About Nelson report, the answer I have is that the report is genuine, but that it is preliminary. The test done seems to be the appetizer for a real test like the one Elforsk organized for E-cat. The "main-course" never get organized, for unknown reason that may be linked to the cost of such test, IP protections, change of mind, or to more sad reason like it is not working...
Currently the only public victims who paid are Luca gamberale and Franco Cappiello (a million), you Jed, and Xanthoulis himself who put his money... Maybe because most clients did due diligence. today as you say we have no data to be optimistic, but this is not to exclude. better to ignore. There are more serious players arriving, even if most have no reactor claims yet. But now I prefer modest businessmen to empty announces. ( http://www.lenr-forum.com/forum/index.php/Thread/338-LENR-Invest-Fund-I-LLC-raises-205-000-in-May/?postID=651#post651) 2014-05-13 22:15 GMT+02:00 Jed Rothwell <jedrothw...@gmail.com>: > Alain Sepeda <alain.sep...@gmail.com> wrote: > > >> Now we should read the only evidence that remain, the report of Nelson. >> The attention Nelson put in avoiding water boiling is retrospectively >> very important. >> > > I do not think Nelson did all of these steps. His "report" was more of a > checklist of suggestions. As far as I know, no independent observer has > done a successful test of a Defkalion reactor. As I have said here, the > people who went there all signed NDAs. Defkalion has not released any of > their findings. However, some of those people told me confidentially that > the machine did not work. Results were inconclusive at best. One said, "I > wouldn't bother going back." > > If Defkalion had a positive, independent report, I suppose they would have > released it by now. They are strange people, but not that strange. They > would not sit on a positive report when their reputation is in shreds. I do > not think they have a positive report. > > At one point I recall they said something like, "we can't release the > positive reports because they would endanger intellectual property." That > is nonsense. It would be easy to edit down a report to scrub out all > technical details about the reactor, leaving only the calorimetry. You > could add a statement to the beginning saying "this is a partial version of > the report describing only calorimetry." > > I am not going to accuse them of fraud, because I do not know anyone they > have defrauded; I have no idea what they are up to; and I cannot imagine > why they would do such stupid things. Who does flow calorimetry without > confirming the flow rate?!? (Okay, Krivit did . . . Who else?) Here is my > opinion: > > 1. I wouldn't trust them as far as I can throw them. > 2. They are either frauds or idiots. > 3. The sooner these people fold their tent and silently steal away, the > better it will be for cold fusion. > > That is an OPINION, not an accusation. I have no evidence for it, just a > lot of hearsay and an unpaid bill for $1,400. > > - Jed > >
