Exploring Hydrocarbon Depletion
NEW! Members Only Forums!
Access more articles, news & discussion by becoming a PeakOil.com Member.
SeaGypsy wrote:Really Vision I would be as happy as anyone to believe the LENR hype, but my frontal lobes keep getting in the way. I just can't get THAT stoned!
Captain Thunderbolt wrote:Let me give you a few easy examples Laromi
It is an INCONTESTABLE FACT that Rossi is not a scientist.
It is an INCONTESTABLE FACT that Rossi has criminal convictions.
It is an INCONTESTABLE FACT that the Ecat demonstrations were faked.
(a dribble of warm water for furx sake!!)
You and others still refuse to acknowledge an INCONTESTABLE FACT that LENR, Cold Fusion or an elephant by another name has been proven by many, many times over, to be more than a curious event. So what if the allegations you raise against Rossi as a person or others involved in this (LENR, Cold Fusion) debate are true to what extent do they have any revelance to LENR, Cold Fusion as a scientific demonstration that other potential sources of energy will, as in the past, be exposed in in due course of this debate.
If you have INCONTESTABLE evidence of fraud or some other INCONTESTABLE evidence of wrong doing then present it.
BTW Overunity is also bollocks: even o.o99 to the Nth. Degree is still overunity and perhaps whilst not singularly useful, has however, the potential to be useful rather than some of your baseless remarks and quotations.
Whilst you are on the case, if you read further, those that had the later displeasure of calling Pons and Fleishman out did so without the anonymity of the internet. The "public" (scientific fraternity) knew personally, if you will, the people who made the remarks. Not so as you, or in fact as anyone with a mindset for making feckless noise from somewhere behind a screen of filtered and re-filtered firewalls and proxies. That is what I mean. Read the post. And, with a little more effort you may well be on your way to becoming a cynic.vision-master wrote:SG, pm me with those kind of accusations from now on. No sense in falsely labeling me in a public forum. Have you no manners at all?
SeaGypsy wrote:Hey Vision, the mods must be in on it to destroy free energy for big oil?
Rossi wasn't convicted for shoplifting but for environmental destruction and fraud. The worst kind of scammer, a vandal to boot.
SeaGypsy wrote:Carl, for arguments sake, on your many posts on 9/11 you repeatedly updated lists of Architects and Engineers and Military personnel for 9/11 truth. Now those are some serious names. And lots of them.
Where is anything like an equivalent list for LENR?
Krivit wrote:I started this writing project after attending the 10th International Conference on Cold Fusion in August 2003 in Cambridge, Mass. It was there that I met over 100 researchers from around the world and realized that they were on to something.
They were real scientists, credentialed, with long and respectable careers. They employed the same instrumentation and methodologies used in "normal" science. According to them, there was strong evidence for a new source of clean nuclear (no, this is not an oxymoron) energy. At first, it didn't make sense why their research had been ignored. As I dug deeper, the complex scientific and human drama, perhaps the greatest of our time, revealed itself.
The goal of this book is to provide everything you might want to know about the first period of cold fusion's history. What happened? Why? Who was responsible for the successes? The failures? Who knew what and when did they know it? The book is written for the nonscientific reader and provides a unique glimpse into the inner and sometimes ugly process of new science. You'll learn that scientists can be surprisingly unscientific when threatened with new ideas that challenge their funding, stature and careers. You will see how science really works - or doesn't.
Laromi wrote:As I say, a lot of folk (shills) using this forum have, in the main, been deriding Rossi not his science. As you should be well aware by now, many creditable members of the scientific community have little or no problem with acceptance of LENR science and this acceptance appears to be quickly growing in universities, Academic/scientific groups, Industry etc.
Your statements imply that this is the first time a green energy scam recieved endorsements from high level academics. It is not.Schadenfreude wrote:Nah, if something threatens their cherished doom, they start growlin like grandpa's bowels.Laromi wrote:Is green cynicism growing?
It doesn't matter if you say, "Yeah, I heard you the first time: you think it's a scam". So big deal. That idea occurs to everyone. It's only because of the endorsement of high level academics that story sprang to life on the blogosphere. Perhaps it was due, because their is so much independent activity in the LENR field its astonishing that something didn't break before.
Rossi’s Financial and Environmental Criminal HistoryAcerbi: “In the years where [Rossi] was working here, he didn’t produce a single drop of oil [from petroldragon], as far as we know. What he did was creating just a media event. He was able to persuade – in a way that I cannot explain – a good portion of public opinion, and that’s exactly what is hard for me to explain. He persuaded technicians in the field, scientists and important institutions, [inaudible] the region of Lombardia that he was able to do magic.”
“[Rossi] Claimed He Had the Formula to Transform Toxic Waste Into Black Gold, Only Succeeded in Causing Environmental Disaster. “Oil Wizard” sentenced to 8 years. Expenses Enough to Bankrupt Lacchiarella Refinery – Omar Turned Into Warehouse of Tanks Holding 57 Thousand Tons of Toxic Waste – Reclamation Costs More Than 30 Billion.”
As to why he is in not in prison, he was sent to prison several times already. As I already mentioned, he is a convicted felon. However he served his time for his past crimes and is now a free man. To-date, there has been no proof he has committed any crime regarding the E-Cat, at least none that I am aware of.lper100km wrote:K: If this man is guilty of all the duplicity you have ascribed to him, why is he still able to continue to function in the scientific field without censure? Beyond that, why is he even allowed to walk around as a free man? The scientific and legal community are not usually tolerant of scams on this kind of scale.
No miracles in science: The story of the "energy catalyzer"the fans of zero point energy and similar nonsense will promptly counter-attack by stating that the big problem with “official science” is its immobility and its lack of ability to accept new ideas. A scientist would reply that there is no problem in revisiting old paradigms, in reviewing things, updating them and sometimes even changing them at the root; that precisely this exercise is good for Science because that is the way in which it progresses the faster but all that requires time: a careful, exhaustive experimentation, controlling and measuring all the variables, isolating all the processes and describing and understanding them correctly, to make sure about how things actually work. Then, E-Cat defenders would reply that scientists are trying to block progress by raising stupid questions in an attempt of denying the reality of the great invention of 21st Century, and that with his narrow-mindedness scientists are unable to accept that there are phenomena beyond their understanding. The scientist may say then that we are not talking here of understanding but of describing in a precise way under which particular conditions we get a particular output (even if we are listing the reagents for a magic spell) and try to be sure that the phenomenon is repeatable and controlled. But at this point of the discussion, zero-point-energy fans usually switch their brains off. The carrot of a future fulfilling our more stupid hopes suspends our reason and make us prone to fall in the obvious trap.
Check out the quote from Defkalion's own white paper:Schadenfreude wrote:What about Defkalion?
The Hyperion and E-Cat are joined at the hip. If the E-Cat is a scam, then surely the Hyperion is as well. After all, Defkalion was founded to manufacture devices based on the E-Cat.Defkalion Green Technologies s.a. was established to manufacture and market products based on the E-Cat, which was invented by Andrea Rossi.
This dilemma was solved a long time ago with patents. Patenting a process involves disclosure. If you want a patent, you have to disclose. And if you decide to skip a patent, anyone can copy your device the moment you sell the first one and they take it apart. To get around this, Rossi and Defkalion claim to be selling the devices with built in self-destruct features. I don't know about you, but this is a red flag to me. You can't sell consumer devices that self destruct when you open them.lper100km wrote:He seems to be more in the product development field and it would be a mistake to expect that he would willingly share his methodology with any one. His dilemma is that if he wishes to produce this device, he has to involve others and make disclosures. He is not obliged to make public disclosure however. In a properly established research environment, peer reviews and published papers are the norm. In product development, the opposite is prevalent. Of course, that attitude encourages suspicion, protectionism and paranoia which is exactly what we are seeing with the eCat. That in turn fuels suspicions of a scam, which may or may not be so.
No miracles in science: The story of the "energy catalyzer"It is a commonplace to claim that the existence of a patent makes the dissemination of the discovery, and even its commercial exploitation, impossible. This is far from the truth. To begin with, a patent is a publication. The patent claimer intends to make the details of a method or system with industrial interest public; obviously, not because of altruistic reason but in order to defend in a court that the inventor (needs not to be the same as the claimer) discovered the method and so anyone willing to commercially exploit the invention must pay for it some royalties or buy an usage license. In order to allow the rest of the world to know what is protected under patent and what is not patents are public (there are internet patent databases, which although public are not free). So that, let us insist on it, with a patent you cannot either secure the details of an invention or hide its details or anything at all, not even while the patent is pending of evaluation. In fact, evaluation processes last for years, but this does not prevent the patent to be licensed and exploited; anyone who wants to use the patented invention must pay the claimer for it. If, finally, one or more of the claims in the patent (that is, the different parts of the invention that the inventor claims to have discovered) are not recognized, anyone could replicate those parts without paying a dime. So that, there is no reason for Rossi and Focardi's secrecy about the E-Cat. Even worse, if the famous secret catalyzer is not a part of the patent itself, then it is not protected, and hence as soon as somebody takes a sample and analyzes it that person could make a design slightly different from that of E-Cat but using the same unprotected catalyzer without paying any money to Rossi and Focardi. Hence, the secrecy about the catalyzer is against Rossi and Focardi's interests, contrary to what some people may think.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 13 guests