IH and has a fairly high opinion of them. I guess you do not trust Jed then? hmmm....

Quote from RobertBryant

My summary of "what I think of the evidence" from THHnew.

.

.

.

My summary of what "RB thinks".....

It is quite apparent that you simply have a vendetta against THH. THH does not insult and attempts to present his case in open and logical dialog normally using data. Whether right or wrong, he presents his case. You however, can only add insult and juvenile retort. Responses like yours (along with the likes of Adrian Ashfield) is what gives a low opinion to many LENR outsiders. You ascribe a personal insult to a person you do not even know. THH simply is listing his opinions on a non-personal object/test/event. YOU take his skeptisim as some personal insult as you seem to tie your own worth to the value of this set of tests. Why else would you respond in such a childish manner?

(By the way, whatever happened to A,A.? I hope he is not experiencing health issues. Perhaps he simply got sick of having to defend Rossi's lies.)

One last point.... you often state along the lines of "what technical content have you brought to this discussion"...... so I ask you..... "what technical content or value has YOUR repetitive and juvenile retort as shown above brought to the discussion?" It only shows your maturity (or lack of it actually).

RB, for one who often quotes scripture, you sure do not follow it. Perhaps a friendly reminder to re-read and meditate on Corth. 13 some more....

Regardless, I hope you have a good day.

Quote from Alan Smith

W would like to invite you to the "Proof Of Concept” of our magnetic motor (the Yildiz MM).

The test will be open to attendants. There will also be live streaming.

Test Product: 7,5 kW Magnetic Generator (HMSB 286 - Alfa 01)

Test location: Via Fratelli Cairoli, 62/b – Belluno – Loc. MUSSOI – 32100 – BL - ITALY

Test Date: July 5-6-7, 2019

For better Informations please go to: http://www.dambros.com

Only for the brave and the very very optimistic.

Display More

"W" ? Who is this?

Surely any educated person is not falling for a magnetic motor! While not an expert in magnetism, math nor "over unity" machines, it is pretty well accepted that magnetism itself cannot over come the friction and conversion power losses from mechanical motion to electrical. While a nice sounding dream... reality bites this one.

Hopefully this is not someone who is also a leader in the LENR arena.

I apologize for this being OT on this thread, but I do not know where to post the question since I cannot find the "Atom-Ecology" thread.

Having been "off-line" for a month or so, I have not seen any updates on this project. At the time of my "vacation", this project was the next big thing with results at will, according to one principal, the end of the fossil age around the corner and visitors with significant qualifications.

Now it seems Muzuno is in the spotlight and the Atom Ecology reactor forgotten about?

What is the current status of the "dancing girls" as they were once described?

Quote from RobertBryant

Right on... Bob#2 Welcome to the forum May28 start... do you have a technical comment?

Well, ... May 28th?..... You will have to ask Shane about that I guess...... you assumption is incorrect.

Technical comment?....., I did ask.. Is this not the same reactor / protocol that Mizuno himself demonstrated to IH?

If yes, my memory/understanding was that he could not get it to work.

If not, then what is the difference between this pre-publication and the IH demonstration? My reading of this thread indicates this has been

a few years in development, so the IH demonstration surely has merit to discuss. If Muzuno himself could not get it to work outside his lab,

then replicators need to really target what difference there is to look for. What hope do they have to replicate if Muzuno could not himself?

If we want a successful replication, one must not hide their head in the sand and ignore such questions.... that is what the Rossi believer's do.

I do not and never have claimed to have the technical "LENR" knowledge of McKubre or others. But that does not discredit my ability to think logically.

There must be some significant issue if the inventor himself cannot replicate outside his lab. (Again, I may be misunderstanding the IH event or my memory may be in error) What hope would others have? Asking some of these hard questions such as THH, may well point to the answer.

So a valid truth should withstand scrutiny on it's own merit. It will not matter if a skeptic does not believe or a believer has blind faith. What makes a real working reactor different that Rossi's frauds, is that it CAN withstand real and valid scrutiny. Rossi will not allow validation because he knows his stuff is BS. Just "Saying it works" does not make it work.

Nor does a name.... I remember you espousing about anonymous avatars once..... I assume Robert Bryant is your real name.... but then who is Robert Bryant? I have never heard of him nor his credentials and they mean nothing to me. I am sure I mean nothing to many here, But I can tell by Robert Bryant's own posts however, that he insults and makes personal that which should be objective science. That makes me think his judgement is skewed. Look in a mirror.... I believe you might start seeing a reflection of Adrian Ashfield or IHFB there!

Just like those that still believe Rossi has the goods, those with skewed bias have a serious issue with discerning facts or intention sometimes! Has it has become a personal matter? Contrary to your erroneous statement above, I have been on this site for years. I have NEVER seen THH insult you one time in a post. However you often do not seem to be able to counter your impulse to do so with him. You often site passages, perhaps you should meditate on 1 Corinthians 13:4-13 some! Simply my opinion.

What a sad state of affairs this has become.

The number of posters seems to be declining and no wonder.

When someone such as THH provides reasonable critique, all of which he provides a logical and often mathematical basis to, he is often scorned with

childish, personal insult. THH does not direct any post directly at someone, nor does he insult or deride. Yet the "response" from a few, (namely R Bryant) is personal, meant to cause insult and ripe with simple meanness. Much of the same thing many here state that mainstream media spouses!

Remember, when you point a finger at someone you have three pointing back at you!

Try responding to THH's questions with actual answers or examples. Throwing shit around solves nothing and only shows what level some people operate on.

I am not saying THH is 100% correct in everything, but he sure as hell supports his position mathematically and by example much more than almost everyone here.

This place is becoming similar to ECW. If you do not blindly accept stuff (or in one particular case, push a factual position) you will get nothing but personal insult nd perhaps a perma ban. THH makes many valid points. IF he makes a mistake, he should simply be answered with the factual math or data that shows his error.

Repetitive harping a point only shows the character of the finger pointer. Truly it makes them look bad, not THH.

Then those like IHFANBOY states that he too has fought the many deceptions and misdeeds of THH, but yet he stands by Rossi! Ha, what a pile of hypocrisy that is!

Rossi got so bad even IHFB had to pretty much shutup about him. THH and many others were absolutely right about Rossi but that did not stop the "believers" from disparaging anyone who criticized Rossi. Now the same is going to happen to those asking legitimate or at least well intentioned questions about Mizuno?

It seems many have short memories here. We have seen Rossi, Steorn, Johnny 5, and several others.... all pan out to be fake, phony or actually fraudulent

There is no problem with asking critical questions..... if YOU do not like them, answer them in a factual way that disputes the point... leave out the personality.

So with all the fueding and pissing about these tests and critiques, my question (probably mostly to Jed) is the point that seemingly has been "forgotten"

IH had Muzuno visit and show them his reactors. My understanding was that Mizuno could not get them to work for the demonstration visit. Is my memory / understanding of this correct? If so, is this reactor / series of test that has been "pre-published" the same type of reactor used in the IH visit?

If it is, then replication is likely going to fail by others if Muzuno could not get it to work himself! If these are different, what has changed? I have not been following this site nearly as much since my banishment, but it seems like these Muzuno tests have been several years in the making. Was not the IH demo last year?

This is not a criticism, I am just trying to clarify the situation. If this is the same reactor/protocol and Muzuno himself could not replicate outside of his lab, then it is going to be quite difficult for novices to do so. THH is correct, the devil is in the DETAILS!