I suppose that for some, ignorance equals improbable but for me, ignorance is just that not knowing; and I don't know.
In other words, Ignorance is bliss
Is it for you? Speaking from first hand experience are you? How nice! For me, ignorance is not knowing.
Anyway, since this is a new thread, I will recap my position.
* LENR is improbable.
Ok. What is your "probability scale"? What probability is "improbable"? <50%? <5%? What is the basis for your judgement as to numbers. Do you KNOW something or are your prejudices showing?
* If LENR processes are real, the claimed orders of magnitude improvement in LENR by Rossi is improbable.
* The claimed cheap isotopic separation process of Rossi is improbable.
Seperation? Anyone else see anywhere that Rossi spoke about seperation? Enrichment I remember. Not seperation. Anyone? Is seedload here whacking at strawmen?
* The forgotten claim that shipping was held up because of a container is improbable.
* The coincidental natural isotopic ratios of copper produced is improbable.
If seen two totally opposite secondhand reports of isotope ratios. Link to first-hand report please?
* If a real process, the highly defensive and angry replies to any serious questions is improbable.
Hey, he may just have the same "defensive" personality as ChrisMB and Chikva. You have seen how nasty they were to each other when it seems they were agreeing on most things.
* If a real discovery, the lack of scientific rigor in successive demonstrations is improbable.
Sorry, this is just nonsense. "Demonstrations" are not intended to be "scientific".
* If a real discovery, the extended time of the UOB research project is improbable..
This does seem an odd business decision.
* The idea that only specific isotopes of Nickel would 'react' is improbable.
Your scientific rationale for this is?
* The name "Rossi Tires" on the door is improbable.
So you would be surprised to see a sign for "Smith and Sons Tires" in the UK? The names have equivalent frequency I'm told.
* The naked lab is improbable.
Oh, you mean their new and as yet un-moved-into facility. Yup, no growing company EVER moves into a new facility!
* The coffee machine is improbable.
Yup, no one in Italy drinks coffee. This one is awesome!
* Given Rossi's insistence that the 1MW plant will be proof, the fact that the 'customer' for the plant is the producer of ECATs makes this claim of proof an improbable position.
Actually it makes it ENORMOUSLY likely, just not very reliable!
* If real, Rossi and Focardi disagreeing on the basic reaction at this late date is improbable.
Why? Seems no-one is positive how this thing works, if it works. Absolute uniformity of opinion on said process would be fishy to me.
* Claims of spies etc. are improbable.
Ridiculous! Claims of spies are absolute. He did so claim. The existance of spies is less absolute!
Of course that merely shows his emotional state not his mental capability.
* Claims of designing a self destruct mechanism for home models are improbable.
Similar to the above, claims of designing a self destruct mechanism for home models are absolute, but said claims seem self destructive to his purposes to me!
* The inconsistent claims of filed patents vs. company secret on the secret sauce are improbable..
Unh, what "inconsistant claims" please?
* Given the history of Rossi, the idea that he has not gone straight is improbable..
Unh, given your pattern above, don't you mean that the idea that he HAS gone straight is improbable? Well, if that is your opinion.
No, I don't think we are ignorant at all. We have a basis to draw conclusions that various aspects of this whole business are improbable. .
Wonderful. Please share your basis with me. Remember Alices Restaurant with the "8x10 Glossy Photos with the circles and the arrows and the paragraph on the back of each one tellin what it's all about to be used as evidence" for your "basis". Most of the stuff above seems a bit... flakey?
Previously, my arguments were individually opposed based on the fact that each of the above is possible. For example, it is indeed possible that they are building ECATS in an apartment in Miami just like Apple did in the garage. Yes, it is possible that Rossi has found a cheap method of isotopic enrichment. Yes, it is possible, that Rossi is really being pursued by spies, is really building a self destruct mechanism to stick in peoples homes, is really held up by a shipping container, etc.
Yes, individually, all of the above is possible.
But, we are also not ignorant to the math of probability. Individually improbable things, while possible, quickly approach impossible when considered together.
Absolutely true, if your individual things had any basis for "probability" attached to them. But I see little if any basis.
Now, if you had said, unconvincing...
Seedload. I am not personally holding out much hope for this thing. But being a contrarian I just naturally ask folks to put-up or shut-up when they make technical statements. And "probability" is a technical statement. What are the bases for your technical statements? If it is just your "opinion", would you be so kind as to use the term "unlikely" rather than "improbable"? "Unlikely" is a non-technical word and no-one can reasonably argue with you.