Nick Palmer <ni...@wynterwood.co.uk> wrote:
> He's certainly got a very bad case of Chris Tinsley's inventor's disease or > he's faking. His mention now of totally dry steam has clearly been made > because of Steve K's visit.. . . Rossi does show some symptoms of that syndrome, but there is a TREMENDOUS difference between him and people with a genuine case of the Inventor's Disease. Rossi has demonstrated his machines (albeit mainly in private) and he has signed agreements with legitimate companies and transferred his knowledge to them. He has taken many steps to ensure that the technology will be commercialized. Defkalion is a serious company with serious money and talent. I believe they will begin selling machines this year or early next year. We must not forget this difference! A person suffering from terminal stage Inventor's Disease feels compelled to hide the technology from the world, and take it to the grave. Many people have done that. I think in most cases their "discoveries" were mistakes, or had a prosaic explanation, but some may have been real. Rossi is hard to get along with. (By the way, I believe I popularized the expression "Inventor's Disease" in the context of cold fusion. It has been around for decades. Probably it has been around since people invented the first tools, as shown in the movie "2001 A Space Odyssey." It is remarkable they had such good cameras back then!) > It has been made to forestall further criticism of/investigation on this > point. Big smelly red flags! The bit about universal credibility coming from > working units sold commercially raises another red flag to those of us who > have seen many such promises before. It could not be red flaggier unless he > mentioned "shipping" devices... > You need not worry about that. Rossi is not claiming that he will be selling commercially. Defkalion says they will be. I believe them. You will be able to judge this issue yourself after the June 23 press conference. You will be able to see that conference on YouTube and I am expecting two reports from participants, so we should get good coverage. Abd ul-Rahman Lomax <a...@lomaxdesign.com> wrote: > Generally, what the record showed wasn't what some of the participants > thought. They were reacting to, not what had actually been said, but how > they had, themselves, interpreted it > > In Landmark terms, they had collapsed what had happened with the story > about what happened. Then new stories are often created based on the > original stories, etc. > That is a sharp analysis. > He [Rossi] could apologize. What would he lose if he did? Nothing that I > can see! > It would be out of character. - Jed
