Monday, September 19, 2016



Rudeness is the weak man's imitation of strength (Eric Hoffer)

The weaker you are the louder you bark. (Masashi Kishimoto)

The willingness to change one’s mind in the light of new evidence is a sign of rationality not weakness. (Stuart Sutherland)

Our greatest weakness lies in giving up. The most certain way to succeed is always to try just one more time. (Thomas A. Edison)

Weakness of attitude becomes weakness of character. (Albert Einstein)

Weakness is what brings ignorance, cheapness, racism, homophobia, desperation, cruelty, brutality, all these things that will keep a society chained to the ground, one foot nailed to the floor. (Henry Rollins)

Growth begins when we begin to accept our own weakness. (Jean Vanier)

Power over others is weakness disguised as strength. (Eckhart Tolle 

There is no failure except in no longer trying. There is no defeat except from within, no really insurmountable barrier save our own inherent weakness of purpose. 
(Kin Hubbard)

There are two kinds of weakness, that which breaks and that which bends. (James Russell Lowell)

It is often said that men are ruled by their imaginations; but it would be truer to say they are governed by the weakness of their imaginations. (Walter Bagehot)


We can ignore, deny or forget that Cold Fusion was born weak and remained so for many years. However it has chances to be strong only if it accepts its initial and primordial weakness- but I spoke about this hundreds of times in vain.

About the E-Cats- they also were weak at the start but later, for example in the 1MW plant they were already strong and anti-fragile:

Now in the frame of the Rossi vs. Darden Trial it is am zing the weakness of some arguments of the supporters (on the Forumo- and Blogosphere) of IH, see please my editorials:

Sep 06- "A Stake in the Heart of Dracule- Exhibit 5
Sep 13_ " Myths of Proofs.."

It causes me an almost physical pain see in people who claim being normal insisting with pathological stubbornness that in the closed circuit of the Plant the water pipes were only half full. Now I have found an identical logic at the Flat Earth this only a coincidence? I think it is not possible to communicate with Joseph Murray who created this hypothesis and his epigons are just epigons.

So much about weakness today, please read the Mottoes and think about how can they be applied to LENR. The first two go perfectly for the.. epigons.


1) Updated Sept 17, 2016
Good prospects for Leonardo Corp./Andrea Rossi lawsuit vs. Cherokee Investment Partners/Thomas Darden


3) in Italian- 
Loreto Created New Test Anormalities of LENR Question Albertini VID 20160917 171531 video by Claudio Pace

4) MFMP Publishes Details, Seeks Input on New ‘Clamshell’ LENR Reactor Design

Pietro F.
September 18, 2016 at 11:58 PM

Mr Andrea Rossi:
What is the situation of the industrialization of the 1 MW E-Cats?

Buon lavoro

Pietro F.

Andrea Rossi
September 19, 2016 at 6:37 AM

Pietro F.:
Small scale industrialization is on course. Large scale industrialization needs longer times, but not too long I hope.
Warm Regards,

6) Report: ‘Stable Excess Heat’, ‘100 Per Cent Reproducible’ in LENR Experiment at Tohoku University, Japan


  1. Peter - your third quote is apt. You are still ignoring the evidence of the missing ~1MW in the Doral test. If it was produced, then where did it go? Is there any evidence that there was a process being performed that would use that amount of heat, or that there was any attempt to dissipate the waste heat from the process?

    Rossi won't tell you how that heat was removed. It's not his problem, after all, it's up to JM Products to tell you how it was removed, and it's unlikely that they will tell you. Rossi has no control over them - they are a customer after all, and the fact that Rossi's lawyer is running it and that there seem to be no other employees is not a material fact.

    Unless you can think of a physical process that would totally remove around 980kW of heat at around 100°C for around 350 days and leave no trace behind it, the only explanation for the missing heat is that it wasn't produced.

    This single bit of evidence enabled me to change my opinion of Rossi from "not sure" to "it's certain it didn't work". That is why your quote is apt. I don't see how you can maintain your position that Rossi produced 1MW and it worked as he stated. Rossi will not be able to explain away the lack of the audit trail for 1MW or so of heat energy from that building. He won't even try, since any such explanation will be obviously false to anyone with some high-school physics.

    It's time you address the problem and change your mind.

    1. The photo was taken after the test was complete and equipment removed.

    2. Dear Simon,

      Because you do not insist with total absurdities as half full pipes and bewitched flowmeters I will answer you with empathy.
      I do not ask you to change your opinion but I ask mutuality.
      First question is what do you wish from this affair? It seeems you wish Rossi should lose the Trial and IH should win because they are right.
      Ok, if what you say- consume of the heat from 1500 kg steam of 102-104 C is an INSOLUBLE PROBLEM inthe given circumstances than your wish wuill become a reality- then why do you insist so much? Wait a while and then be happy.
      What do you actually know for sure about the JM building, warehouse? Can you please repeat me length, widh , height, position of the building? Connection to utilities, ventillation, everything else.

      Then for a year Rossi's men but IH's too have seen what it is in the ERV report water going to the ECats becoming steam going to JM's building nd coming back as 60C water. Has somebody said it was something suspicius?
      Then there will be anaalyses of samples if the plant has woirked there will be isotopic shifts.

      It is difficult but put yourself in Rossi's position, he has worked hard an entire year, had a valid contract and IH has not paid, Rossi started the trial, supposing he swindled and there was no energy produced no energy consumed, what are his chances?
      The Trial is not cheap.
      You are lacking information, you consider consume of heat impossible, OK...this is your opinion. My opinion is different and I wil change it when I consider it is the case. Or not.
      Be happy with yours, OK?

      My good wishes,


    3. Peter - what I wish is to be told the truth.

      Where that heat went without leaving a large amount of evidence is an insoluble problem given centuries of experience in dealing with steam engines etc.. That amount of heat released to the environment would not even need instrumentation to notice, and would be obvious to anyone passing close by. The absence of such remarks should be noted.

      Other corroborative evidence also doesn't match. The returned condensed water at ~67°C should be nice clean distilled water. It will not get dirtier over time as shown in the photos on other sites, but will become cleaner.

      The available building data has been discussed elsewhere. No point in repeating that here.

      Though specific data as to what was done in the locked room is not available, we can treat it as a black box. What goes into it must come out again, since we do have photos of what was there after the test was concluded. The most important flow is of course the heat. We know of no way of destroying that heat, and such a discovery (that we can destroy or create mass/energy) would be very important if true. Is this therefore your contention, that Conservation of Energy can be broken?

      The reason I'm insisting that you consider where the heat went is that you are insisting that Rossi succeeded in showing that it was produced, and you are insulting people like Jed and Abd who disagree with you. It is obvious that what Rossi claims is simply wrong, when you consider what effect 1MW would have on the environment around that Doral warehouse. The fine points of how bad data was produced, and whether it was a flowmeter problem or a combination of other things, is largely irrelevant. If you know you'll have to deal with such a large amount of heat, you will need to have systems in place to dissipate it, and it will leave a rather large trail of evidence as to where that heat went. That is inescapable.

      I hope that Bob Godes will prove his system. The signs are good that he's telling the truth about his data. I also hope that Alan Smith and Sam will succeed in their Parkhomov replication and developments, and I've even given them a small donation. I have no doubt they'll tell the truth.

      With Rossi, the scientific question is whether the heat was actually produced. The evidence says that it wasn't and that Rossi didn't expect to need to deal with it either. Unless it impacts on IH's backing of other LENR projects, I'm not concerned about the legal results of the trial. The trial won't test the science, after all, but instead what the precise wording of the contracts was.

      Maybe another allegory on measurements is in order. The wall-thermometer in a room tells you it's 25°C, but you see people in there in thick padded jackets and you can see the plumes of their breath. Do you believe what the thermometer tells you and wear summer clothes to go in there? Or do you suspect that the thermometer is wrong? If you then see a half-empty coffee cup with frozen coffee inside, how sure would you be that the thermometer is wrong? It's much the same with Rossi - what we see doesn't agree with what he's telling us.

    4. @Simon Derricutt

      ...are you sure that it is 25°Celsius and not 25°Fahrenheit (still 'official' temperature scale in the United States, including its unincorporated territories)?

      25°Fahrenheit means -3.88°Celsius and would explain what you describe!

      Greets Felix Rends

    5. The argument about "where did the heat go" is one of the silliest raised in the whole mess. It went either into the air of the building, or into the product and air. Small industrial complexes like the one used are invariably equipped with loading docks. Getting the heat out of the building is as simple as opening the loading dock door and starting up a large electric fan (of the four-foot diameter sort).

      What one does NOT do is install a whole lot of permanent HVAC for a temporary occupation of the structure.

  2. Felix - that is of course a good point. Still, in the circumstances I wouldn't believe that the instrument was correct....

    Anonymous - you seem to have missed Jed's mention of an IR survey that would see that heat-plume. If there was a large fan installed, same problem except that you'd also hear the large fan as well as see the heat-plume. This is after all getting on for a megawatt we're supposed to be getting rid of. Installing air-conditioning also won't get over the problem, since you'd need more electricity to run it and that power would also add to the heat-plume seen.

    "Where did the heat go?" is thus central. It can't be answered by ridiculing it - it needs an answer that is physically possible. If the amount of heat had been only around 10kW then it's harder to be certain it wasn't there, but add another couple of orders of magnitude and it should be unmissable. As it stands, it seems that the IR survey only saw somewhere around 20kW. Peter at least recognises that the question is valid even though he doesn't have an answer yet.

  3. Anonymous
    Still amazing to me that someone has not interviewed a neighboring business
    to the test plant or anyone else that might have some knowledge that is not
    under NDA.
    The old American news guys that track
    down a story must be a thing of the past.