10KW LENR demonstrator (new thread)

[Axil]

Why an up and coming business man with a new type of product should be hamstrung by morality

Axil, that seems to be your argument essence and it is confusing to me, are you saying Rossi shouldn't have to be moral because others are getting away with being immoral? Your logic still has me completely baffled, but thanks for illuminating a Rossi supporter's thinking by giving us your explanations and logic.

Re: Dirty tricks
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dirty_tricks

Dirty tricks are unethical, duplicitous, slanderous or illegal tactics employed to destroy or diminish the effectiveness of political or business opponents. The term "dirty trick" can also be used to refer to an underhanded technique to get ahead of an opponent (such as sabotage or disregarding rules of engagement).

There is an internet business service conducted by persons or companies who are contracted by other companies to either boost their own product or discredit the product of a competitor through positive or negative endorsements paid for by the company who benefits from these endorsements.

One example is the ploy that the oil industry uses to discredit climate change research.

The nuclear industry also is affected by this tactic.

I suspect that Rossi is slandered by parties that pay people to do so.

Any anonymous party can say what they want without consequence to disadvantage a company or person.

Because of this character of the internet, I always evaluate such opinion as advertisement based on referenced proof provided by the advertisement supporting the accusation or endorsement.

[Axil]

Here is an important opinion piece. MIT professor Hagelstein reveals his cynical, sarcastic side. He attacks science by vote, and science by Wikipedia, among other things. See:



Hagelstein, P.L., On Theory and Science Generally in Connection with the Fleischmann-Pons Experiment. Infinite Energy, 2013(108).



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

ABSTRACT:

I was encouraged to contribute to an editorial generally on the topic of theory in science, in
connection with publication of a paper focused on some recent ideas that Ed Storms has put forth regarding a model for how excess heat works in the Fleischmann-Pons experiment. Such a project would compete for my time with other commitments, including teaching, research and family-related commitments; so I was reluctant to take it on. On the other hand I found myself tempted, since over the years I have been musing about theory, and also about science, as a result of having been involved in research on the Fleischmann-Pons experiment. As you can see from what follows, I ended up succumbing to temptation.

[Stubby]

It is only slander if it is not true.
I can't be sure that all criticism of Rossi is well founded but certainly here people here make a big effort to back up their claims about Rossi with evidence.

Rossi is his own worst enemy he should sue himself. He has demonstrably lied or exaggerated his claims of a LENR device. The evidence comes from HIS OWN mouth in the form of blogs, emails and official reports.

As has been said, we remain skeptical about LENR in general. That is how it should be. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.

[Axil]

It is only slander if it is not true.
I can't be sure that all criticism of Rossi is well founded but certainly here people here make a big effort to back up their claims about Rossi with evidence.

Rossi is his own worst enemy he should sue himself. He has demonstrably lied or exaggerated his claims of a LENR device. The evidence comes from HIS OWN mouth in the form of blogs, emails and official reports.

As has been said, we remain skeptical about LENR in general. That is how it should be. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.

Why are you concerned if Rossi tells the truth, lies, or exaggerates? All these behaviors are just business tactics. Do you have religious underpinnings that force you to impose your value systems onto others?

If so, why Rossi and not Dimon?

But sometimes some good old boys get together in a gang and pick a target to beat up on; A mob kind of thing. It makes the gang feel good to feel the power over another. Could this be a motivation?

[sdg]

Why are you concerned if Rossi tells the truth, lies, or exaggerates? All these behaviors are just business tactics. Do you have religious underpinnings that force you to impose your value systems onto others?

Axil, really? This is such a stupid question I wonder if you are serious or just playing around?

When a person through their own public words and actions reveal themselves to be as ignorant and incompetent as Rossi and then makes self-serving claims about their own extraordinary accomplishments, and it is known that this person has a previous record of fraudulently making self-serving claims in various contexts, why would anyone NOT conclude that it is most likely that the person's claims are false?

Do you really think that Rossi's claims have better than a 5% chance of being true? I ask this earnestly, not rhetorically.

I don't really see what Dimon has to do with any of this, except maybe that there really are a lot of suckers in the world. If that's the point you are trying to make, you, me, and PT Barnum are in agreement. In fact, if you are serious in asking the quoted question, it's becoming clear that you are one of them.

What on earth does that have to do with religion, BTW??

[Axil]

Why are you concerned if Rossi tells the truth, lies, or exaggerates? All these behaviors are just business tactics. Do you have religious underpinnings that force you to impose your value systems onto others?

Axil, really? This is such a stupid question I wonder if you are serious or just playing around?

When a person through their own public words and actions reveal themselves to be as ignorant and incompetent as Rossi and then makes self-serving claims about their own extraordinary accomplishments, and it is known that this person has a previous record of fraudulently making self-serving claims in various contexts, why would anyone NOT conclude that it is most likely that the person's claims are false?

Do you really think that Rossi's claims have better than a 5% chance of being true? I ask this earnestly, not rhetorically.

I don't really see what Dimon has to do with any of this, except maybe that there really are a lot of suckers in the world. If that's the point you are trying to make, you, me, and PT Barnum are in agreement. In fact, if you are serious in asking the quoted question, it's becoming clear that you are one of them.

What on earth does that have to do with religion??

You seem to be demonstrating a inordinate amount of unwarranted hostility in this dialog.

This is oftentimes deeply rooted in the subconscious mind. To understand this negative behavior, it is good to elevate these negative feeling and their underpinnings into the conscious mind for evaluation.

I am interested in these reactions because I do not understand them. I hope that you will work with me to uncover the reasons behind these hostilities.

[sdg]

Why are you concerned if Rossi tells the truth, lies, or exaggerates? All these behaviors are just business tactics. Do you have religious underpinnings that force you to impose your value systems onto others?

Axil, really? This is such a stupid question I wonder if you are serious or just playing around?

When a person through their own public words and actions reveal themselves to be as ignorant and incompetent as Rossi and then makes self-serving claims about their own extraordinary accomplishments, and it is known that this person has a previous record of fraudulently making self-serving claims in various contexts, why would anyone NOT conclude that it is most likely that the person's claims are false?

Do you really think that Rossi's claims have better than a 5% chance of being true? I ask this earnestly, not rhetorically.

I don't really see what Dimon has to do with any of this, except maybe that there really are a lot of suckers in the world. If that's the point you are trying to make, you, me, and PT Barnum are in agreement. In fact, if you are serious in asking the quoted question, it's becoming clear that you are one of them.

What on earth does that have to do with religion??

You seem to be demonstrating a inordinate amount of unwarranted hostility in this dialog.

This is oftentimes deeply rooted in the subconscious mind. To understand this negative behavior, it is good to elevate these negative feeling and their underpinnings into the conscious mind for evaluation.

I am interested in these reactions because I do not understand them. I hope that you will work with me to uncover the reasons behind these hostilities.

LOL. It seems we now find each other fascinating. I'm trying to figure out if you are serious or not, and you are interested in my subconscious.

Likely we'll not get very far here, and it seems rather far from the topic.

But, just for fun, I've asked a question.

Do you believe Rossi's claim to have a working eCat with COP > 5 has more than a 5% chance of being true?

Answer that and I'll answer questions about my subconscious

[Stubby]

No religious underpinings here. You must have missed the signature.

I prefer the scientific method and evidence.
Rossi made a claim: My E-cat works! As with ALL CLAIMS, the claimant has the burden of proof. He must provide sufficient evidence to prove the claim.
In this regard, Rossi has failed to meet the burden of proof in many ways and many times.

[Axil]

I am not interested in Rossi as a business man one way or another, there are a million such people in America that range from saints to scum bags; with the numbers slating toward scum bags.

I am interested in the subject of LENR. I have my own opinion about what Rossi has contributed to the field as an experimenter along with another thousand people.

It does not make sense to me to talk incessantly about Rossi’s character. This has nothing to do with the subject of LENR. Such constant banter is pathological. Yet it is still interesting as part of the LENR scene.

[sdg]

I am not interested in Rossi as a business man one way or another, there are a million such people in America that range from saints to scum bags; with the numbers slating toward scum bags.

I am interested in the subject of LENR. I have my own opinion about what Rossi has contributed to the field as an experimenter along with another thousand people.

It does not make sense to me to talk incessantly about Rossi’s character. This has nothing to do with the subject of LENR. Such constant banter is pathological. Yet it is still interesting as part of the LENR scene.

Well, we agree then. I could care less about the morality of Rossi, EXCEPT as related to the legitimacy of his claims. If his claim is true, that would truly be an amazing, awesome and world-changing truth. Unfortunately, as it turns out, Rossi is both incompetent scientifically, and also a con man. That seems to me to be relevant to the plausibility of his claim.

And by the way, if, as it seems to be, he IS a con man with nothing real to show, that will have negative impacts on future LENR research over the long run. So if you are an LENR advocate, it would seem to me that you might find Rossi's "work" unhelpful.

Or maybe it's really all about my subconscious hostility that needs liberating.

By the way, I really am interested in your answer to my question. A simple Yes or No will do.

Do you think Rossi's claims to have a working eCat are true?

[Axil]

I am not interested in Rossi as a business man one way or another, there are a million such people in America that range from saints to scum bags; with the numbers slating toward scum bags.

I am interested in the subject of LENR. I have my own opinion about what Rossi has contributed to the field as an experimenter along with another thousand people.

It does not make sense to me to talk incessantly about Rossi’s character. This has nothing to do with the subject of LENR. Such constant banter is pathological. Yet it is still interesting as part of the LENR scene.

Well, we agree then. I could care less about the morality of Rossi, EXCEPT as related to the legitimacy of his claims. If his claim is true, that would truly be an amazing, awesome and world-changing truth. Unfortunately, as it turns out, Rossi is both incompetent scientifically, and also a con man. That seems to me to be relevant to the plausibility of his claim.

And by the way, if, as it seems to be, he IS a con man with nothing real to show, that will have negative impacts on future LENR research over the long run. So if you are an LENR advocate, it would seem to me that you might find Rossi's "work" unhelpful.

Or maybe it's really all about my subconscious hostility that needs liberating.

By the way, I really am interested in your answer to my question. A simple Yes or No will do.

Do you think Rossi's claims to have a working eCat are true?

Rossi has not shown system control and long duration operation. I would not buy and E-CAT until I saw these capabilities, Rossi's ability to tell the truth does not matter. Caveat emptor.

[sdg]

Rossi has not shown system control and long duration operation. I would not buy and E-CAT until I saw these capabilities, Rossi's ability to tell the truth does not matter. Caveat emptor.

I am not interested in Rossi as a business man one way or another, there are a million such people in America that range from saints to scum bags; with the numbers slating toward scum bags.

I am interested in the subject of LENR. I have my own opinion about what Rossi has contributed to the field as an experimenter along with another thousand people.

It does not make sense to me to talk incessantly about Rossi’s character. This has nothing to do with the subject of LENR. Such constant banter is pathological. Yet it is still interesting as part of the LENR scene.

Well, we agree then. I could care less about the morality of Rossi, EXCEPT as related to the legitimacy of his claims. If his claim is true, that would truly be an amazing, awesome and world-changing truth. Unfortunately, as it turns out, Rossi is both incompetent scientifically, and also a con man. That seems to me to be relevant to the plausibility of his claim.

And by the way, if, as it seems to be, he IS a con man with nothing real to show, that will have negative impacts on future LENR research over the long run. So if you are an LENR advocate, it would seem to me that you might find Rossi's "work" unhelpful.

Or maybe it's really all about my subconscious hostility that needs liberating.

By the way, I really am interested in your answer to my question. A simple Yes or No will do.

Do you think Rossi's claims to have a working eCat are true?

Rossi has not shown system control and long duration operation. I would not buy and E-CAT until I saw these capabilities, Rossi's ability to tell the truth does not matter. Caveat emptor.

Well, we're in agreement here as well regarding the eCat. But are you sure this "caveat emptor" skepticism that we both share regarding purchasing a Rossi eCat is warranted? Perhaps it is merely a product of our own hostile subconsciousness ?

But I'm still baffled as to how you can make your last statement. When Rossi says "I have many working eCats", how can you then say that his "ability to tell the truth does not matter", when determining whether or not Rossi actually has many (or even any) working eCats, given that the only evidence we have that working eCats exist is based on what Rossi said? You know, secret factories, secret customers, secret reviewers...

Do you have any credible evidence that Rossi has working eCats that doesn't depend on the _assumption_ that Rossi is speaking truthfully?

If not, why do you assume he is telling the truth given that he has both a motive to be untruthful and demonstrated inclination to be untruthful?

[ScottL]

I am not interested in Rossi as a business man one way or another, there are a million such people in America that range from saints to scum bags; with the numbers slating toward scum bags.

I am interested in the subject of LENR. I have my own opinion about what Rossi has contributed to the field as an experimenter along with another thousand people.

It does not make sense to me to talk incessantly about Rossi’s character. This has nothing to do with the subject of LENR. Such constant banter is pathological. Yet it is still interesting as part of the LENR scene.

Boo Hoo, we're pick on Rossi in a Rossi/e-cat thread, what the ever living hell does this have to do with banking or other con men? This fora is dedicated (loosely) to fusion and other forms of energy production. This specific topic is about a man, Rossi, and his claim of such a device, the e-cat. We've poked holes in his theories and demonstrations repeatedly. We've poked holes in his personal stories and history. We've done this to set precedent that he is dubious at best, and a fraud at worst. At no point did the title of this topic change to "Con Men; The Early Years" nor did this Fora change to "Banking, Guess Who is Stealing Your Money?!" So if/when it does, your previous arguments about businessmen vs. con men might be valid, until then however; it is not. If LENR as a topic is what you're looking for, well you came in all likeliness to the wrong place. I don't go to an auto-mechanic to discuss airplanes.

TLDR: THIS IS NOT A GENERAL TOPIC ABOUT LENR, BUT A TOPIC ON ROSSI'S DEMONSTRATOR

[KitemanSA]

Rossi is his own worst enemy he should sue himself. He has demonstrably lied or exaggerated his claims of a LENR device. The evidence comes from HIS OWN mouth in the form of blogs, emails and official reports.

Specific example, PLEASE!

[KitemanSA]

No religious underpinings here. You must have missed the signature.

I prefer the scientific method and evidence.
Rossi made a claim: My E-cat works! As with ALL CLAIMS, the claimant has the burden of proof. He must provide sufficient evidence to prove the claim.
In this regard, Rossi has failed to meet the burden of proof in many ways and many times.

Just FYI, Rossi is under no obligation to prove anything to you. AFAICT, you are a zero in his awareness equation. The fact that you do not find the demonstrations convincing is not proof that they are not true. It is merely proof that he has not convinced YOU. (It is also evidence that you have at least a partially working brain!)