Posted on 07/07/2012 7:25:43 AM PDT by Kevmo
I use the same criteria for "to me" as you use about posts that mention but are not about "Rossi". Your quibble is a distinction without a difference, but completely reflects your usual intellectual dishonesty. DO NOT POST TO OR ABOUT ME. And I will grant you the same "courtesy".
No deal.
The stuff you post here on FR needs to be questioned and criticized.
Since Kevmo already reported me to the mods last night, and I'm still here, I'm going to assume that my questioning and criticism is acceptable.
In return, if you want to post about me, or criticize what I say, then I'm fine with that. Just don't try to squelch my speech that FR seems to find acceptable.
Kevmo: Naturally, since Rossi has dominated the LENR news in the last 18 months, there are a lot of articles mentioning Rossi. But the article is about LENR, not Rossi.
Toddriot:
Maybe if you posted fewer articles mentioning Rossi, you’d get fewer comments about his fraudulent past (and present).
***You just blithely ignore the sentence, post your bowlsheet and continue forward. Your attempts at minimally critical thinking have proven incredibly inane.
Horseshit. If you actually engaged in honest scientific criticism, it would be one thing. You WILL NOT do that. I've made more than a good faith effort to get you to discuss the science, and you have used every tactic imaginable to avoid doing so.
You and those like you are WORSE than Rossi. If Rossi dupes a few investors, that is simply money. You skeptopaths are destroying the honest, open practice of science.
But obviously in your case, the only answer is the time-honored one of "don't feed the trolls". I'm done with anything whatsoever to do with you.
It's true, there have been lots of stories about his fraud.
Your attempts at minimally critical thinking have proven incredibly inane.
Coming from you, hilarious.
“Correlation of excess power and helium production during D2O and H2O electrolysis using palladium cathodes”
peer reviewed paper, published in 1993:
http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/MilesMcorrelatio.pdf
replicated in 2002 (among several others) by these folks:
“EXPERIMENTAL EVIDENCE OF 4HE PRODUCTION IN A COLD FUSION EXPERIMENT”
http://www.lenr-canr.org/acrobat/DeNinnoAexperiment.pdf
Here is (a very small part of) the science.....show me the voodoo.
This is much more likely to be successful than fusing nickel and hydrogen.
That appears to be a report made on the ENEA website, not an article from a peer reviewed journal.
This is much more likely to be successful than fusing nickel and hydrogen.
***It is utterly amazing to see just how dense you are. The excess power comes from the same fusing process in Deuterium as it does in the D/Pd system as it does in the H/Ni system, and the ONLY way to get helium production from either process is through fusion.
At a certain point, I suppose all you deserve is pity and the thanks for bumping the thread.
At a certain point, you’ve demonstrated that all you deserve is pity and the thanks for bumping the thread.
The same fusing process? D fuses to form He.
Your favorite fraud claims to produce copper.
and the ONLY way to get helium production from either process is through fusion.
Now Rossi is producing helium?
At a certain point, I suppose all you deserve is pity and the thanks for bumping the thread.
I'm just glad you've stopped whining.
thanks for bumping the thread
Don’t cry.
I don't believe that Rossi "is" fusing nickel and hydrogen. IMO, that is misdirection to lead any competitors off on a wild goose chase. I've seen at least one article that agrees with that view (I "think" it was from Dr. Godel at Brillouin). He believes (as do I) that the final product in Rossi's case is He4, and lays out the scenario by which that happens.
I see, so when I mention the unlikelihood of Rossi's lies, that makes me a Luddite.
Thanks, now it all makes sense.
Actually, it is the explanation that makes the most sense of all available data. The core of Rossi's claims are true....he is generating large amounts of energy from LENR. This central fact is attested to by a large number of independent witnesses in many demonstrations (the skeptopaths deny this). Another fact is that Rossi's patent protection is weak to non-existent. A third high probability is that Rossi's system is not sufficiently stable for really long-term operation. So, it makes absolute sense for Rossi to mislead potential competitors by feeding misdirection on various details.
Like it or not, the above scenario fits more of the publicly avialable data than any other.
Unless he allows independent testing of his "coolant", I'm not convinced it isn't a chemical reaction.
Another fact is that Rossi's patent protection is weak to non-existent.
His credibility too.
Like it or not, the above scenario fits more of the publicly avialable data than any other.
Complete fraud is still more likely.
No possible chemical reaction can provide the level of energy measured. Despite all the hoopla to the contrary, the measurements were NOT either badly done or inaccurate. In this area I am a genuine expert. The supposed "errors" are all bullshit.
"His credibility too."
Which is why the observations of the different attendees are important evidence. It isn't just Rossi.
"Complete fraud is still more likely."
Based on the totality of available data, no.
You are, of course, free to believe whatever you like, as I am, despite the self-appointed posting police.
"Unless he allows independent testing of his "coolant", I'm not convinced it isn't a chemical reaction."Doesn't match what you're saying here:No possible chemical reaction can provide the level of energy measured. Despite all the hoopla to the contrary, the measurements were NOT either badly done or inaccurate. In this area I am a genuine expert. The supposed "errors" are all bullshit.
"His credibility too."
Which is why the observations of the different attendees are important evidence. It isn't just Rossi.
"Complete fraud is still more likely."
Based on the totality of available data, no.
You and those like you are WORSE than Rossi. If Rossi dupes a few investors, that is simply money.You seem to have your doubts.
How can you say that? How many gallons of "coolant" did he push though the system? What if it wasn't coolant?
Which is why the observations of the different attendees are important evidence. It isn't just Rossi.
If they're only looking with their eyes, how good is the evidence?
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.