Mark Gibbs on E-Cat

National Review Online ^ | October 18, 2011 2:24 P.M. | Reihan Salam

[Kevmo]

No, dilataunt has gone directly from such fiction using it as evidence that con artists do things that way. So there is at least one Freeper who needs the fictionality pointed out.

How much of a popous twit would you be, trying to proceed to make a point of fact from a piece of fiction?

[Kevmo]

I searched for Dilataunt but couldn’t find him.
***That’s my endearing nickname for dila813. But if you had used those superior reading skills on a few prior threads, you would have known that.

[Lx]

Quick, you need to create a diversion so people don't see the complete lack of logic in your posts. I used an example from the Sting as it fit perfectly with your own unique version of English and anyone reading post 287 would know I was using a movie and not quoting real life although there's no doubt those kinds of scams take place in the real worlds, much like the scams where a person claims he has a device that will solve the energy crisis while eliminating cancer.

I've said what I'll do if this is the real deal, what will you do when it's proven a fraud?

[Lx]

So you libel Dilataunt, what, are you in 6th grade? You realizes that violates the TOS of FR, yes?

So, having nothing you’ve resorted to insults, too bad your parents took you out of school in 6th grade.

I barely bother skimming your ‘post’s as it’s typically arecndjhfjkrahfjkweaf, SEAGULL, jfcikewjfbkre s, SEAGULL, hgekjwal hrgjkwalsfbdsbjfk.
Then you post that lame graphic.

Looks, it’s nothing to be ashamed that you can’t read or write at an adult level, there are plenty of classes that will help you in your home town; you should look into them.

[Kevmo]

So you libel Dilataunt, what, are you in 6th grade? You realizes that violates the TOS of FR, yes?
***Let’s see. I libel him by calling him ‘Dilataunt’ but then you do the same thing. What’s sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander.

So, having nothing
***Well, I’ve tried all kinds of things to shoo away these useless flying rats, so the seagull insult seemed to be the next thing to try. It doesn’t work all that well, because they still seagull on the threads and “do their business” but at least now other FReepers can see how useless they are.

you’ve resorted to insults,
***Only after beint the recipient of them, time and again, just like you did by calling me a twit. Does that mean that you had nothing, so you dove into YOUR sixth grade bag o’ tricks and started slinging the big ‘TWIT’ word around?

too bad your parents took you out of school in 6th grade.
***What an interesting presumption. If you would like to talk about education policy, by all means please click on the keyword I maintain: CHSPE

I barely bother skimming your ‘post’s
***Hey, Mr. Superior Writer, what is this [’post’s] thing? Is it somehow super-duper-significant?

as it’s typically arecndjhfjkrahfjkweaf, SEAGULL, jfcikewjfbkre s, SEAGULL, hgekjwal hrgjkwalsfbdsbjfk.
Then you post that lame graphic.
***I like the graphics. Graphics are fun.

Looks, it’s nothing to be ashamed that you can’t read or write at an adult level,
***Now that there is funny, no matter who ya are, I tellya. Now LOOKS, if ya’s tryin’ to be Superiors in yer writin’, ya need to watch out for all dem typos & piss-poor grammer & such.

there are plenty of classes that will help you in your home town; you should look into them.
***Gee, that’s the exact same insult I used on you. Aintcha got nuthin more ‘riginal than deerecktly copying the guy you’s been insultin’?

[Kevmo]

Quick, you need to create a diversion
***Oh, okay. How do you keep an idiot in suspense?

[Lx]

Quick, you need to create a diversion ***Oh, okay. How do you keep an idiot in suspense?

Ask Kevmo to count to two.

[Lx]

there are plenty of classes that will help you in your home town; you should look into them. You wrote something like this to me? My hats off to whoever does your writing for you but what post and thread was it on?

***Gee, that’s the exact same insult I used on you. Aintcha got nuthin more ‘riginal than deerecktly copying the guy you’s been insultin’?

Yes, that is Shakespeare level writing, no one else could come up with anything close to it.

You have yet to address the fact that that Nobel prize winner did not say he was testing Rossi's device. Let me report it as I'm sure it's got both of your functioning neurons in a loop

UPDATE: Brian Josephson (Noble Prize winning physicist) will NOT test Andrea Rossi's Energy Catalyzer. A misinterpreted posting led to this misunderstanding.

UPDATE: "Someone who couldn't read failed to see that the text talking about 'our test' was written by Levi not me. It is Levi's test." - Brian Josephson

Yes, he's so busy he's missing out on possible Nobel work.

So, who is putting words into whose mouth and answer this question, was it a fraud or a mere misunderstanding?

[Kevmo]

“take a writing class” is one of my standard insults, along with “take a critical thinking class”... you could use both.

I responded to your molehill post earlier.

My hats off to whoever does your writing
***I do my own writing, and you just complimented it. Thanks. Unfortunately, your writing isn’t nearly as good so it does not deserve a compliment. Maybe if you took that writing class I keep mentioning...

[Kevmo]

You wrote something like this to me? My hats off to whoever does your writing for you but what post and thread was it on?
***This one. Right before you told me to do the same thing.

Dr. George Miley Replicates Patterson, Names Rossi
Tuesday, October 25, 2011 5:58:34 PM · 139 of 140
Kevmo to Lx
....
Get someone with a college degree to read the previous to you and reply.
***Take a writing class and ask them to help you rewrite that sentence.

Or, you can cry like a little girl, you’re choice.
***While YOU’RE in YOUR writing class, you can learn the difference between [your] and [you’re] so that you won’t have to embarrass yourself any more.

Post Reply | Private Reply | To 138 | View Replies

[Lx]

You've managed to avoid addressing the fact that Rossi and posse claimed a Nobel awarded physicist was supporting and testing his work which the physicist said was not true.

Clearly that was wrong yet you ignore it; not man enough to admit you or your fellow travelers are wrong?

Anyone can read this whole thread and determine who is the much better writer.

I did peruse this thread again and I found out what you consider good writing, they agree with you, that's all it takes. Classy.

I like how you avoided the fact the I admitted I was wrong so you posted the same post again. What's the matter, you know deep down inside you lack what it takes to admit an error? That's one of the reasons why I kick a** in my field, if something I've designed is wrong, I have no ego problem admitting it and going back to square one. This has rarely happened in 20 years.

So, what is your field, you've avoided answering several times. At least have the b*lls to tell me it's none of my business.

It seems you're not using the seagull slur much lately, you finally realized how lame it sounds?

This Friday all this back and forth will hopefully be settled. I would love for this thing to work. Overnight the world changes. That would be awesome.

However, my wishes are only that, my background convinces me that this thing won't produce over unity. I hope I'm wrong.

[Kevmo]

You know, I think I'll just treasure that compliment you gave me on my writing and leave it at that.

It seems you're not using the seagull slur much lately, you finally realized how lame it sounds?
***Well, see ya around, seagull.

Your result for The Which Stupid Creature Are You Test...

You are a Seagull

You scored 5% on Usefulness, 90% loudness factor, 7% knowledgeability, and 4% on scientific method!

You are a Seagull... which makes you annoying as all hell. On the bright side , well what exactly is the bright side to trolls like you visiting these threads and leaving their business? The bright side is … that the garbage gets eaten.

Take The Which Stupid Creature Are You Test at HelloQuizzy

[Lx]

Ah, back to the the seagull insult. While it may work on your elementary school playground, even, "your momma wears combat boots" is less childish.

I like how in post 310 you again mention my grammar mistakes knowing full well I admitted I was wrong. One of the reasons I'm great at what I do is that if I design something and it doesn't work and won't work no matter how hard we were to work on it, I'm the first to admit I made an error and it's back to the drawing board because I leave my ego at the door. Something Edison should have done with his DC power. Of course this has seldom happened in over twenty years so far in the biz.

Funny, I've yet to see you correct anything, let's start with Rossi's degree, is it real, from an accredited university?

Next, is this Rossi's site?

http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/

If it is, you see nothing fishy or unethical about Rossi publishing his work in a peer reviewed journal that he runs?

You have yet to answer any of my questions; I'm dying to know what you do. Why, is it because it has nothing to do with physics, chemistry or electronics? Please correct me if I'm wrong. If you don't have a degree in any of those fields, that doesn't mean you don't know them but it would be nice if you knew any of those discipline's fundamentals even without a sheepskin.

We will know this Friday whether this thing works providing if and only if:

1) They have the device unassembled and put it together for the test having measured the weight of the entire device and the weight of whatever it is that undergoes the LENR as well as allowing people to look at the device's working parts. Now I'm not talking anyone, I'd like to see folks with great reputations in Chemistry, Physics and Electronics. They can sign an NDA if Rossi is worried, in fact, All of the test equipment needs to come from a neutral source.

2) All of this device's reactants and energy needs to be measured, going, coming out including the resistive heaters for pre-heat and for stability.

3) A Geiger counter should measure the normal radiation as well as the radiation this thing supposedly puts out. If he won't do this because he doesn't want to hurt anyone with the radiation, he can run the test behind materials that block radiation such as lead or lots of concrete.

4) If it takes water in to run, why doesn't he send the output he's currently disposing back into the Ecat; after running it through a heat exchanger first?

5) Does anyone have a basic block diagram of how this thing works?

6) I've read that it requires two heaters, one to begin the LENR and the other to keep it from thermal runaway. Why a heater keeps a device from thermal runaway is counter intuitive but it could be because of the LENR. I am unconvinced though.

7) He needs to let the neutral scientists disassemble his device

8) After the test, once again, all of this device's reactants need to be measured as well as the device's own weight as well.

9) I know this shouldn't have to be said but the energy in and out needs to be measured. That means, the energy to preheat the device as well as the other heater he uses, the temp and volume of the water going in and out, the amount of Hydrogen used and since it's supposed to be a LENR, we need to take into account a nuclear reaction which means we need to use E=MC2. This means, whatever this thing uses to turn mass into energy needs to be measured. Since the amount of mass converted to energy in the Hiroshima explosion was so little, even if this device is a LENR, it would need to run for more than a few hours to get detectable differences in the weight of the element that is undergoing the transition, I believe, although I could be wrong, but Rossi believes that Nickel is fusing into copper which generates massive amounts of energy based on Einstein's equation.

10) This is a biggy, Rossi needs to lay out exactly the parameters of his test and stick to them. Better yet, he should get a prominent physicist and chemist to design the tests

Kevmo, you said the October 8th test was a success, yet a magazine that supports things like free energy declared the test a failure? http://blog.newenergytimes.com/2011/10/08/e-cat-test-demonstrates-energy-loss/

Interesting comments on that thread.

While Rossi is certainly acting squirrely, he is doing something other folks with free energy claims won't do, he at least lets them take apart the rector. Now I don't know if he lets the neutral scientific advisers take the device apart or he only lets his folks do the disassembly.

[Kevmo]

“How the Flawed Journal Review Process Impedes Paradigm Shifting Discoveries” by P.A. Mosier-Boss, L.P. Forsley, and F.E. Gordon describes the experience of these researchers as they submitted papers describing their low-energy nuclear reaction (LENR )experiments to mainstream science journals.

From the Abstract:

The purpose of scientific journals is to review papers for scientific validity and to disseminate new theoretical and experimental results. This requires that the editors and reviewers be impartial. Our attempt to publish novel experimental results in a renowned physics journal shows that in some cases editors and reviewers are not impartial; they are biased and closed-minded. Although our subject matter was technical, its rejection was not: it was emotionally charged. It was an agenda-laden rejection of legitimate experiments that were conducted in US DoD and DoE laboratories. This paper describes the flawed journal review process, detailing our own case and citing others. Such behavior on the part of editors and reviewers has a stifling effect on innovation and the diffusion of knowledge. © 2013 ISCMNS. All rights reserved. ISSN 2227-3123

Noting that the rejection of revolutionary science “is hardly a new phenomenon”, the authors quote from Responsible Conduct of Research by A.E. Shamoo and D.B. Resnik:

History provides us with many examples of important theories that were resisted and ridiculed by [reviewers of] established researchers, such as Gregory Mendel’s laws of inheritance, Barbara McLintock’s gene jumping hypothesis, Peter Mitchell’s chemiosmostic theory, and Alfred Wegener’s continental drift hypothesis. –Shamoo and Resnik

Shamoo and Resnick explaining what their decisions regarding new energy research have meant:

As a result of this controversy, it has been difficult to conduct peer-reviewed work on cold fusion, because mainstream physics journals select reviewers with strong biases against cold fusion.

Boss, Forsely, and Gordon had submissions to journals rejected by reviewers who knew little about the phenomenon or the instruments involved, and didn’t attempt to learn. The authors found “the lack of curiosity and the unwarranted, surprisingly emotional responses” shown by some reviewers “disturbing”.

The consequences are far-reaching:

One immediate and long lasting effect of journals refusing to publish papers on as yet controversial observations is the elimination of a field of research and the diminution of scientists and engineers working in it. Without peer-reviewed publications, university faculty are precluded from funding as well as students, as no student will pursue an unrecognized field where jobs do not exist. Scientists are unable to find funds or management support. Entrepreneurs are limited because it is not likely that corporate angels or venture capitalists will risk funds on a technology, which is denigrated by leading scientists and subject to ridicule. In 1991, Nobel Laureate Julian Schwinger [38] aptly summarized the problem when he wrote:

“The pressure for conformity is enormous. I have experienced it in editors’ rejection of submitted papers, based on venomous criticism of anonymous referees. The replacement of impartial reviewing by censorship will be the death of science.”

Indeed, this whole situation is a “Catch-22” [39]; a situation named for the war novel in which a pilot who claims he is crazy so he wouldn’t have to fly missions, but by refusing to fly missions he proved he was sane! Our Catch-22 is that both DoE and DoD have unequivocally stated that until “first-tier” journals, like Science and Nature, publish papers inn this field, they will not fund programs. But, editors of these journals have stated they would not publish papers without DoE acceptance of the phenomena: a Catch-22. –Mosier-Boss, Forsley, and Gordon.

The Journal of Condensed Matter Nuclear Science (JCMNS) is published by the International Society of Condensed Matter Nuclear Science (ISCMNS).

Read the article “How the Flawed Journal Review Process Impedes Paradigm Shifting Discoveries” in Volume 12 December 2013 [.pdf]
http://www.freerepublic.com/%5Ehttp://coldfusionnow.org/science-journal-rejections-suppress-clean-energy-research/