Good luck next year, Linus.
Posted on 01/12/2012 8:58:28 PM PST by Kevmo
I'm sure that there are bastions of conservativism in CA, but they are so outweighed by the liberal/illegal numbers in urban areas that they can't really be effective.
I just couldn't live with CA's gun ownership/usage laws. Fortunately, Washington state seems to have enough liberal gun owners (former military??) that the gungrabbers haven't managed to pass many state-wide restrictions, and, also fortunately, the uber-liberal urban areas can't pass such laws due to state pre-emption of that area of law.
Oh, and today "is" a "snow day". I make it about six-seven inches piled up on the railing of my deck.
Liar.That's funny, coming from a Rossi shill.
One more time....when I made the statement, the best information ANYBODY had (and that many others indicated as well) was that Rossi planned to allow such testing.Rossi knew better. He lied about it to claim undeserved credibility from the U of B.
And while I'm sure you were gullible enough to believe Rossi, you spent that time using it as the core of your argument that Rossi must be legitimate, because if he wasn't, he wouldn't allow the U of B to do their testing.
Now that the lie is exposed, you act incredulous about it, as though no one could have seen it coming. In reality, everyone with a brain saw it coming. It's only the gullible Rossi fanboys who seem to have trouble accepting the fact that Rossi is lying his way through this farce.
And in fact, he has, as recently as this week, stated that he still plans to collaborate with the U of B, and hopes to get that started in a couple of months.WOW! Just WOW! Rossi lies about it again and you believe him again. That is a new record for gullibility!
You should know that the U of B stated when Rossi first blew them off that their contract had a deadline, which has either already passed or is about to.
My guess is that Rossi is waiting until the contract has expired, and then step forward with an insincere offer to let them test it. When they properly tell him to go pound sand, he will claim that they are persecuting him and trying to "suppress" his work.
I know squat about newspapers in Italy.Congratulations! You've invented a whole new logical fallacy. I've heard of "argument by authority" (which you are fine with when the "authority" happens to support your side, as in the anonymous "NATO Colonel" working for the anonymous customer).
But you have invented the "Argument by ignorance" fallacy. Since you "know squat" about something, you therefore feel justified in ignoring it.
I just finished reading 385 pages of conference proceedings of the "Proceedings of 15th International Conference on Condensed Matter Nuclear Science", which contains many excellent scientific papers, both theoretical and experimental, which show conclusively the truth of LANR.As I've stated repeatedly, I'm arguing about the validity of LENR in general. Just the fact that Rossi is a con man who has decided to use LENR as the background for his scam.
And, as we continue to go for month after month where there is nothing but unsubstantiated claims from Rossi, and no signs of an actual, working E-Cat anywhere, I'll be here to rub your nose in it.
Nope. LENR shill. You just can't seem to differentiate the two.
"Rossi knew better. He lied about it to claim undeserved credibility from the U of B."
Speculation.
"And while I'm sure you were gullible enough to believe Rossi, you spent that time using it as the core of your argument that Rossi must be legitimate, because if he wasn't, he wouldn't allow the U of B to do their testing."
Bullshit.
"Now that the lie is exposed, you act incredulous about it, as though no one could have seen it coming. In reality, everyone with a brain saw it coming. It's only the gullible Rossi fanboys who seem to have trouble accepting the fact that Rossi is lying his way through this farce.
Lying again. I have NEVER denied the possibility that Rossi might be scamming. What I "have" done is point out that there are often alternative explanations to the actions you ascribe to Rossi. You see EVERY action Rossi does or has ever done as "black/evil". I see the POSSIBILITY that other explanations might be correct, therefore I just have to be a "Rossi shill". This is precisely why I say that your skepticism rises to the point of "skeptomania".
"WOW! Just WOW! Rossi lies about it again and you believe him again. That is a new record for gullibility!"
What makes you think I "believe him"? I'm pointing out the statement. No more, no less.
"You should know that the U of B stated when Rossi first blew them off that their contract had a deadline, which has either already passed or is about to."
IOW, you have no idea about when the "deadline" is, or whether it has passed. For all you know, Rossi has asked for and gotten an extension of the deadline. But no, you just ASSUME that a particular possibility MUST be true.
"My guess is that Rossi is waiting until the contract has expired, and then step forward with an insincere offer to let them test it. When they properly tell him to go pound sand, he will claim that they are persecuting him and trying to "suppress" his work."
At least you properly label THIS point speculation.
"Congratulations! You've invented a whole new logical fallacy. I've heard of "argument by authority" (which you are fine with when the "authority" happens to support your side, as in the anonymous "NATO Colonel" working for the anonymous customer).
Excuse me?? I have never claimed ANYTHING about said "NATO colonel" as an authority. My statement was that the other witnesses to the demo said he was knowledgeable.
"But you have invented the "Argument by ignorance" fallacy. Since you "know squat" about something, you therefore feel justified in ignoring it."
Still lying. As I said previously, I "ignore" nothing. But, not being familiar with Italian newspapers I have no idea how to "weight" the evidence. You, OTOH, assume anything anti-Rossi that appears anywhere just has to be the "gospel truth".
As I've stated repeatedly, I'm arguing about the validity of LENR in general. Just the fact that Rossi is a con man who has decided to use LENR as the background for his scam.
Still lying. You have made generic anti-LENR statements before, and I've called you on them.
"And, as we continue to go for month after month where there is nothing but unsubstantiated claims from Rossi, and no signs of an actual, working E-Cat anywhere, I'll be here to rub your nose in it."
Again, I suggest you hold your breath while waiting.
Here's a clue.....you apparently consider yourself "Luke Skywalker"........but in reality, you're Anakin. Or in political language, a "useful idiot". And still nuts.
Here's a clue.....you apparently consider yourself "Luke Skywalker"........but in reality, you're Anakin. Or in political language, a "useful idiot". And still nuts.Wow! You're resorting to Star Wars analogies.
I've overestimated you. I guess you really are a 13-year-old, living in your mother's basement.
No, I just didn't bother looking up the reference when I first wrote that."You should know that the U of B stated when Rossi first blew them off that their contract had a deadline, which has either already passed or is about to."IOW, you have no idea about when the "deadline" is, or whether it has passed. For all you know, Rossi has asked for and gotten an extension of the deadline. But no, you just ASSUME that a particular possibility MUST be true.
HERE is the article. Dario Braga, the director of scientific research at the University of Bologna, made the following statements on November 27, 2011:
The Rossi contract must start soon; otherwise, the University of Bologna can withdraw from the contract.There you go. Direct quotes from the person who knows the details of the contract with Rossi.It must be understood that the period can be a few weeks, maybe a few months, but for sure not years.
The deadline for this is mid-January, and, as far as I know, an extension is unlikely.
"It must be understood that the period can be a few weeks, maybe a few months, but for sure not years. "The deadline for this is mid-January, and, as far as I know, an extension is unlikely."
LOL. See underlined section above. A quote from November says ZIP about the situation at current time. And it doesn't sound like Mr. Braga is the one who makes the final determination. This is your typical projection of your personal prejudices onto uncertain statements to "promote" them into "case proven against Rossi". The simple fact is that neither you or I know what the situation as regards the contract is today.
SANE people (and certainly anyone trained in science) divide information into five categories:
Proven true....has hard data absolutely proving the case.
Probably True....has hard data indicating, but not sufficient to prove the case.
Insufficient Information....some data exists for both true and not true.
Probably Not True.....the majority of data indicates "not true".
Proven False....hard data exists proving the "not true" state.
Your modus operandi in the case of Rossi seems to be:
Proven true......assumed to be false
Probably true.....assumed to be false.
Insufficient data.....assumed to be false.
Probably Not True.....proven false.
Proven False.......proven false.
Do you begin to see why I think you're nuts??
Why not email Mssr. Braga and ask him what the status of the contract TODAY is.
LOL. See underlined section above. A quote from November says ZIP about the situation at current timeYou're an idiot.
The quote from November is all the information that is publicly available. You insist on making up totally unsubstantiated guesses about possible changes, even though you are the one without a shred of evidence to support it.
By the way, have you been following the postings on Vortex today? Looks like the mountain of lies by Rossi are starting to crumble.
Correct, it "is" all the information that is currently available. And I seem to recall you castigating me time after time by pointing out that information AFTER Rossi indicated that no further outside testing would happen, which you have all along ASSUMED was false. Who was guilty of "unsubstantiated guesses" then???
So now we have a piece of information from Rossi saying that he expects the collaboration to go forward, but in a time frame past the deadline. We now have a contradiction between the contract deadline and this new datum.
The hypothesis that explains both data is that Rossi got an extension. This may be correct, it may NOT be correct. But the simple point is that this goes in the category "insufficient data" UNTIL the U. of B. confirms or denies that the contract deadline has passed, and will or will not be extended.
So, we need more information to verify the hypothesis. But at this point, neither you or I KNOW what the situation is.
"By the way, have you been following the postings on Vortex today? Looks like the mountain of lies by Rossi are starting to crumble.
Yes, since well before you posted this tidbit. Again, a situation of many pieces of contradictory evidence. I've looked at the various "blink" video comparisons, and I do NOT see the "cut and dried" obviousness of identicality. The only real PROOF available is that "Rossi says" the pics show the same 1MW e-cat, and that the contradiction is from a language problem. Certainly the "evaluations" from the pictures are ridiculous.
I spent a short period of time at a company, one of whose businesses was assembling "instrument shacks" for large chemical plants. These were containers pretty much identical to what the 1MW e-Cat components are mounted in, but which, instead of e-cats, contained gas chromatographs, mass spectrometers, sample systems, etc. etc. When the assembly crews were working on several units intended to be identical (and yes, Virginia, there "are" chemical plants that big), they would even have marks on the concrete floor so that as the empty units came in, they would be placed in exactly the same spot. This was done to facilitate electrical hookup to external utilities, and the "workstations" of parts that were clustered around the unit under construction). And I can guarantee you that if you put together a "blink" comparison between two separate boxes, that they WOULD be identical in such a comparison, even to the point of having labels on vessels aligned the same. The crews that do this kind of assembly pride themselves on "getting it the same every time".
So, once again, we are reduced to "Rossi says". "Insufficient data" once again.
The hypothesis that explains both data is that Rossi got an extension.No, the hypothesis that explains both is that Rossi is lying yet again.
January 21, 2011, Rossi says, "We made an important test with the University of Bologna, with whom we are going to make a 1 year research program also." (LINK)
March 3, 2011, Rossi says, "We are now making a R&D work with the University of Bologna." (LINK)
June 18, 2011, Rossi says, "In these days, together with the University of Bologna and with my Customers, we have made tests measuring not only dry steam, but also with really , really, REALLY high performances: they know, I know, we know. That’s enough." LINK)
November 5, 2011, the University of Bologna releases a press release (LINK) that specifically denies any involvement with any test conducted by Rossi:
E-cat: the University of Bologna is not involved
November 5, 2011The clarification of the University on the experiments conducted by the company Leonardo Corp.
The 'University of Bologna - in reference to the report published on FoxNews.com and several articles published in recent weeks - states not involved in the experiments conducted by the company on the E-Cat Corp. owned by Leonardo Andrea Rossi.
The University also states that:
A) no experiment concerning E-Cat was held at the University of Bologna or October 28, 2011, or earlier dates, nor was conducted by researchers at the University;
2) the University of Bologna (Department of Physics) experiments on the apparatus is ready to play cat-and as soon as the contract signed with EFA Srl (Italian society of Andrea Rossi) will be made active to this end were to experiments, as observers, researchers at the University of Bologna.
The University continues to pay close attention to the evolution of the situation.
Only if your sole focus is in trying to paint any and every action ever undertaken by Rossi in his life as some sort of criminal acitivty
Sorry. your "proof" concerns the CONTRACT not at all. Come back when you actually have information about the subject under discussion.
At this point, we have NO DATA as regards the current status of the contract.
Sorry. your "proof" concerns the CONTRACT not at all. Come back when you actually have information about the subject under discussion.Here you go:
http://blog.newenergytimes.com/2012/01/24/university-of-bologna-terminates-relationship-with-rossi/
You're still an idiot.
Nope. Certifed as not, even. As attested by my SAT, NMSQT, and other sundry data.
However, YOU "are" a nutcase (specifically a monomaniac of the skeptopathic variety).
But at least this time you weren't speculating. You see, it's NOT difficult to actually wait for proof.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.