Posts by nobody

    Woodworker, your argument is concise, clear, reasoned. Thanks.


    Do you put any weight behind the argument that IH actively pimped Rossi's technology to investors during the time period IH claims now to be unsure the tech even worked, shows IH isn't beyond stretching the truth for profit? IH also filed a patent on Rossi's technology in that time period when they could not replicate LENR, much less the patent, which patenting Rossi claims was a breach of contract (this is my memory of Ross's claim, am too lazy to find you a source). Will Rossi try to make the case that IH are the frauds? What is Rossi's best case?

    This is an end game. HIstorically, at something like this point, the inventor disappears.


    Historically, inventors like Farnsworth, Tesla, the Wright Brothers found themselves slowly squeezed by litigious usurpers with deep pockets and endless greed. This could be the case with Cherokee thinking they had a fresh rube inventor in their anaconda grip.


    Appears they got an agreement to pay $89 mil at such time as they damn well felt like it, namely never. Appears they set up a shell corp at the last minute to assure easy bankruptcy if ever faced with the prospect of actually paying.


    At this point my bet is that Rossi's customer will be proven a sham and there will be no trial. But still viable at this point is the prospect that Rossi has the goods: rather hope the latter scenario is correct.

    The entire case is: if the ERV report stands as specified in the contract, IH owes Rossi $89 mil.


    IH is going to have to have evidence the ERV measured incorrectly or reported fraudulently. Am not sure if arguing that they, IH, were unable to validate Rossi's Lugano reactor will persuade anyone the device is fraud and therefore the ERV report is either fraud or negligence.


    Were i the court, would order Rossi to submit the device to a court-appointed independent test. If it passes, IH owes.

    Rossi claims that the contingency came to pass and the $89 million fell due and was not paid. However, that is simply a debt, and there is no provision in the contract for termination for failure to make that payment


    Above doesn't pass the laugh test. Failure to pay invalidates contracts all the time. Try not paying your employees, but then insisting you keep their pension funds and they continue with their regular duties because the contract was not invalidated by your failure to carry out crucial, central contractual obligations.

    Sharing the basic information to allow wide replications might be the problem, because it is based on what can cause big troubles. When you are successfull you must definitively face with this issue. Better results you obtain (which is just matter of time), bigger troubles can occur. And as you know how it really works, it is easy to boost the effect.


    Well, then you'd better just take your discovery to the grave, because no matter how you engineer a safe reactor, the theory eventually will become public knowledge. Everyone knows the basic concept of a fusion or fission bomb, but cannot easily make one in ones garage. With LENR it might be otherwise.


    Disclosing now or later will make no difference. :nuke:

    A whole lot of "Ban the other guy, but not me" in this thread.


    Perhaps the elitists can think up a character to put in the title of their non-Rossi topics to make it easy for those who hate the common rabble to find. They can go on speculating about angels dancing on pinheads as if doing science.

    Andrea Rossi
    June 14, 2016 at 11:06 AM
    Barty:
    The reasons why we cannot be independent from an external source are mainly connected with safety issues. I cannot give further information.
    Warm Regards
    A.R.


    Sniff, sniff...what is that aroma? Stinks of the familiar odor of Italian bovine, again rectally dealing out the safety card to avert the obvious question of why the magic perpetual motion machine isn't self-looped.


    A properly engineered control looping power would be indistinguishable to the EQuark/EQuack from plain old power mains. Safety my a$$ !


    This kind of BS puts Rossi firmly in the fraud category until some honest 3rd party says otherwise.


    Those entranced by a blurry picture and a new crock of unsubstantiated miraculous claims might be better hypnotized by jangling car keys.

    Don't ask, don't beg, don't question, don't bully.
    Just kiss his ass or he'll go away!
    That's real good what you're doing me356, real good.
    We love all you, and really love waiting just a few days.
    Just a few days.

    Turbo3:

    Quote

    "If I were the Judge I would recommend the two parties sit down and try to negotiate a new test procedure"


    Am no lawyer, but think the judge must rule on the letter of the contract and not the intent.


    Could be that Rossi is a fraud, but managed to wrangle a winning contract.


    Could be that ECat works, but IH manages to steal $80M by finding loopholes in the contract.


    If I contract with you to measure my height by an agreed upon inaccurate method, then the result is contractually sound, even if incorrect.


    ISSUES ARE:


    "Measured as agreed upon, and the result indeed showed X!"


    OR


    "It was NOT measured as agreed upon, and besides you were late in starting the test and were missing a signature!"

    possibilities:
    1. me356 does not have the goods and is ashamed to admit it
    2. has the goods but now sees dollar signs, korunas, euros and won't divulge his secrets
    3. is still trying to prove to himself he has the goods


    Whatever the reason, that's real good what ya done me356, real good. Please comment. Don't wish us into the corn field. (see "It's a Good Life" episode of "Twilight Zone")

    As far as the identity or purpose of the "customer" is concerned, all that should matter is an accurate measurement of the input water and output steam with verification of whether it was wet or dry steam.


    Shouldn't matter if there was nothing in the secret room, a heater, a factory, Dewey Weaver steam cleaning his money. Or does it?

    So what is Dewey Weaver, the unofficial spokesman for a company who tells us to ignore unofficial spokspersons?


    Seems to be just an investor with money to lose if things go further south.


    As Upton Sinclair said, 'It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it.'


    Methinks the unofficial spokesman doth protest too much.


    Pump IH until such time as one can dump.

    Thomas published an article in his name challenging the Lugano Report and requested the academics in Uppsala/Bologna to read, consider and comment on it as if it was an academic paper. In that context Thomas CV is certainly essential. Don't you agree?


    Only the argument is important, not the CV. Appeal to authority and ad hominem fallacies depend on the CV, science depends on the reasoning and the data.