Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Validation of Electrical Power Generation by Second - Generation CIHT Technology
Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry Rowan University, Glassboro, NJ, ^ | N ovember, 2011 _ | K.V. Ramanujachary

Posted on 01/23/2014 12:42:27 PM PST by Kevmo

Validation of Electrical Power Generation by Second - Generation CIHT Technology

Valuator:
K.V. Ramanujachary
Professor
Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry
Rowan University, Glassboro, NJ, 08096

Submitted to the BlackLight Power Corporation

Evaluators Signature:
Date : _ N ovember, 2011 __
2 BLACKLIGHT POWER ( BLP )
CIHT CELL VALIDATION (November 2011)
The present report deals with the studies aimed at validating several second generation CIHT (Catalyst - Induced - Hydrino - Transition) cells that were assembled at the BLP facility. In contrast to th e first generation cells, BLP has identified a novel proprietary electrolyte consisting of earth - abundant and eco - friendly chemicals.

All t ests were performed at BlackLight Power, Inc. at their Cranbury, NJ laboratories . The primary focus of the vali dation is to analyze the net electrical production from proprietary CIHT cells using the hydrogen fuel from water and supply it to the electrochemical reaction .

The electrical output was corrected for highest energy possible for any known conventional e lectrochemical reactions based on the initial and final analysis of the cell contents. The electrical energy balances were performed with multiple state - of - the - art battery testing systems (Arbin BT 2000) that were calibrated to high accuracy (<0.1% error) at the factory and confirmed using a digital oscilloscope at BLP. The net electrical energy gain determined in this manner for many different systems, configurations, and modes of operation were 162%, 340%, 385%, 167%, 195%, 456%, 735%, 182%, 151%, 425% and 186%.

Typically, steady electrical power was continuously measured from the cell for more than a week and up to more than 30 days before the cell was stopped and the cell contents were analyzed by a cascade of characterization tools . These tests wer e necessary for an accurate determination of potential chemical change s . Controls were processed under the same protocol and analyzed using the same analytical instruments in triplicate. Measurements included weight change of the active electrode (anode) and any compositional change of the electrolyte by compositional analysis using ICP, XRF and XRD.

Special systems were run with controlled mass flow to rule out the possibility of hypothetical conventional energy contributions . ‘

“Hydrino” pro duct was identified by the presence of an up field - shifted NMR peak characteristic of reduced - radius (lower - energy) hydrogen. Each CIHT cell comprised a set of metal electrodes and an ionically conductive electrolyte. W ater supplied as vapor to the cell or extracted from air , from which hydrogen was generated by electrolysis , appears to be the source of electric energy output . Due to the electrochemistry occurring in the cell, an electric current flowed through a load of the electrical testing inst rument with an internal ion flow of the electrolyte completing the electric circuit. The mechanism of operation appears to involve specific chemicals of the electrolyte that formed the catalyst and atomic hydrogen during electron and ion flow needed for t he production of electricity. The excess electricity observed was consistent with the electrochemical production of low - energy form of hydrogen providing the energy source.

Indeed, the electrical energy out surpassed by multiples the electricity required to generate the hydrogen fuel from water .

The cell was continuously regenerative and operated at constant power output for extended periods . The mass and energy balance s were performed on each cell. The electrode at which the electrical power was devel oped (anode) was weighed to rule out the possibility of any reaction that could give rise to excess electrical energy observed in the present CIHT cells. The electrolyte was also carefully analyzed by elemental analysis. Controls comprised the same start ing compositions and treatments as the electrical - power - producing anodes and electrolytes.

The cell used nontoxic , earth - abundant commodity chemicals, and the system operating conditions were similar to those of exi s ting technologies such as batte ries and fuel cells . However , the stand - alone generation of electricity from water reported here is truly exceptional . The confirmatory electrical and analytical data and analysis is available upon request.


TOPICS: Science
KEYWORDS: canr; cmns; coldfusion; lenr
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-89 next last

1 posted on 01/23/2014 12:42:27 PM PST by Kevmo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: dangerdoc; citizen; Liberty1970; Red Badger; Wonder Warthog; PA Engineer; glock rocks; free_life; ..

The Cold Fusion/LENR Ping List

http://www.freerepublic.com/tag/coldfusion/index?tab=articles


http://lenr-canr.org/

Vortex-L
http://tinyurl.com/pxtqx3y


2 posted on 01/23/2014 12:43:09 PM PST by Kevmo ("A person's a person, no matter how small" ~Horton Hears a Who)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: All; y'all; Ping; et al

Interesting discussion on Vortex-L

———————————www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l@eskimo.com/msg89246.html————————

RE: [Vo]:Mill’s theory behind the hydrino

Jones Beene Thu, 23 Jan 2014 08:57:22 -0800

From: Stefan Israelsson Tampe

Also if there any serious issues with his math I would like to know, else he
deserves respect, with or without the hydrino.

He is a brilliant thinker, yet the great disappointment in Mills (from most
of us on this forum) has been in is his failure to deliver, as an
experimentalist. He has not lived up to his claims and there is a level of
dishonesty which shows through. IOW his theory does not make predictions
which have led to real devices, at least not in the past but he insists that
they have.

For instance, there was an early charge of plagiarism in the first versions
of the theory, but it was in details which were not greatly relevant. In
fact, it was bulk plagiarism of the cut-and-paste variety - and it was
quickly removed from later versions.

However, the most telling historical issue for me in the Mills story is that
several of his early co-authors, all PhDs - moved on to other jobs, often
lesser paying jobs in Academia.

That would be unheard of in a situation where the staff really thought that
a major breakthrough in Physics was eminent. I think that they were
disillusioned about the growing gap between what was “on paper” in the
theory - and what was turning up in the Laboratory.

I have not the least doubt that Mills experiments have resulted in
radioactive ash, and that he has hidden this from the public, and the R&D
staff was sworn to silence.

Finding even tiny amounts of radioactive ash is absolutely devastating to
Mills in the IP arena. It can, and will, cost him millions, possibly
billions . and he has dug himself into a hole on the issue - since it keeps
him from actual 3rd party independent testing without incredible NDAs. There
is not a single true replication of his work without these restrictions.

The fractional hydrogen redundancy reaction can be described as one which is
a predecessor state to LENR, in my estimation - and Mills is powerless to do
anything to change that basic fact - other than to hide it, since it kills
his IP.

This kind of thing really turns off young PhDs who want to dig for the whole
truth.

Jones


3 posted on 01/23/2014 12:45:59 PM PST by Kevmo ("A person's a person, no matter how small" ~Horton Hears a Who)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

Comment #4 Removed by Moderator

To: Kevmo

Inch by inch, step by step, we get a little closer every day.


5 posted on 01/23/2014 12:48:07 PM PST by UCANSEE2 (I forgot what my tagline was supposed to say)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

“The cell used nontoxic , earth - abundant commodity chemicals,”

I like how they use environmentalism to help sell the scam.


6 posted on 01/23/2014 1:34:11 PM PST by Moonman62 (The US has become a government with a country, rather than a country with a government.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kevmo

It seems that Jones Beene’s concerns have been addressed by this validation memo


7 posted on 01/23/2014 1:39:49 PM PST by bigbob (The best way to get a bad law repealed is to enforce it strictly. Abraham Lincoln)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: UCANSEE2

You never know. The Prince Philip cult actually got to meet the object of their worship in spite of being deluded fools.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prince_Philip_Movement


8 posted on 01/23/2014 1:40:47 PM PST by Moonman62 (The US has become a government with a country, rather than a country with a government.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

The hot-fusion boys used similar language in their scam. The difference is that maybe cold fusion accounts for $60M, but hot fusion accounts for %600B in their scam, 4 orders of magnitude worse. Do we see skeptopaths generating 4 orders of magnitude more invective on hot-fusion threads? Nope. Because fraud isn’t really their concern.


9 posted on 01/23/2014 1:57:55 PM PST by Kevmo ("A person's a person, no matter how small" ~Horton Hears a Who)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Kevmo

Sounds too good to be true.....therefore....

Almost like free energy.
Not going to hold my breath.


10 posted on 01/23/2014 4:45:16 PM PST by nvscanman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: nvscanman

So you think that a

Professor
Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry
Rowan University

is a crackpot or made mistakes in his validation?


11 posted on 01/23/2014 4:47:55 PM PST by Kevmo ("A person's a person, no matter how small" ~Horton Hears a Who)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Kevmo

No way of knowing if he is exaggerating,lying, mistaken or angling for
research $$$. The claims made are extraordinary....approaching the
“free energy/perpetual motion” territory. Extraordinary claims require
extraordinary proof. Till multiple independent competent research
facilities corroborate and successfully duplicate these results they are
to be considered unproven.


12 posted on 01/23/2014 5:11:56 PM PST by nvscanman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: nvscanman

He’s most likely “angling for
research $$$”.

The claims made are not all that extraordinary in the light of 14,700 replications of the P-F Anomalous Heat Event.


13 posted on 01/23/2014 5:16:26 PM PST by Kevmo ("A person's a person, no matter how small" ~Horton Hears a Who)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: nvscanman

As far as I can tell Black Light paid this professor for his signature on a piece of paper that resides at Black Light, not Rowan University as the OP would have us believe. Furthermore, this little piece of cargo cult science took place over two years ago. You’d think that huge amounts of power from cheap water would have overtaken the markets by now.


14 posted on 01/23/2014 7:21:12 PM PST by Moonman62 (The US has become a government with a country, rather than a country with a government.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Moonman62

As I said.....I’m not holding my breath.


15 posted on 01/23/2014 8:43:56 PM PST by nvscanman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

You’d think that huge amounts of power from cheap water would have overtaken the markets by now.
***Then the same concept applies to controlled-hot-fusion. You’d think that Mr. Fusion boxes would have overtaken markets by now.


16 posted on 01/24/2014 2:42:44 PM PST by Kevmo ("A person's a person, no matter how small" ~Horton Hears a Who)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

If only Rossi had been working on hot fusion........


17 posted on 01/24/2014 4:59:16 PM PST by Toddsterpatriot (Science is hard. Harder if you're stupid.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Toddsterpatriot

Rossi could learn a thing or two about running cons from the Controlled-Hot-Fusion (CHF) boys. His corner-turn is a couple of years; theirs has always been 50 years. He’s supposedly “conned” guvmints of a few million per your assertion; they’ve conned our guvmint of hundreds of $Billions. He has to turn over IP, actually have something to sell; they’ve produced zero IP to sell. Yup, those CHF frauds are far better con artists than Rossi ever could be.


18 posted on 02/04/2014 12:08:23 AM PST by Kevmo ("A person's a person, no matter how small" ~Horton Hears a Who)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Kevmo
Rossi could learn a thing or two about running cons from the Controlled-Hot-Fusion (CHF) boys.

Right, because no one has ever seen useful amounts of energy produced by fusion.

19 posted on 02/04/2014 5:56:06 AM PST by Toddsterpatriot (Science is hard. Harder if you're stupid.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Kevmo

What does Jennifer think about this article?


20 posted on 02/05/2014 1:20:57 PM PST by TexasGator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Toddsterpatriot

Right, because no one has ever seen useful amounts of energy produced by fusion.
***We’re talking CONTROLLED-Hot-Fusion here, sparky. Not the HBomb stuff, of which the usefulness amounts to killing millions of people. No one has generated useful amounts of CHF even though hundreds of $billions have been poured into it. Geeshh, it’s like arguing with 2 year olds.


21 posted on 02/05/2014 8:16:16 PM PST by Kevmo ("A person's a person, no matter how small" ~Horton Hears a Who)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: TexasGator

Again, geesh, it’s like arguing with 2 year olds.


22 posted on 02/05/2014 8:16:47 PM PST by Kevmo ("A person's a person, no matter how small" ~Horton Hears a Who)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Kevmo
Right, because no one has ever seen useful amounts of energy produced by fusion.

It's like arguing with a deaf 2 year old.

23 posted on 02/05/2014 8:46:23 PM PST by Toddsterpatriot (Science is hard. Harder if you're stupid.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Toddsterpatriot

By ALL FREEPING MEANS, post where ANY amount of Useful Energy has been produced by CHF. H-Bombs are not an example of CHF. But if you want to argue from that premise, it will be useful for the asked & answered offsite knowlege storage & reference.


24 posted on 02/05/2014 9:02:04 PM PST by Kevmo ("A person's a person, no matter how small" ~Horton Hears a Who)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Kevmo

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_energy


25 posted on 02/05/2014 9:27:12 PM PST by Toddsterpatriot (Science is hard. Harder if you're stupid.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Toddsterpatriot

That is a demonstration of supposedly Controlled Hot Fusion? Where does ‘fusion’ occur within those solar cells? It doesn’t. Everyone knows that except you. Your CHF fraud boys produced Zip, as usual.


26 posted on 02/05/2014 9:32:41 PM PST by Kevmo ("A person's a person, no matter how small" ~Horton Hears a Who)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Kevmo
Right, because no one has ever seen useful amounts of energy produced by fusion.

Deaf and blind.

27 posted on 02/06/2014 6:08:38 AM PST by Toddsterpatriot (Science is hard. Harder if you're stupid.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Toddsterpatriot

There is nothing controlled nor useful about an H-Bomb. It is UNcontrolled. It’s the difference between 13th century Chinese gunpowder bombs and 21st century Internal Combustion Engines. 700 years difference, control vs. uncontrolled. But someone as ignorant as you is calling an Hbomb “useful” amounts of energy produced. Go ahead and stand next to one and let it go off to prove to us how useful it is to you.


28 posted on 02/06/2014 1:57:29 PM PST by Kevmo ("A person's a person, no matter how small" ~Horton Hears a Who)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Kevmo
Damn, you're denser than osmium.

There is nothing controlled nor useful about an H-Bomb. It is UNcontrolled.

I've never heard of an H-bomb going off accidentally. Have you?

I'm pretty sure most H-bomb tests were successful.

Seems controlled to me.

But someone as ignorant as you is calling an Hbomb “useful” amounts of energy produced.

Can you read? Right, because no one has ever seen useful amounts of energy produced by fusion.

Are you under the impression that the only fusion we've seen was in an H-bomb?

29 posted on 02/06/2014 5:24:24 PM PST by Toddsterpatriot (Science is hard. Harder if you're stupid.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Toddsterpatriot

Damn, you’re denser than osmium.
***which would make you as stupid as a bag of rocks.

I’ve never heard of an H-bomb going off accidentally. Have you?
***Case in point, right here. Just look how incredibly stupid your argument is. Your argument is that because you can decide WHEN it’s going to blow up, that is an example of CHF. So, after hundreds of $billions trying to control this reaction, the best we have is an on switch, no off switch, and entire populations vaporized. That is YOUR example of controlled hot fusion, a hot fusion car, a hot fusion water heater, a hot fusion jet pack. I’d be more than happy to stand for an hour next to a Cold Fusion reaction; and it would make me happy to see you stand for just a few seconds next to your shining example of Controlled Hot Fusion while it’s turned on, as long as I’m a continent away.

I’m pretty sure most H-bomb tests were successful.
***And we’ve spent hundreds of $billions trying to control that reaction so we can use it. By your own admission, the only “control” we have over the reaction is when to turn it on. In the meantime, guys like Hagelstein are running Cold Fusion cells for MONTHS. My goodness, it just boggles the imagination to see someone so stupid as to promote an atom bomb as an example of a controlled, useful reaction. You can’t be that stupid. But when we look over your posts, yup, you are that stupid.

Seems controlled to me.
***Yup. You ARE that stupid.

Kevmo: But someone as ignorant as you is calling an Hbomb “useful” amounts of energy produced.

Toddiot: Can you read? Right, because no one has ever seen useful amounts of energy produced by fusion.
***So, it’s so useful to you? Hundreds of $billions have been spent trying to control the power of the hbomb, and what do we have to show for it? The fact you can SEE it from afar? That’s USEFUL? Keep in mind this is money spent well after the HBomb was produced. Its aim was directly to turn it into a useful and controlled energy source. The best we have is that we can stand 100 miles away and SEE an HBomb go off. And that’s supposedly hundreds of $millions well spent. Only a stupid person could hold such a position. And you DO hold such a position.

Are you under the impression that the only fusion we’ve seen was in an H-bomb?
***No, we’ve seen fusion in that star that hangs in the sky. So, now your position is that we’ve spent hundreds of $billions trying to control this HBomb reaction and the best we have to show for controlled hot fusion is that you can go outside and look at the sun? WTF? What was that money fraudulently spent on? We could go and look at the sun long before that money was spent, and if only 2% of it were spent on Cold Fusion instead of CHF, we’d have LENR cars by now.


30 posted on 02/06/2014 6:08:18 PM PST by Kevmo ("A person's a person, no matter how small" ~Horton Hears a Who)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Kevmo
You said, "There is nothing controlled nor useful about an H-Bomb. It is UNcontrolled". You have an example of an uncontrolled H-Bomb?

Your argument is that because you can decide WHEN it’s going to blow up, that is an example of CHF.

Nope. Not even close. Just refuting your silly claim.

Can you read? Right, because no one has ever seen useful amounts of energy produced by fusion.

So, it’s so useful to you?

You've never seen useful energy produced by fusion? I'd like to alter my previous claim, you're denser than neutronium.

No, we’ve seen fusion in that star that hangs in the sky.

Finally! Now go back to my original statement, "Right, because no one has ever seen useful amounts of energy produced by fusion".

Now you see how stupid your subsequent hissy fit was?

We could go and look at the sun long before that money was spent,

Yes, and the sun is proof that fusion can produce useful amounts of energy.

What is the proof for "cold-fusion"? Rossi's (H2O2) reactor? LOL!

31 posted on 02/06/2014 6:44:12 PM PST by Toddsterpatriot (Science is hard. Harder if you're stupid.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Toddsterpatriot

Kevmo: We could go and look at the sun long before that money was spent,

Toddiot: Yes, and the sun is proof that fusion can produce useful amounts of energy.
***Yup, if you’re 93 million miles away. And the fact that we spent hundreds of $billions and all we have to show for it is the ability to look at the sun and bask in it, WTF was that money spent on? We KNOW that CHF funds were NOT spent on solar power cells. We are no closer to controlling Hot Fusion than we are to time travel, but we’ve got a multihundred $Billion bill to pay. We paid for absolutely NOTHING. It was a fraud.

What is the proof for “cold-fusion”? Rossi’s (H2O2) reactor? LOL!
***All Rossi, all the time. The proof for cold fusion is in the 14000 replications. And other strong evidence,


32 posted on 02/06/2014 6:51:17 PM PST by Kevmo ("A person's a person, no matter how small" ~Horton Hears a Who)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Kevmo
Kevmoron: ***All Rossi, all the time. The proof for cold fusion is in the 14000 replications. And other strong evidence,

Well, you did say his reactor produced 100 times more energy than any possible chemical reaction. That is, unless he used dilute H2O2.

33 posted on 02/06/2014 6:58:00 PM PST by Toddsterpatriot (Science is hard. Harder if you're stupid.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: Toddsterpatriot

Feel free to prove that. Notably, you have not. You won’t log onto such a thread because your position is utter bullshit. If it was H2O2 all along, someone would have smelled it. In a way, this is just yet another extension of your incredibly inane ignorance.

How to Prove that the Rossi/Focardi eCAT LENR is Real (or Fake)
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2730401/posts
Sun 05 Jun 2011 07:52:15 PM PDT · by Kevmo · 55 replies
LENR.QUMBO.com ^ | April 6, 2011 | Alan Fletcher


34 posted on 02/06/2014 7:10:37 PM PST by Kevmo ("A person's a person, no matter how small" ~Horton Hears a Who)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: Toddsterpatriot

Rossi’s reactor IP is selling for $20M. What is the CHF IP selling for? Nothing. After hundreds of $billions spent trying to control the HBomb reaction, we got absolutely NOTHING.

But we can all console ourselves by going out and looking at the sun as if it were evidence that we spent money worthwhile. What a bunch of bowlsheet.


35 posted on 02/06/2014 7:13:46 PM PST by Kevmo ("A person's a person, no matter how small" ~Horton Hears a Who)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Toddsterpatriot

You’ve never seen useful energy produced by fusion? I’d like to alter my previous claim, you’re denser than neutronium.
***No useful energy produced by the CHF fraudboys that we spent hundreds of $billions. By your own admission, all we have from that effort is the ability to go outside and look at the sun, as if we couldn’t do that before those hundreds of $billions were fraudulently spent.


36 posted on 02/06/2014 7:17:35 PM PST by Kevmo ("A person's a person, no matter how small" ~Horton Hears a Who)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Kevmo
Feel free to prove that. Notably, you have not.

I already proved that your 100 times claim was ridiculous.

Oh, right, it was 1000 times. Still funny!

37 posted on 02/06/2014 7:43:12 PM PST by Toddsterpatriot (Science is hard. Harder if you're stupid.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Kevmo
But we can all console ourselves by going out and looking at the sun as if it were evidence that we spent money worthwhile.

When you find the post where I said we got our moneys worth on fusion research, be sure to post the link.

38 posted on 02/06/2014 7:45:45 PM PST by Toddsterpatriot (Science is hard. Harder if you're stupid.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: Toddsterpatriot

You have not proved Jack Shiite.


39 posted on 02/06/2014 7:45:57 PM PST by Kevmo ("A person's a person, no matter how small" ~Horton Hears a Who)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: Toddsterpatriot

You can play games all you like. Your stupidity has outshined others skeptopaths by a considerable margin, and it will be reposted for the benefit of others for a long time.


40 posted on 02/06/2014 7:47:27 PM PST by Kevmo ("A person's a person, no matter how small" ~Horton Hears a Who)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: Kevmo
I proved how simple it would be for H2O2 to produce

"1000 times more energy than any known chemical reaction"

LOL!

41 posted on 02/06/2014 7:51:48 PM PST by Toddsterpatriot (Science is hard. Harder if you're stupid.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: Kevmo

Make sure you repost my refutation of your silly claim.


42 posted on 02/06/2014 7:52:23 PM PST by Toddsterpatriot (Science is hard. Harder if you're stupid.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: Toddsterpatriot

You’re welcome to log onto those science threads. Notably, you anti-science Luddites have been absent on such threads.

Think about this: Suppose LENR breaks out this year. Everyone praises this triumph. Later on, they wonder why there was such opposition. What was it that motivated such meanspirited bandwagon jumpers? They will have your posts as an example of some incredible idiot who thought that HBombs were an example of CHF. Thanks.


43 posted on 02/06/2014 7:56:31 PM PST by Kevmo ("A person's a person, no matter how small" ~Horton Hears a Who)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: Toddsterpatriot

LOL indeed. The real figure is that the INDEPENDENTLY tested energy density is 10k times that of gasoline. Thank you SO MUCH for displaying your incredible ignorance.


44 posted on 02/06/2014 7:57:43 PM PST by Kevmo ("A person's a person, no matter how small" ~Horton Hears a Who)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: Kevmo
They will have your posts as an example of some incredible idiot who thought that HBombs were an example of CHF.

Please review my posts. Let me know which one claimed "HBombs were an example of CHF". LOL!

45 posted on 02/06/2014 7:59:01 PM PST by Toddsterpatriot (Science is hard. Harder if you're stupid.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: Toddsterpatriot

Best of luck trying to refute it. For POSTERITY.


46 posted on 02/06/2014 7:59:39 PM PST by Kevmo ("A person's a person, no matter how small" ~Horton Hears a Who)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: Kevmo
The real figure is that the INDEPENDENTLY tested energy density is 10k times that of gasoline.

To which of Rossi's tests are you referring?

47 posted on 02/06/2014 8:00:58 PM PST by Toddsterpatriot (Science is hard. Harder if you're stupid.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: Toddsterpatriot

Please review
***Please answer my questions — HONESTLY. You won’t, so why should I go fetch like you ask?


48 posted on 02/06/2014 8:01:59 PM PST by Kevmo ("A person's a person, no matter how small" ~Horton Hears a Who)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: Toddsterpatriot

The latest INDEPENDENTLY verified tests in which 7 INDEPENDENT scientists did the measurements.

Gee, you really are pretty stupid. No doubt your stupidity is representative of LENR Skeptopaths, and relatively easily refuted and ridiculed. Posterity thanks you.


49 posted on 02/06/2014 8:05:09 PM PST by Kevmo ("A person's a person, no matter how small" ~Horton Hears a Who)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: Kevmo
You won’t, so why should I go fetch like you ask?

You're lying about my posts, on this very thread.

You can't fetch, because I never said what you claimed.

50 posted on 02/06/2014 8:06:04 PM PST by Toddsterpatriot (Science is hard. Harder if you're stupid.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-89 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson