I’ll read his silliness when
***Like the priests who refused to look through Galileo’s telescope, you are the charlatan here.
scientific merit is demonstrated and a working model
***Raising the bar for LENR while lowering the bar for hot fusion, the standard “where’s my LENR car” line. Where is my hot fusion car? Especially since hundreds of $billions have been spent towards this goal with no “working models” in sight.
is available to the public as promised. Sorry guy, but your continuous babbling of such activity
***It is simply putting forth scientific activity. You have a problem with it because you are an anti-science Luddite.
calls into question your credibiity on this issue.
***Your credibility is in question. You don’t seem to have looked into the facts surrounding LENR, and you refuse to look through the telescope and bring yourself up to speed, like a standard anti-science Luddite skeptopath.
You citing of work that has actually been performed and refuted by the Navy scientist who were involved
***Bowlsheet. Pamela Mossier-Boss never refuted her own work. Her funding just got stopped. You don’t seem to have any facts straight at all.
is even more disturbing on a professional level. 14,000 times indeed.
***Yes. 14,000 times. Or is it your position that someone in the Chinese Acadamy of Sciences doesn’t know how to count? Talk about “disturbing on a professional level”, your own attitude is utterly anti-science and filled with arrogance & stupidity.
I have licensed new IP with on a few repetitions of the science in question.
***Maybe you could afford to take a writing class, then. Your IP is ENGINEERing based. You haven’t developed any SCIENCE at this level, otherwise you’d be getting a Nobel prize. Geez, you are so ignorant.
This is a scam
***Prove it. Make a call to the FBI to have LENR scientists rounded up. Write a protest to the Chinese Academy of Science because one of their scientists doesn’t know how to count. Send letters to the supervisors at NASA because 2 of their scientists are working in this field. Send a letter to the CEO of STMicro or even Scientific Instruments (who cite over 150 replications of the Anomalous Heat Effect). You won’t because you do not honestly believe this is a scam, and that is what makes you a charlatan.
and is seen as such by most reputable scientific mind
***Reputable? How about Nobel Prize winner Schwinger, or the folks at STMicro or Mitsubishi or Scientific Instruments? They aren’t reputable in your mind?
I know in this business. But I’m sure that you are going to quote all kinds of non-data driven experiments
***Again, you show a tremendous ignorance of the data available to anyone who has just an ounce of curiosity. Non-Data driven experiments? What a bunch of crap. Lenr-Canr.org is filled with scientific data papers, peer reviewed, “reputable scientists”, all the rest. You are truly showing the classic signs of a skeptopath.
by more scammers and charlottens, then point to a myriad of blogs, topic driven marketing sites in an effort at credibility.
***I’ve never seen WW do that. He points people to LENR-CANR.org just like most of us do. You are so full of bowlsheet.
All you are doing is overpromisong and delivering NOTHING,
***Hot fusion is the group who has overpromised and delivered nothing. Over 60 years and the most energy generated was 6MJ over a few milliseconds, while several LENR experiments have generated over 300MJ over months.
just like your Rossi hero. Good day, Snake-oil Man.
***When was the last time an article was posted on FR that was pro-Rossi? It was done by the Luddites who are AGAINST Rossi, and it was several months ago. You are thoroughly ignorant of the latest information and trends. You simply do not know what you are talking about.
LOL. Translation...."My mind is made up, don't confuse me with facts". FYI, Beaudette's background is VERY similar to your own (engineering manager for a major high-tech company (EG&G)). One can hardly consider him a "scammer".
"Sorry guy, but your continuous babbling of such activity calls into question your credibiity on this issue.
All I have ever done is recommend that people check out the published science. It that is "babbling" and damages my credibility, then so be it.
"You citing of work that has actually been performed and refuted by the Navy scientist who were involved is even more disturbing on a professional level."
And what specific work would that be. I don't recall citing anything by "a Navy scientist", though some Navy folks have done some good work.
"14,000 times indeed.
Sorry, Dudley.....wrong guy. I have NEVER used that phrase in any post.
"I have licensed new IP with on a few repetitions of the science in question. This is a scam and is seen as such by most reputable scientific mind I know in this business.
And who would that be, pray tell. Once again, you rely on "your unknown expert". Why not actually look at the data yourself, just once?
"But I’m sure that you are going to quote all kinds of non-data driven experiments by more scammers and charlottens, then point to a myriad of blogs, topic driven marketing sites in an effort at credibility.
Again, wrong guy. Everything I have cited leads back to published science (as does Beaudette's book). But nice rant.
"All you are doing is overpromisong and delivering NOTHING, just like your Rossi hero.
LOL. I haven't promised anything at any time. And Rossi is by no means "my hero". But another nice rant.
"Good day, Snake-oil Man."
Good day, Willfully Ignorant Man.