TheEEStory.com

Tec wrote:

...just perhaps an intolerance of people shooting off their mouths in a negative fashion...

Sounds pretty hostile to me.

As I keep saying, I have no idea whether it works or not, and no reason to adopt a pro or anti position.

I will wait and see. Arguing about it in the way it is conducted here with people brandishing hearsay at each other is a waste of time.

Sorry you feel that way. I think that public conversation should be governed by a kind of civility that includes an awareness not only of the greater good but a desire for authentic knowledge. And do you know something? You may never have thought of it this way, but future shift happens.

Knowledge is not something that you learned in a book as a Freshman in college. It lives and breaths, growing and changing, finding out that what we believed ten years ago, fifty years ago, two hundred years ago, four hundred years ago, is not quite right or even entirely untrue. The Sun does not rotate around the earth. Slavery is not good. The continents do ride on tectonic plates. Cold fusion is real.

Too many people participating in discussions about alternative energy on the internet seem to think that they are god's gift to the future, while heaping a continual stream of abuse on anyone is actually even trying to bring about an improvement in human life through the reform of today's moribund, profiteering, ecologically retrograde energy system.

We all know there are scams. We don't need to be reminded of that fact. But sometimes there's also something called progress. Our job is to try to distinguish one from the other. In this thread (of which I have admittedly only sampled given its great length -- which is *itself* a testimony that something of importance may be happening here) I've seen a depressing amount of a priori character assassinations of Mr. Rossi and not nearly enough gathering of factual information from other internet sources that would actually help the participants to make an informed judgement about how to assess Rossi's claims, or those of Defkalion, or of MIT, NASA, or SRI. That is what the bright technical minds on this forum should be helping us do. The blithe cliche of ringing changes on the "since I don't believe in it, it doesn't exist" is getting tiresome.

Opposing LENR because you don't know enough about it to have an informed opinion is fine as long as you don't start accusing anyone of fraud. At that point, as far as I am concerned, you are at the limits of responsible exercise of free speech. Like I said, Tec, nothing personal.

>exit, soapbox.

Tec wrote:

There is little point in wasting time on this until it is generally accepted to work. At the moment it isn't.

Unlike y_po and his boy assistant Lensman, I am NOT saying it is a scam. Merely that I don't know at this point. I want to keep an open mind on it but not so open that my brain falls out.

And I am not going to waste time looking at any 'theory' until I am sure it works.

I am a little puzzled at why this should cause such hostility. If it works, it should do so whether I have faith in it or not.

I think waiting for an unambiguous demonstration of significantly more energy coming out of it than is going in for a very long period - like days or weeks - is a reasonable position, and I intend to wait until this happens.

You may be mistaking confidence for "hostility." There is no hostility in *my* postings, at least (believe me, I know when I'm feeling hostile and you are quite safe from it) -- just perhaps an intolerance of people shooting off their mouths in a negative fashion without having first bothered to acquaint themselves with the facts.

Don't take it personally. Its a common failing. I'd love for you to be the one (with Y_Po of course) to invent that Guiness E-cat. I might even invest in your Co. if you did. Cheers,

psi

Taylor wrote:

Oakthicket wrote:

Any premise that Siemens is somehow supportive of Rossi's eCat is foolish. It's no different than Rossi's deceitful attempts at 'credibility by association' with the University of Uppsala, University of Bologna, National Instruments, NASA and MIT. It's a common fraudster ploy.

Yeah, then why don't you prove that is scam instead making up a bunch of silly non-sense. Just tell us who is getting scammed and when the money transfer (fraud) will occur.

Most everything you claim as "deceitful" has been explained a number of times, but you are so biased towards your nutter-scam-believer conspiracy theories that you can't separate fact from fiction.

Its interesting how well this discussion is helping me to make up my previously undecided mind about EESTOR. Bringing to the discussion a few weeks of intense online study of the Rossi-LENR story from a few dozen different websites, when I come here I encounter the same luddite nonsense being argued in both cases, first against EESTOR, and now against LENR. I even found Y_Po (or someone who had stolen his good name) operating as a troll at one of the LENR sites! If Whiskey Thief knew anything at all about the history of Rossi's involvement with NI, he would be more empirical in his phraseology. Rossi is not "playing" the game of credibility with major players. He is winning it.

http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=4955212n

I've listened to those others. You are very like them. They are wrong. I don't even have to understand the technical dimensions very clearly -- no one, as the linked 60 Minutes Video shows, really does. I can infer from the sociological dynamic of the debate that the opponents are wrong -- MAYBE not about Rossi or Defkalion, but at least about the reality of underlying phenomenon that Rossi claims to be bringing to imminent commercialization.

If you want "living proof" that not everyone agrees with me, click on the link. The question is not whether some people are still in denial. The question is -- who do you believe? If you believe someone whose best argument seems to be that he's living proof that it ain't so, I venture to suggest that you may want to reconsider your own reasoning.

Everything Rossi says has merrit. I see many trying take these statements and twist them into garbage but it only makes them look like idiots.

I think Skeptics are getting pissed that Rossi, without any Physics degree, is consistantly shooting every skeptic claim down, and handily at that.

The Only thing left in the Skeptic "bag of tricks" is the fact that Rossi will Not give the demo skeptics want.

it is hilarious, Cry as you might, Rossi has you over the barrel.

Sesla, I have to agree. Rossi is acting like a man who knows exactly what he is doing, no small feat given the stakes involved here. Unfailingly polite to any honest person, he called a certain lapdog a "snake." When the snake attributed to a third party the story that Rossi was no longer working with National Instruments, he thought to get his revenge. Imagine everyone's surprise when, in the space of two days 1) Rossi says, yes, its true, we are no longer working with NI -- adding that he thought they were a fine company and that he and his people had been "taught many things" by NI, and hoped to work with them in the future, but that his customer for the 1 MW plants preferred another supplier with whom they had an established relation....gosh, who could *that* be? 2) Blogger calls NI and says, "how do you feel? Have you thrown in the towel on Rossi." NI spokeswoman says, we are very pleased to be working on LENR projects, have great respect for Mr. Rossi, and if you want to know what our relationship with him is like, please see [link to Rossi's original statement]. The snake got bit on its ass.

Its time for Y_Po to take some time out for a beer. Maybe Tec can join him with some textbooks on LENR and they can build us an E-cat that runs on Guinness and generates electricity for the EE-Su.

Last edited Sun, 26 Feb 2012, 6:56pm by Psi

Tec wrote:

I will reserve judgement until it is clear that it DOES work, thanks.

Until then, I neither know nor care much whether it is real or a scam. I'll read up on it if and when it is demonstrated.

It is clear that it works. The fact that you are ignorant of this fact is your problem.

Tec wrote:

Are you claiming that changing its name WILL make it work better?

No Sir. I make no comment on whatever you call'it. I care not. I care, sir, that it is real. Look it up.

Tec is about ten years behind the times in his reading of the *tec*hnical lit on this subject.

Y_po, also, is in fine form. His wit shineth from the brow of glory, as Shakespeare would have said. He already knows more about the subject than NASA, SRI, and MIT.

Tec wrote:

Maybe someone will invent a capacitor that holds lots of energy and does not have this problem.

More likely Rossi's invention will solve it.

What a revealing comment. I hope you are prepared to eat at the banquet of your own rhetoric.

Don't look now, but global warming is about to bring snow to San Fransisco (as if people freezing in India, climategate, and the coldest winter in England in a century wasn't enough).....Amazing what that magic gas CO2 can do.

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2011/02/23/low-snow-...

jambon wrote:

I believe you will find them, or at least similar companies, in this article.

Free Energy Ideas

Yes, but the category "free energy" at Peswiki includes everything from outright scams to devices and materials efficiencies that are indubitably valid at least at the experimental level. Eestor is covered fairly extensively there. I was just wondering if any posters here could add anything material to discussion of how real this could possibly be. For what its worth, what I've learned as a layman about plasma -- apparently making up 99% of the known universe -- if somewhat scarce on earth and barely taught in our physics classes, makes me think that there's a whole lot to learn about how it behaves and what practical applications it might have.

Tec wrote:

I suppose it's good to know that EEstor is not the only 'save the world' company that is nearly there.

That's charming as usual, Tech, but can you tell us why this particular plan is as crazy, iyho, as eestor? After all, if the device works as claimed, it will "save the world" or at least transform it. Notice my "if" -- I'm just asking.

EEventually wrote:

web content screams "LOON" to me.

needs more description about how they think the energy gain happens. what's the fuel anyway?

The web content is unsophisticated. The knowledge base of the inventors also seems to me, by contrast, quite sophisticated. Scams usually focus on image. These people seem to be concentrating on results. But I am not technically qualified enough to form any definite judgment on that score, so I am naturally curious to see how the range of skeptical and technically trained posters here will react.

The fuel is a mixture of noble gases, excited by electric spark:

http://plasmerg.com/plasmf.html

http://peswiki.com/index.php/Directory:Plasma_E...

Just out of curiosity, I wonder what folks here think about this:

http://plasmerg.com/index.html

The claims are big, including that production lines are only weeks or months away -- licensing and international patents appear to be very far advanced.

Thoughts?

@antiguajohn

If you are undecided about global weirding, which is a more accurate description of global warming, see Wiki link;

http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/global_weirding

Then I suggest you watch this video outlining the choices and relative risks involved with whichever path you choose, see link;

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zORv8wwiadQ&...

If you watch, you will at least have a proper framework for your deliberations, of course some people will still be deniers ignoring all facts, after all there are still people who believe the earth is flat!

antiguajohn

And then there are people whose "knowledge" is so conditioned by panic induced groupthink that they can't even engage in a rational discussing with hurling around words like "denier" to reassure themselves that anyone who has come to a different conclusion after independently weighing all available evidence is a moron or intellectual criminal.

Grow up, dude.

http://wattsupwiththat.com/