Re: [Vo]:What was not said can be as important as what was said

[Axil Axil]

I don't think it is accurate to state that Mills is promoting a
financial scam on top of a real energy anomaly of the kind Thermacore
showed in 1993. It is just maximizing investment to explore unknown
and esoteric subjects in science.

On Fri, Mar 11, 2016 at 4:17 PM, a.ashfield  wrote:
> Jones wrote:  "The statement completely contradicts Lewan's assertion of
> Industrial Heat's
> involvement in the test."
> Krivit must be going blind as he wrote; "The statement mentions nothing
> about any test, let alone the test Lewan said Industrial Heat had been
> conducting during the past year."
>
> Also
> "As many of us have been saying from the start - in regard to Rossi, it is
> easily possible to build a financial scam on top of a real energy anomaly of
> the kind Thermacore showed in 1993 and the only surprise is that the
> perpetrator of the quasi-scam did not do a better job with showing the real
> anomaly."
>
> I'm surprised you didn't mention Krivit's link.   "Rossi Promoter Arrested
> on Child Sex-Abuse Charges" while you were at it.
>

[Vo]:What was not said can be as important as what was said

[a.ashfield]

Jones wrote:  "The statement completely contradicts Lewan's assertion of 
Industrial Heat's

involvement in the test."
Krivit must be going blind as he wrote; "The statement mentions nothing 
about any test, let alone the test Lewan said Industrial Heat had been 
conducting during the past year."


Also
"As many of us have been saying from the start - in regard to Rossi, it 
is easily possible to build a financial scam on top of a real energy 
anomaly of the kind Thermacore showed in 1993 and the only surprise is 
that the perpetrator of the quasi-scam did not do a better job with 
showing the real

anomaly."

I'm surprised you didn't mention Krivit's link.   "Rossi Promoter 
Arrested on Child Sex-Abuse Charges" while you were at it.

[Vo]:What was not said can be as important as what was said

[Jones Beene]

Is Andrea Rossi the genius inventor that his dedicated followers believe, or
is he a charlatan crackpot - on the verge of exposure? In my opinion it is
neither, but first - what does his sponsor have to say? The following is a
synopsis of a number of posts which have appeared this morning.

New Energy Times reports on sending a copy of Mats Lewan's blog post to
Industrial Heat, asking for comment about its corporate involvement in the
test. Today, NET reports that a statement from IH carefully dodges the exact
question asked, but explains the company's broader objectives with LENRs. 

The reply, pretty much the same as the previous one from IH - cautiously and
wisely mentions nothing about Rossi, Leonardo Technologies, the March
report, the obscure customer, or the so-called megawatt reactor. Instead, it
relegates Rossi to one of many unnamed technologies being funded - and of no
particular importance over any other. 

This is a smart move, with an attorney's fingerprints all over it - since IH
has their own investors in an extended portfolio of many projects - of which
AR is only one-of-many. IH will be held to a higher standard (legally) than
the one which Rossi's adorers hold Rossi to. And it is even possible that IH
already have a better technology than whatever Rossi claims to have. 

That's right, IH may have leapfrogged Rossi already, or are on the verge of
it - and will move-on in the LENR field, with or without him. Obviously,
Rossi borrowed from Mills, Piantelli, Thermacore etc . and nothing keeps IH
from taking Rossi's contribution is a different course than what AR wants to
pursue. 

"Who's zoomin' who?" . is the sentiment that comes to mind.

Yet - the Industrial Heat statement talks about "embracing failure" and
"premature proclamations" and condemned situations in which "results are
promoted and claims are made without rigorous verification and precise
measurement." That is the part that could apply mainly or exclusively to
Rossi and the upcoming report. Apparently IH is saying this without saying
anything: "we do not have a clue what is in this report, and we cannot stand
behind it until we have thoroughly vetted it." This does not mean it is
failed test, only that it is not properly vetted?

The statement completely contradicts Lewan's assertion of Industrial Heat's
involvement in the test. In fact, there is no indication that they knew more
than the pundits. "Any claims made about technologies in our portfolio
should only be relied upon if affirmed by Industrial Heat and backed by
reputable third parties who have verified our results in repeated
experiments." 

The implication here is that they have NOT VERIFIED the results of the
so-called year-long test - which after all, could be a complete fraud since
no one not under Rossi's thumb has actually seen the unit or knows if there
is a customer. It could be happening in Italy or it could be 100% bogus. At
best it is a juvenile ploy by Rossi to keep funding without actually showing
results.

As many of us have been saying from the start - in regard to Rossi, it is
easily possible to build a financial scam on top of a real energy anomaly of
the kind Thermacore showed in 1993 and the only surprise is that the
perpetrator of the quasi-scam did not do a better job with showing the real
anomaly.