On Mon, Jul 10, 2017 at 1:01 AM, Lennart Thornros <lenn...@thornros.com> wrote:
> The whole discussion after the TRAIL is useless. Accusations between > vorts, discussions trying to determine how Rossi is a fraud or not - all of > counter productive. > Rossi has a small window to show that he has something. His ethics need no > analysis. Rossi as a person is of little interest if the focus is LENR. > The only that came out of this lawsuit was that nobody has picked up a > path to a commercial LENR. > The interest in LENR has gone down as it obviously still is no solution. > Still the interest exceeds what was before Rossi's appearance in this > field. > I suggest to change the focus to possible solutions and let Rossi return > with his better mousetrap when or if he has one. > (I just saw a better mousetrap on Youtube, BTW.) The issue IS the crass, obsessive focus on creating a commercial 'product' -- and NOT the Science. Andrea Rossi himself is _wholly_ responsible for that failing, here. OTOH, anyone _should_ be able to see that the Science ALWAYS should have come first -- especially in such a bold, pioneering and high-stakes sphere -- but DIDN'T: and this yet another attempt at crass commercialization IS the essential reason WHY this latest episode ends in wretched failure (assuming cold fusion is not simply a canard), and in acrimonious recriminations which only hurt the scientific side of the matter: the ONLY side which really matters. People should simply be turning to the likes of the Martin Fleischmann Memorial Project, and putting their bets THERE. In OPEN Science. > Lennart > > On Jul 9, 2017 19:03, "Che" <comandantegri...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On Fri, Jul 7, 2017 at 8:39 PM, Jed Rothwell <jedrothw...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> Che <comandantegri...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> >>> Clueless, DEAD wrong, AND delusional. All in one email post! >>> >> >> That is not what I would call a cogent response, but I appreciate the >> brevity of it. You needn't say more, since your responses are canned and >> never deviate from party doctrine. >> >> - Jed >> >> > We are following an old script, here. If you want to pretend there's an > actual dialog going on, feel free. Just don't pretend to the others that > you're 'winning' something here, OK? > > In any case: the political-economic aspects of the Rossi fiasco are every > bit as 'cogent' as the fyzix and engineering. At this point -- even more so. > > > > > >
