Sunday, August 7, 2016

AUG 7, 2016 LENR

+Image result for suntzu quotes


The LENR world can now enjoy the Counterclaims of IH and Co.- a document of 66 pages. How convincing and opportune could this been in the first 2-3 months of the 1 year Test, without the 150 millions US$ investment money obtained by the Counter-plaintiff and, in the frame of a trial started by IH against Rossi and his helpers!
Now it is highly anachronistic , and because IH does not claim explicitly and cannot claim it that what Rossi has is not an energy technology with a game-changing potential it is a mixtura miserabilis of gossip, misunderstandings, errors (yes, nobody is infallible!) slander, exaggerations, anecdotes, imagination and irrelevance.
Why the decisive proof, the ERV reports  (three of them paid by IH without any complain) has not been thrown in battle in this series of Countercomplaints? Has IH in mind that if there are isotopic shifts in the ash samples from the Plant and they cannot invalidate the ERV Report then they cannot win in the Trial

Dear Readers ou have a lot to read today but not very pleasant things- the potential E-Cat killers are not nice at all.


1) Industrial Heat Responds to Rossi’s Complaints

2) Darden / IH / Cherokee Goes Full Ad Hominem on Fabiani and Penon in Counterclaim!

3) Industrial Heat Brings Counterclaims

4) Matthey, Matthew, or Matth-less: The Question of JM Products Parent Company (Hank Mills)

5) Is Joseph Murray the Establishment/DoD/Apco Operative Assigned to Slow LENR Down and Trash Rossi

6) Mystery Man James Bass Playing Soccer for Johnson Matthey of Royston UK! The HQ of Johnson Matthey Chemical Products …

7) Messages to and from Andrea Rossi re the Counter-complaints

August 6, 2016 at 5:31 PM

Dear Andrea:
The counterclaims of IH are ridiculous.
They say that the test was fake, that everything was fake, but they paid the reports made by the ERV in the first three quarters during which made their investors visit the plant while it was tested and collected 50 millions from Woodward. They stink.
IH has got refused its motion to escape and now is inventing slanders to find an excuse not to pay their debt.
By the way, Cherokee Fund is not new to frauds: see all the links below from the New York Times and other official sources about the frauds made by Tom Darden and Cherokee Fund Partners:
I am sure you and your attorney will bring in Court all the evidence necessary to proof their dishonesty.
I hope all this will not obstruct your work on the E-Cat.

Andrea Rossi
August 6, 2016 at 8:29 PM

Thank you for your insight and for the links.
As a matter of fact, I am spending a lot of time together with my Attorney to collect all the evidence to destroy the slanders. It is not difficult, but takes time that I’d prefer to spend in my factory. But a war is a war and we gotta do it.
Warm Regards,
August 6, 2016 at 5:59 PM

Dr Andrea Rossi:
The most humoristic part of the counterclaims of IH is where they say that they got the millions from Woodford and other investors not because of your IP, but for the other technologies they bought. But if you make a due diligence, you discover that what they got other than your IP is just a series of empty boxes, paid few hundred thousand dollars, plus shares of IH that are worth nothing, while IH collected more that 100 millions to buy your IP that is related to all the strong story of your work, your patents, your plants, the multiple tests made by third independent parties…and a real agreement they made with you and that certainly has been shown to their investors to justify the hundreds millions IH got from them. They are veritable fraudsters, this is what emerges reading the papers.
Never give up !

Andrea Rossi
August 6, 2016 at 8:25 PM

Thank you for your insight. I cannot comment.
Warm Regards,
Audrey Dadmond
August 6, 2016 at 6:40 PM

Dear Andrea:
Congratulations for the counterclaims of IH: if that is all they got, you already won. You produced solid evidence and logic considerations, they produced slanders that will never be sustained by evidence.
Andrea Rossi
August 6, 2016 at 8:23 PM

Audrey Dadmond:
I can’t comment, but thank you.
Warm Regards,

August 6, 2016 at 7:00 PM

Dear Andrea Rossi:
All my sympathy for your litigation against the slanders of Industrial Heat. They are rich and powerful, but everybody reading their counterclaims understood that they lie. They have used you to make money from their investors and then tried to discharge you. They stink, but you will win, because all their bullshit will not resist in Court. From all the papers deposited so far it is clear that your assessments are based on solid evidence, theirs are based on slanders.
We are all with you.
Barry Dodgson
Andrea Rossi
August 6, 2016 at 8:21 PM

I cannot comment about issues related to the litigation.
Thank you for your sympathy.
Warm Regards,
Peter Gluck
August 6, 2016 at 1:23 PM

Dear Andrea,

this is my blog for today:

Tomorrow it will be more clarity around.

warm regards,

Andrea Rossi
August 6, 2016 at 3:51 PM

Peter Gluck:
Thank you for your link.
Within several days our Attorney will assess the slanders in due mode. I cannot comment anything that has to be issued in Court, but I can say we are in possess of all the evidence necessary to dismantle the slanders of our foe.
Warm Regards,


8) Bay Area Cold Fusion Meetup
Next BACF meeting: Talk on CF in proton conducting ceramics


  1. You asked me several times to describe what error Rossi made with the flow meter. The error was described in detail in Exhibit 5 from I.H., which is here:

    I summarized the problems here:

  2. Progressive opinion after IH counterclaims published:

    1) IIRC if the test required a COP of greater than or equal to 3 and this result would have been deemed a success if sustained over the 12 month period.

    What I read is IH saying the eCat could in no way deliver the ERV Report claim of average COP up to 50. So my immediate reaction is what has COP 50 got to do with the result other than it is way higher than the required average COP of 3. ?.

    2) That this trial is before a jury of lay people means it is a 'song and dance' act performed by both sides to prove one way or the other, that the test was conducted per the terms of the contract. There is no other purpose to the trial.

    As stated previously the Jury cannot prove the science of LENR (real or false) and neither can the judge.

    The only issue to prove is who did or did not meet the terms of the contract. The issue of proof of the test's COP levels was delegated to the ERV and the delegated ERV says yes it was greater than 3. So the issue then becomes IH proving *to the jury* that the ERV made gross errors or lied. In regard to the test, What Rossi says is a side issue. It is what the ERV says that counted.

    As for the judge ordering another ERV to conduct a further test. That IMHO is likely to lead to an impasse over both parties accepting a mutually agreed ERV. BUT, a new test could simply run for a week and prove COP > 3 or not.

    If the plant could run a a COP > 3 for one week then it should validate the findings (in terms of the goals of the original test) of the 1st ERV reports.

    The show rolls on.

    Doug Marker

    1. You misread the documents and data from I.H. They said there was no measurable excess heat from any reactor. Not the ones Rossi made and operated, and not the ones I.H. made according to his instructions. They said, for example: "Indeed, using the E-Cat technology Plaintiffs directly provided them, Industrial Heat and IPH have been unable to produce any measurable excess energy." Elsewhere, they said this about Rossi's own test.

      They did not say the COP was less than 4. They said it was less than 1 (no excess heat). They said this repeatedly and unequivocally.

      I have seen a sample of Rossi's data, and I agree with I.H. evaluation. There was no indication of excess heat. Furthermore, the data is rife with fraud and outrageous mistakes, as described in Exhibit 5. There were days when the reactor was half turned off, or fully turned off, yet the data log shows it produced 1 MW continuously on those same days. That is blatant fraud. The claim that 1 MW of heat was released into the customer site is baloney. They ran the wrong kind of flow meter in a pipe half full of water. They knew they were doing that! They were told. They did it deliberately, in order to produce a fake, inflated COP. They did this with other instruments as well.

    2. Jed,
      So ykou are already a star witness for the defense.

      Good for you and, good luck. I am sure the jury will love you ;)



    3. Jed is all over the place. He is doing a lot more work than he did in killing Dekalion. He might need to maintain this frenetic pace for years to come. Jed must really enjoy what he is doing to press his nose to this grindstone so vigorously.

    4. As far as I understand,

      -not measurable mean that it is zero +/- the uncertainy.
      -not significant mean that it is epsilon which is below the uncertainty

      same meaning ?

      as I understand not significant is scientifically important as it does not mean zero, it mean imposible to distinguish scientifically from zero, because of the uncertainty.

      this is much used in emidepiology or particle physics to cool down the crowd when reading a spurious anomaly which is probably simply noise.

      Do I understand English correctly?

    5. Alain,
      I think you have it right.

      The way you explain it certainly comes though to me as you put it.

      Doug Marker.

  3. Jed
    You have said A.R. released parts of the EVR.
    Why would release the Data if it goes
    against him as you argue.

  4. I have no idea what Rossi does what he does. You will have to ask him.