Posts by Jack Cole

My opinion so far of BLP is that Mills doesn't even know he is running a scam. He is quite intelligent, but is so certain his theory is correct, that he extrapolates to the Nth degree from questionable experiments. Here is a slightly tongue in check example: "This experiment showed .1W excess heat, so if we scale this up 1 trillion fold, we will be terraforming Mars in 10 years."

Godes might have a little of the same problem. He is so certain of his CECR theory and the fact that he is an Electrical Engineer, that there is no way he could be mis-measuring input power right?

Ele seems to be greatly ignorant of previous explanations of flawed replications and calls people out on things that everyone already knows (that digital data collection systems exist). Then ele talks with who knows what level of inside knowledge claiming that Doral was not based on Ni+LiAlH4. It is a good thing if so, because Ni+LiAlH4 shows no credible evidence of ever working! I can provide you a long list of scores of negative replications along with evidence that improved methodology is associated with disappearance of COP>1. Can you provide any evidence of a credible experiment replicating the ecat?

Quote from AlainCo

i don't care about heat dissipation, because JMP circus is enough for me.

Please, believers, wake up! you have been fooled like I've been, like IH have been, like Dewey have been, like Ampenergo have been, like Hydrofusion have been.

Once you know you are fooled, you are no more fooled, you are just furious.

The heat dissipation issue is interesting, but personally it does not matter much to me either. There is a large body of evidence pointing to deliberate deception consistent throughout AR's career and ample evidence that his Ni+LiAlH4 system does not work. Any excess heat seen is negatively correlated with the rigor of the test, with Doral being the best example yet.

Quote from ele

I'm really worry about what is done here. I see a number of assumptions and preconceptions are taken as real facts.

Are you able to imagine that there is the possibility that Rossi is not faking and is right ?

It is about as likely as a guy who has a history of running scams discovering something of such an amazing magnitude that it has never been done before and would change the world.

Quote from ele

He hast started the trial. Now if he was faking why not just take the 11M$ and disappear ?

It's kind of like the game shows where you can keep your $100K, or keep playing for the $1M and lose it all. It seems he probably should have stopped playing.

Quote from ele

Don't you think that most of what is written here can be seen as jury poisoning attempt ?

Nah. This is a very small amount of people here. It would be very easy to find people who know nothing of AR or the ecat.

Quote from Paradigmnoia

"We recieved from your plant the amount of energy of" etc....

This is not undercharging.

In the cases of the requests I posted, it is an outright lie.

Not only are the figures wrong and a lie, it is proof positive of scamming by just writing the invoices from the fake customer!

Quote from THHuxleynew

Anyone know why ele has not yet replied to my question about the heat exchanger calculations he/she seemed interested in? You get the impression from his/her posts that he/she is technically competent, but careful avoidance of real tech questions is for me a warning sign.

It is a warning sign possibly indicating that the arguments are only designed to fool those who can be easily fooled. It is an approach eerily similar to others who came and went here in the past (with more interesting profile pics). As it is, ele attracts little attention.

Quote from Forty-Two

The "closed windows" discussion is hitting someone's nerves.

From JONP:

Damn, the Google street-view car apparently just drove by when Rossi closed the window for a moment

Yes, another painful sock puppet post, but probably still believable to those who really hope against hope that it is real. AR at least gets better at what he does over time--he grows and alters approach to give a more effective presentation. The question is can the puppet master and his puppets put on a good enough show to convince a jury or will he be revealed as the clown and snake he is? (he, he, he)

Quote from IH Fanboy

I think your persistent accusations of trolling is trolling. Once Rossi went down the JMP ruse path, it made it very difficult for him to switch things up mid-test and say "hey y'all come back here and see what we got 'cookin." The first part of the two-part blunder is that Rossi initiated the JMP ruse, probably after the disappointment with the actual Johnson Matthey. It was a fateful decision. The next part of the two-part blunder is that Darden hired the wrong experts, who understand little to nothing about LENR, and render clumsy reports. What other choice did Darden have at that point other than to believe his experts? At the point of filing the lawsuit, Rossi probably believed that JMP could escape unscathed by claiming trade secret, etc.

IHFB, I sympathize with your hope that AR's deception ends at his having actually working technology. Given everything you know, do you have a reason to think that all his deception ends at having a fake customer, fake tests (admitted previously to get out of a license agreement), and fake patents (they don't work), fake comments on his blog and elsewhere? In other words, what makes you think he is being honest about the "test" and "data" when he has so clearly lied about so many other things? I understand motivations such as those of Mats Lewan and others which is that the risk is simply too high to dismiss his claims. However, I don't agree with this position as "clean" energy is now more affordable than the dirty alternatives. We don't have to have a working LENR technology, although it certainly would be nice.

The parade of astroturfing sock puppets continues.

http://www.e-catworld.com/2017…ith-report-from-the-jonp/

Of course he cannot comment on ongoing litigation.

Fortunately, he has "readers" who can speak for him. I seriously hope IH subpoenaed the raw comment logs from his wordpress blog showing the IP addresses.

Quote

Oliver
April 8, 2017 at 1:29 PM

DT:

Thank you for your intelligent insight on the “expertise’ of the fake expert Mr Smith. It was past due.

All the best,

Oliver

Erik
April 8, 2017 at 5:31 PM

Dear DT:

Fantastic comment, you made naked the false expert.

It was time!

Cheers,

Erik

Prof
April 9, 2017 at 6:18 AM

@DT:

I totally agree with your comment. By the way, another thing that appears evident about the “expertise” of Mr Smith is that he talks of a plant he does not know: the sole serious phrase of his texts is where he says that he never saw the plant. For example, the diameters of the steam pipes are totally different from reality, as we can see from the depositions of Dr Andrea Rossi.

All the best,

Prof

Karen Monsay
April 9, 2017 at 7:38 AM

DT:

It appears Mr Smith does not know that the mass of an object is its energy while at rest.

Steve
April 9, 2017 at 8:29 AM

About the comment of DT:

the “tone” of Smith’s expertise disturbed me. It seems highly prejudicial and unprofessional. Especially for someone alleged to have 40 years of experience.

Best Regards,

Steve

Display More

Quote from IH Fanboy

So I just showed a young child, who is under the age of 8, this image and asked: "which of these has glass and which does not have glass." He quickly pointed out that the two on the left did not have glass and that the two on the right did. Then said: "that was easy."

To me, it doesn't really matter about whether there were windows or not. However, if you want to ask a question, try not to ask a loaded question. Your question to the young child had an unstated assumption/suggestion "some of the windows have glass and some don't." It's quite different to ask a question of "what do you see in this area?" While running your finger over the window area.

Quote from Shane D.

You have to admit, Rossi is good. This is a high stakes game, and he plays it like a pro.

With the recent additions to the docket, there is some interesting information. AR's tax returns for one. Strangest thing is the last corrected return filed in 2016 for 2013. Looks like he reclassified a bunch of the income. Someone who knows more about taxes should take a look. I'm not seeing the full $10M.

Pretty cool show. It really evokes thoughts in the viewer of, "who would go to all this trouble if it wasn't real?" Sure did for me. Eventually after you realize the full extent of the lies, the answer to that question is quite simply, "AR." IMO, that is his MO that he has used repeatedly, because it is so powerful.

"Who would go through all the trouble of building these huge 'refinery' towers if it didn't work?"

"Who would build this big elaborate looking thermoelectric device if it didn't work?"
"Who would build this 1 MW plant with all its apparent complication if it didn't work?"

"Who would sue IH for $267M if it didn't work?"

The answer is: AR.

It is not necessary to consider these factors if you want to stick to empirical data. There is no credible or repeatable evidence of Pxs anywhere near the levels he claims. The better the measurements the lower the Pxs (or it is null with excellent instrumentation). But I suppose there is a certain magic touch that goes along with using a stethoscope on the reactor.

There are apparently sock puppet lawyers, other sock puppets, and AR who make all the same mistakes. ;).

Quote from Thetruemonty

Why do you say these things? I think for AR this paranoia is very real so no fake involved here. And about the lying part: Have you been there and are really competent to judge?

There are three options for his "paranoia." 1) he is irrationally mistrustful, 2) he is being mistrustful as a tactic to exclude people who could discover his deception, or 3) he is rationally mistrustful because of strong forces trying to steal his secrets.

My opinion is for #2.

He tries to present as if #3 is true.

About the lying part, the patent(s) don't work. So, he is either lying in them or he is wrong and it doesn't work. Which is it? I have been there with attempting many replications and have been very involved in considering the research of others. People more competent than I have conducted many more replication attempts with null results. There have been probably 100s of null results using the formula outlined in the patent. It doesn't work. There have been a few poorly done replications indicating higher levels of excess heat, but disappeared with better methodology or could not be replicated. Could there be some small level of excess heating (COP 1 to 1.3)? The data have not yet resolved that matter.

Quote from ele

Jack we are in the Internet century. Industrial plants and experiment can be monitored from long distance. The ERV had to be present just to set up the data taking system then the fulll data was recorded and was possible for him to monitor the system with a remote connection lowering the costs for both parties Rossi and IH.

There is no need of magic here and the only thing that eventually other experts should verify is that the data was taken correctly.

When I referred to magic, I was referring to the fake paranoia of AR that someone might detect his secret formula that he lied about in his patent(s) and to IH. You think I don't know things can be monitored from a distance? Anyway, you are playing dumb about the real problem which is having real scientists see the plant in operation without AR messing with the instruments. Based on his deposition, Penon was naively trusting and incurious about most everything. I would guess this is why he was selected by AR.

Quote from ele

Is still there, sealed upon a request from IH.

Well then, let's turn it back on and have any and all experts take a look at the system without all the fake customers and absent "expert(s) responsible for validation!" But maybe they would have magic devices to divine AR's secret formula from a distance.

Quote from damn_right_yes

I already stated that here, because this is very likely the case.

I really don't think so as to Mats being paid by AR. I tend to think AR compensates others minimally, which is actually the better (and safer) tactic for maintaining a long-con. When you pay people money to espouse a viewpoint they tend to believe the money is the reason for their actions, but if they do it for minimal compensation, they believe it is because they really believe in the chosen course of action. Lot's of research on this.

Quote from Paradigmnoia

Vaughn actually pulled off a literal "your mom" response:

Oh, that's hilarious. It's always enjoyable when someone risks to crack a joke during these very serious times. A friend of mine offered the judge some M&M's while testifying as an expert witness. Only subdued internal laughter was allowed.

Quote from Dewey Weaver

The Judge's quick rejection of the Spoliation filing is a head-scratcher. Powerful evidence of destroyed emails and system hardware in the doc. Perhaps she has made up her mind and doesn't intend to waste time on anything else now that the SJ filings are in the docket.

Dewey,

I think that was just because it was not the role of the judge. Those things are supposed to be worked out in different ways (i.e., between the attorneys and ultimately the magistrate). It may yet get new wings once addressed with the magistrate.