Talk-Polywell.org

Or also adding the bit about the drilled holes. To wit, same dents and drilled holes, why?

ScottL, if you are game to go simple stupid and see what he says with Kite's version that would be cool.
If he ignores it, so be it. But others will see it, and I think it will cause pressure on him.

If he deletes your post, then I would take that as an answer in itself.

Personally, I think it is pretty clear it is the same 1MW, and has been all along. Rossi has only changed some window dressing, and he should be called on it.

ladajo wrote:Or also adding the bit about the drilled holes. To wit, same dents and drilled holes, why?

Suggest NOT the holes. He might "answer" with, "they are part of the assembly process" and ignore the important part.

KISS.

Fair enough.

Now it just needs to get up on JONP...

I'm willing after the New Year (Holiday travels) but Kite is right in that I'll have to be very careful in how I word it. He has a tendency to delete posts and/or cherry picking questions. I'll see what I can come up with in the way of wording once I return home and link as I can.

"The shipping container that held your first unit has the same unusual dents as the one that was shown in the recent Swedish video. Why is that?"

because we re-used the original container after the original contents were transferred to our latest customer (a powerful military organisation whose name i cannot reveal afaik)

im guessing thats the kind of answer you'll get

ScottL wrote:I'm willing after the New Year (Holiday travels) but Kite is right in that I'll have to be very careful in how I word it. He has a tendency to delete posts and/or cherry picking questions. I'll see what I can come up with in the way of wording once I return home and link as I can.

Thanks!

Happy Travels.

Let us hope that 303 is not right. (One of my all time favorite rifles, the venerable Enfield .303, ...was that your purpose?)

What could you possibly like about the Enfield? In the 1800's it was acceptable, but during WWII, the Brits, Italians and Germans were shooting bolt actions while US troops had Garands. Patton rightly called the Garand "the greatest battle implement ever devised" as it gave US soldiers a decisive edge in firepower. The Enfield pales by comparison.

It has nothing to do with utility. I too would vote for the usefulness of the M-1. However, the Enfield is one of my favorites purely for aesthetics. Being a native New Zealander, it was the rifle d'jour of my childhood. Many of my family dragged them out for hunting (suited the purpose), and they were all the rage on the many English shows of our one TV channel at the time. The .303 has always tugged at my nostalgia strings. One day I may own one to hang on the wall. Just haven't gotten around to it yet.
Besides, you just have to admit it does look cool. The front sight is a classic in itself.

Troll ScottL got an answer.


ScottL
December 31st, 2012 at 6:23 AM

Mr. Rossi, I’ve been in a never ending back and forth with individuals about your 1MW container. Many of those who argue say that the container for your first unit has the same dents and floor scrapings as the one shown in the recent swedish video. Is the original 1MW unit the same one in the video or is this a new unit with coincidentally similar markings? I’m sure you know how these internet arguments can go and I’d like to having something backing what I post in response to them. Thank you, ScottL
Andrea Rossi
December 31st, 2012 at 7:02 AM

Dear Scott L.:
As I said and wrote many times, the Container of the 1 MW plant is the same tested one year ago, since to the military Customer we delivered different ones. This one, seen also in the Swedish Television, has been used to make tests, modifications, improvements, certification. It has been a tremendous tool for R&D. Now it is destined to a Customer. It will be delivered on March, after further series of modifications we have in course now. Thanks to it now we can pass to a repetitive manufacturing line. After a glorious first life as a prototype for R&D, it is on his way to go to work in a centralized heating plant to supply heat: this will be his seconf life.
Warm Regards,
A.R.

Heh, makes me want to encourage folks to ask about that particular '1M unit' in April to see how the customer is doing with it.

parallel wrote:Troll ScottL got an answer.

Don't call me a troll, I did nothing of the sort. I asked a question proposed here, and got a response. You receive hostile responses because you approach situations as a hostile individual who is ill informed. Not to mention, you're a liar who is now once again parttaking in the discourse here instead of sticking to your previous position.

ScottL wrote:

parallel wrote:Troll ScottL got an answer.

Don't call me a troll, I did nothing of the sort. I asked a question proposed here, and got a response. . .

Just when there was a bit of civility going on here, Parallel.

Anyway, to the subject at hand. I feel it is unlikely that Rossi had the resources to build another 1MW system, that was never shown, to be delivered to the mystery customer. So on its face, it looks rather bad that the 1MW system prototype is still around in his shop.

Rossi claimed he has answered this question many times, but this is the first I have heard it here, that the 1MW plant original was not supposed to be delivered. I have not suffered searching through his blog on this, however.

JoeP,

Things have never been civil on this thread. There are too many who accuse Rossi of being a criminal, a fraud and a liar without adequate proof. Guilty until proven innocent. If ScottL had been as civil on this thread as he was when asking Rosssi a question, I wouldn’t think he was a troll. He is not the worst by any means.

The preponderance of evidence now makes LENR certain. It is therefore likely that Rossi’s E-Cats work although it remains to be proven just how well. The known problems of repeatability and control may not have been solved well enough yet for a commercial product. Remember there have been several lab explosions in the past and even Rossi says that he has had some.

The knucklehead’s mantra of “why has he not demonstrated it in a way we can believe” and he must be a fraud because he hasn’t, is inane beyond words. Although it has been repeated so many times, they still can’t grasp that Rossi has no obligation to do that. It is not in his interest to encourage competition, particularly with the patent situation so screwed up. All he has to do is persuade his backers it is real and he appears to have done that. People thinking of investing money usually run stringent tests themselves.

There are so many people now involved in the E-Cat that fraud is very unlikely. Krivit is the only witness to have cried foul and he was reportedly caught trying to steal some of Rossi’s nickel fuel.

With the independent report expected in February, the 1 MW Hot Cat reportedly on track for February and the original R&D 1 MW E-Cat to be delivered in March, we should know the truth one way or the other inside six months.

parallel wrote:JoeP,

Things have never been civil on this thread. There are too many who accuse Rossi of being a criminal, a fraud and a liar without adequate proof. Guilty until proven innocent. If ScottL had been as civil on this thread as he was when asking Rosssi a question, I wouldn’t think he was a troll. He is not the worst by any means.

The discussion at hand was how to formulate a question to Rossi about the 1MW container. This was a cooperative effort to get some more info, and calling ScottL a troll when he was the one to make a post and get an answer from Rossi for us here was uncalled for.

parallel wrote: The preponderance of evidence now makes LENR certain.

I doubt you will have many here in agreement with that. Current evidence is not at all convincing. The current state of the evidence indicates that more experiments with better controls are needed in order to rule out measurement errors and unaccounted for side effects.

parallel wrote: The knucklehead’s mantra of “why has he not demonstrated it in a way we can believe” and he must be a fraud because he hasn’t, is inane beyond words. Although it has been repeated so many times, they still can’t grasp that Rossi has no obligation to do that. It is not in his interest to encourage competition, particularly with the patent situation so screwed up. All he has to do is persuade his backers it is real and he appears to have done that. People thinking of investing money usually run stringent tests themselves.

That was always Rossi's game from the beginning. I think a lot of folks here respected that logic. However there are a lot of things about Rossi that came out over the past couple of years that put a lot of doubt over just about everything he says or does. Thus this marketplace motivation for ignoring serious scientific inquiry into his apparatus has become greatly suspect.

parallel wrote:JoeP,

Things have never been civil on this thread. There are too many who accuse Rossi of being a criminal, a fraud and a liar without adequate proof. Guilty until proven innocent. .

http://newenergytimes.com/v2/sr/RossiEC ... line.shtml