Skeptopaths, cryptodenialists and saboteurs vs LENR

Pseudoskepticism can be divided into skeptopathy (pathoskepticism) and cryptodenialism.

Skeptopathy is persisting in an erroneous disbelief in spite of logic and evidence to the contrary. Skeptopaths suffer from chronic, irrational beliefs that certain phenomena are not true, improbable or non-existent for the sole reason that they are unusual, controversial, novel or disruptive to a belief system or ideology. Skeptopathy is not a personality disorder or a mental illness - it is an intellectual weakness, an inability to think logically characterized by arguing-from-authority and the use of ad-hominems and logical fallacies to defend one's position, a position often borne out of the wish that something is not true. Cryptodenialism is a cloaked denial of facts for ulterior motives such as jealousy or opposing financial interests. A great majority of academics are skeptopaths. It has been suggested that skeptopathy arises as a consequence of trauma, suffered from having been forced to adopt a faith-based belief system (religion, homeopathy etc.) but we think that it is more likely that the more a person assumes they know (have been taught), the more rigid the belief that this "knowledge" is perfect. The more effort and resources spent on an education, the more resistance to abandoning the knowledge it yielded. Likewise with the more status the skeptopath has in his field, the less inclined he will be to undermine the foundations of his hard-won position.

A close cousin of the skeptopath is the magical thinker, the "believer", he who believes things merely because he wishes them to be true. A complication is that "believers" often have irrational reasons to believe facts that are however still true, and this aids skeptopaths and cryptodenialists in their public atacks on the veracity of those facts. Sometimes the believers' arguments are handed to them by cryptodenialists, so that they can shoot them down later as "proof" that the entire "conspiracy theory" or "crackpot hoax" is nothing but that.

George Hody

George Hody/"Mary Yugo" in a photograph taken decades ago.

There is no sharp boundary between skeptopathy and cryptodenialism. Cryptodenialists often display skeptopathic traits. Where skeptopaths are mainly "stupid" (in spite of the fact that they can score very high on an IQ test and be lauded academics), cryptodenialists are mainly "evil" but these traits can occur in the same person, as we will discuss in the example of "Mary Yugo", the accidentally-revealed alias of George Lawrence Hody, who used to be the VP of Thermonetics Corp, a tiny company that made calorimetric sensors. George Hody as "Mary Yugo" has been a most vocal "eCat denier" from the day Andrea Rossi gave public demonstrations of his device to scientists. Mr. Hody has no competence in nuclear physics and is not a stakeholder in LENR, so he can be classified as a skeptopath.

Steven Krivit

Steven Krivit

Steven Krivit on the contrary is well-versed in LENR and can therefore be classified as a cryptodenialist. Krivit likely has an ulterior motive to attack Rossi, because he is in a position to accurately judge the technology.

Skeptopathy can seamlessly morph into cryptodenialism when the skeptopath's position becomes untenable also for himself. Just as some schizophrenics will eventually understand that the voices they hear aren't real (John Nash is an example), the skeptopath, when confronted with sufficient evidence, may also see the error of his ways but may turn into a cryptodenialist to avoid embarrasment, in the hope that meanwhile, the problem will go away. The cryptodenialist may be die or be forgotten before incontrovertible evidence to his misjudgment becomes common knowledge, or the object of his denialism may die, disappear or become marginalized.

Cryptodenialism can be regarded as an expression of sociopathy and is not too interesting to warrant elaborate discussion because it is well-known that unscrupulous counter-stakeholders will deceive. Skeptopathy however is a poorly recognized psychological phenomenon which continues to cause society incalculable damage. Skeptopaths are damaging enough by themselves, but they also serve as force-multipliers for cryptodenialists. Without skeptopaths, the world would be a vastly better place because the cryptodenialists would not have skeptopathic authority figures to hide behind.

Both skeptopaths and cryptodenialists won't hesitate to accuse their target of committing criminal offenses. Andrea Rossi is routinely called a fraudster by both categories. Cryptodenialists however usually make sure they remain on the side of caution, in the knowledge that knowingly falsely accusing someone of having commited a crime is in most jurisdictions a potentially prisonable offense. Cryptodenialists, usually being stakeholders, would make themselves guilty of the crime of aggravated libel: Libel with intent to do financial harm. Skeptopathic allegations originate in a feebleness of mind so they are more inclined to be less careful with their accusations. Cryptodenialists prefer to engage in covert sabotage instead, such as Gary Watkins who uses the alias "Gary Wright". Gary Watkins is the owner of the site He tried to use the authorities to shut down Rossi, as is evidenced in these emails. Mr. Watkins has spared no expense in his attacks, dedicating himself full-time to taking Rossi and his eCat down. His emails to authorities are structured like master theses, with 15 pages of supporting "evidence" backing up his claims. Gary Watkins reminds of Roger Helbig, who is paid by the Pentagon to spend a full working week on heavy-handedly suppressing all discussion about Depleted Uranium. It turns out that Mr. Watkins indeed is a full-time paid saboteur for everything promising in the cold fusion realm: He has spared no expense in time and money to try to get Papp motor research shut down. The Papp engine was a device that likely used cold fusion reactions triggered by a 400 KV discharge in a plasma of noble gases to explosively expand the plasma and run a motor this way - without fuel, without exhaust, without much noise and without the need for cooling. An apparently very intelligent person who spends enormous resources over the years in time, effort and money to do nothing else but sabotage cold fusion research in all possible ways - including legal bullying and spending money and apparently thousands of hours of his time to try to bury all forms of LENR commercialization likely is a paid saboteur. Amongst the many skeptics over the years that were shown the motor in operation was Richard Feynman, who called Papp a scammer and promptly disconnected the mains lead to the control unit. Papp's motor kept running for a couple of minutes but then started to make sputtering noises and Papp worriedly plugged the control panel back in. The motor exploded, one onlooker died at the scene, Feynman claimed Papp must have hidden a bomb in his motor "to prevent us from discovering his hoax" but the FBI did not find any trace of explosives. Feynman's Caltech and Papp settled out of court.

Andrea Rossi

Andrea Rossi with 1 MW eCat

An excellent contemporary example of a scientific field popular as a target for skeptopaths is Cold Fusion, also called LENR (Low Energy Nuclear Reactions). We could have chosen many other examples from the past, such as Ignaz Semmelweiss, who was ridiculed for his discovery that washing hands before delivering babies virtually eliminated infections suffered by the mother. He was locked up in a lunatic asylum and was beaten to death by the guards two weeks later. Ignaz Semmelweiss' "crazy delusion" was that some kind of infectious agent was responsible for the frequent lethal fevers associated with childbirth. Skeptopathic doctors would make a point in demonstrating their disbelief by doing deliveries with deliberately dirtied hands. Years after his death, Louis Pasteur confirmed Semmelweiss' theory of pathogenic microorganisms. Countless lives of young mothers could have been spared if it weren't for the pathoskeptics' sabotage of this important discovery.

Pseudoskeptics are by definition unpersuadable by proof and evidence that refutes their disbelief. When the Wright brothers flew an airplane for the first time in the presence of a crowd of journalists, those journalists refused to mention this feat in their newspapers. Instead, newspapers around the world would keep calling them scammers. In the years that followed, the brothers would fly higher, further and faster but it would take a full five years before the newspapers stopped calling them fraudsters. That was when the US Army awarded them a lucrative contract to build airplanes for them. The Wright brothers soon were mired in patent litigation.

Rossi's eCat device has been independently verified to work as advertized by a team of Swedish scientists, one of which the former President of the Swedish Skeptics Society. The Swedes, in breach of their promise to Rossi, disclosed every detail of the fuel used as well as other data they vowed to Rossi not to make public. It is not just scientists who seek to sabotage the commercial success of engineer-inventors: Unethical business partners will try to steal trade secrets, as happened in Rossi's case with the Greek Defkalion. Andrea Rossi spent a year in an Italian prison because the corrupt Italian government, pressured by the Mafia that controls most of Italy's waste disposal industry, made the storage of waste by unlicensed actors an offense. Rossi's oil-producing waste processing plants were declared environmental "crime sites" and access was blocked. This resulted in leakage after some years, since Rossi's company PetrolDragon was forbidden to operate, renovate or evacuate their plants. Rossi was charged with responsibility for the oil leakage and his one year in prison was spent studying the nearly 1200 publications in scientific journals on Cold Fusion, which he paid for and obtained via intermediation by the prison library. Rossi studied them so intensely and made so many notes that three hours before he was released, a fellow inmate stole them, in the assumption they must be valuable. Fortunately, they were retrieved unscathed.

Stanley Pons and Martin Fleischmann

Stanley Pons and Martin Fleischmann, discoverers of Cold Fusion.

Andrea Rossi did not want to end up like Martin Fleischmann, who, together with Stanley Pons discovered cold fusion, only to be sabotaged by MIT, which successfully replicated their experiment but publicly stated the opposite, presumably our of fear they would lose their multi-billion subsidies to fund their research into hot fusion. Fleischmann died before he could be vindicated by Rossi's research, which was also influenced by Sergio Focardi's work on Nickel-Hydrogen fusion. Focardi asked Rossi to publish his eCat results, because he would like to see public recognition of these efforts.


Focardi died not long after Rossi agreed. Rossi, like Pons and Fleischmann, suffered tremendous backlash for his intransigence in announcing a major scientific breakthrough, him not even being a scientist and clearly having commercial motives, which seems to be a deadly sin to academics. Like Pons and Fleischmann, Rossi intended to not just have humanity benefit from his hard work and financial sacrifices but he himself as well, so he kept the details secret, to the public dismay of pseudoskeptics.

Alexander Parkhomov

Alexander Parkhomov

It did not take long before Rossi's discovery was independently verified and all details of a working cold fusion reactor put in the public domain by the Russian nuclear scientist Aleksandr Georgievich Parkhomov. His primitive "eCat knockoff" is a very simple device that can be replicated by an electromechanically apt hobbyist of average skill. His detailed instructions on how to build a cold fusion reactor are here. Rossi did not want to suffer the same fate as Fleischmann and Focardi so, when faced with the refusal of the EU and US patent offices to accept his patent application for his device, sold the rights for a symbolic amount (15 million dollars) to Industrial Heat LLC. He undoubdedly will receive royalties as well. Industrial Heat LLC has access to billions in investment capital and their CEO is a nuclear physicist. Without Rossi's involvement, they built an eCat from scratch and verified that it indeed works as claimed. They proceeded to obtain the IP rights and managed to patent the device in the United States. The eCat patent can be read here.

"Mary Yugo" has claimed that Tom Darden, CEO of Cherokee Investment Partners which spun off Industrial Heat LLC is some kind of naive schmuck who got scammed by Rossi. This could not be further from the truth. Mr. Darden is a well-credentialed, respected captain of industry with an impressive track record and is well-connected with key decision makers in the US government.

Tom Darden, CEO, Cherokee Investment Partners, discusses Transportation and Climate Change

We hope that it is clear that in light of the handful of independent verifications of the eCat technology by various truly skeptical scientists that continued vocal objections to Rossi and his invention must be based on either ignorance or malice, in other words pseudoskepticism. Since George Hody AKA "Mary Yugo" is not a conceivable stakeholder (the man is in his seventies, never researched cold fusion and his business is dissolved), his literally thousands of vitriolic and libelous attacks on Andrea Rossi over the years on forums and blogs - a fulltime activity, we can presume - can only be explained as the sign of his apparent skeptopathy. The real scientists don't dare to voice skepticism anymore. Nobel laureate Brian Josephson is on the record that he's certain the eCat is a nuclear fusion device and works as claimed. was forced to tone down their rhetoric and admit that the number of independent verifications of the eCat are steadily increasing. Even the most vociferous eCat disbelievers have grudgingly said that "Even a kook, a clown and a criminal can invent something important". But George Hody keeps spamming his vile accusations of Andreas Rossi being a liar and a scammer.

It is a little known fact that Rossi, in the spring of 1970, ran 175 km in 24 hours in the town of Brescia. That's more than 7 full marathons in a day and a night. He set a new Italian record.

For more information on the personality traits of pseudoskeptics in the context of Rossi's eCat, read this interesting blog posting.

True skeptics:
  • Question everything and take nothing on faith, even from established institutions.
  • Ask questions to try to understand new things and are open to learning about them.
  • Apply critical examination and inquiry to all sides, including their own.
  • Withhold judgment and do not jump to rash conclusions.
  • Seek the truth and consider this their main goal.
  • Think in terms of possibilities rather than in preserving fixed views.
  • Fairly and objectively weigh evidence on all sides.
  • Acknowledge valid convincing evidence rather than ignoring or denying it.
  • Possess common sense and reason.
  • Are able to adapt their paradigms to new evidence and update their hypothesis to fit the data.
  • Understand the difference between the scientific process and the scientific establishment.
  • Acknowledge that the scientific establishment is subject to politics, corruption, control, censorship and suppression and therefore must be critically examined and scrutinized, rather than taken on faith, especially in the light of contrary evidence to their claims.
  • Will admit they are wrong when the evidence calls for it.
  • Do not ask questions to try to understand new things, but judge them by whether they fit into orthodoxy.
  • Apply "critical thinking" only to that which opposes orthodoxy or materialism, but never to the status quo itself.
  • Immediately judge as false and "debunk" anything that contradicts their paradigm.
  • Are not interested in truth, evidence or facts, only in defending their views.
  • Cannot think in terms of possibilities, but see their paradigms as fixed.
  • Are willing to lie and deceive to discredit their opponents.
  • Automatically dismiss and deny all data that contradicts their orthodoxy.
  • Are judgmental and quick to draw conclusions about things they know little or nothing about.
  • Scoff and ridicule what they oppose instead of using objective analysis and examination.
  • When faced with evidence or facts they can't refute, use semantics, word games, ad-hominems, straw men and denial to try to obfuscate the issue.
  • Unable to adapt their paradigms to new evidence, and deny data which doesn't fit into them.
  • View the scientific establishment as a religion and authority to be taken on faith and never questioned or challenged. Do not understand the difference between the scientific process/methodology and the scientific establishment institution.
  • Assume that the scientific establishment is objective and unbiased and free of politics, corruption, control, censorship and suppression for no other reason than blind faith in authority.
  • Will never admit that they are wrong no matter what, regardless of evidence.


  • Have a tendency to deny, rather than doubt.
  • Have double standards in the application of criticism.
  • Make of judgments without full inquiry.
  • Have a tendency to discredit, rather than investigate.
  • Use ridicule or attacks in lieu of arguments.
  • Label their proponents pejoratively.
  • Present insufficient evidence or proof.
  • Assume criticism requires no burden of proof.
  • Make unsubstantiated counter-claims.
  • Make counter-claims based on plausibility rather than empirical evidence.
  • Suggest that unconvincing evidence is grounds for dismissing it.

Written on February 8, 2015 by Frank de Groot.

Copyright violations result in a DMCA to the host + invoice with our content licensing fee.

1.  Pathoskeptic    Wednesday, June 24, 2015

Well, it is commonplace amongs the promoters if woo to redefine the very basic concepts. It is necesssry to keep their self made realitities more believable. They are,of course, not very believable at all, but enough to keep the religion alive.

2.  Sarah Vaughter    Monday, July 27, 2015

Thank you for coming out, Timo! Scientists don't embrace your religious concepts of science. You stated your disbelief. But real scientists work with proven facts only, not with sticking to dogma in spite of emerging experimental data that challenges this dogma.

What we do know with absolute certainty is that most theories on how the Universe works are wrong. Not merely incomplete but wrong. The "invention" of hundreds of "particles" and "dimensions" became necessary because Physics has been cast into a very imperfect mathematical fantasy, a crude description of how the underlying physical reality is thought to work.

Slowing down of time at near-lightspeed, the Big Bang, Quarks - all concepts that were invented because the underlying mathematical "truth" is false. And we still don't understand inertia, gravity, electromagnetic induction and why light can't go faster than it does because of a critical error in the interpretation of Michelson-Morley.

The big problem is that the Michelson-Morley experiment was misinterpreted, and that Einstein made a major mistake in understanding his own famous formula. Sadly Einstein became the gatekeeper against alternative, more accurate theories. Look at the Epola theory and Harold Aspden's refinements of it for how the world really works, and why exactly Einstein was wrong in the interpretation of what E=MC2 really means.

LENR works because atomic nuclei are not sperical by a long shot, hence Coulomb forces are orders of magnitude lower in certain places. The emDrive works because it pushes against the "ether" inside of it, and the Ether flows though matter, so there is actual thrust, there is an actual push against something physical, namely against the Epola.

3.  Pathoskeptic    Tuesday, August 18, 2015

Most of the promoters of woo are cowards, suppressing free critique. How about you, Susan?

4.  maryyugo    Thursday, August 20, 2015

This is hilarious! I am going to save it so that after Rossi and Darden crash and burn (exactly like Sniffex, Steorn and Defkalion have recently done), we can review the paranoid and inaccurate nonsense content at leisure. Thanks for a good laugh!

5.  Richard Gates    Friday, August 21, 2015

And, just supposing of course, in February 2016 they come out with an overall cost reduction in the test site. What will you say then? I shall be interested to hear @beardedoldness

6.  Richard Gates    Friday, August 21, 2015

Realities. Spell check your rants please.

7.  Richard Gates    Friday, August 21, 2015

Who is Susan? I'm afraid I missed something here. Or are you implying remembering a person's name is unnecessary? Oh, and what is woo? Not some emotional denigration of the topic, surely. We are all rational here and wouldn't do that...would we?

8.  maryyugo    Friday, August 21, 2015

I will say: bullsh*t. Don't realize that Rossi and his fictitious customer can say anything they want to?

Do you REALLY believe that Rossi has the most important invention in the last century and all he can do with it after 8 years of work is to sit in a steel container in North Carolina for an entire year to determine if it actually works?

Goodness, if you believe that, you will believe anything!

Rossi said he heated an entire factory in Italy with a boiler in which the heating element had been replaced by an ecat. And that was in 2007! 8 years ago!!!!

What happened to that magical heater since? Or do you think maybe Rossi was lying then and he's lying now?

Rossi claimed sale of his megawatt plant in 2011. No customer has ever come forward. What does that tell you?

If Rossi told the truth in 2011, why don't we have ecats in stores all over the world? Or at least in university laboratories? You really think something this important would take more than EIGHT years to emerge from the developer's laboratory?

By the way, what is "@beardedoldness"/ Your Tweeter feed?

9.  maryyugo    Friday, August 21, 2015

"Woo" or woowoo is the expression made by believers when they are told impossible lies by scammers and crooks like Andrea Rossi or John Hadjichristos (Defkalion, now a dead company).

10.  maryyugo    Friday, August 21, 2015

Before you theorize about how LENR works, it would be good to *prove* it works. That has not been done. Or at least, it has never been *properly* done.

11.  AlainCo    Friday, August 21, 2015

this is very common for the consensu to be wrong and to deny a reality that ano honest observe can consider provided he is not biased by education.

this happened agains wright brothers public flight.
this happened against Wegener evidentobservation of geological connectivity.

now not only it is common, but it start to be wrong.
you refuse to see it bu the planet is getting warmer on cold fusion, hiding a little i admit, because you and Nature are very good in terrorizing decision makers.

I see Tohoku university joining mitsubishi
I see Indian Academy of science making a shy move
I see Italy not blocking ENEA nor ICCF, even if media refuse to even ridiculize ICCF...
I see Airbus hierarchy not blocking JF geneste moves
I see beoing and lockheed martin not blcoking patent nor conferences.

see how media refuse to consider your (absurds) critics ?
they don't talk of LENR at all (few repeal old 1989 fairy tales because they have not updated) because they know that if they are supportive they will be bashed by you & other deniers.
they don't criticize, because they know they will be bashe in few quarters....

the silence when big corps support LENr is enough to say that we are in a psychiatry case of media groupthink, and not in individual incompetent people that media could insult freely as they love to do.

LENR cannot be insulted anymore by opinion makers, because it will make people reconsider the facts and it will break the consensus immediately.

12.  AlainCo    Friday, August 21, 2015

I propose you read the literature and find the artifacts...

Lewis, Hansen and Morrison have been proven wrong by Wilson, who pretend to be skeptic but who confirmed F&P in fact...

nobody else proposed anything to challenge F&P observations.

huizenga is pure antiscience, as he use theory as only argument against experiments, and use unspecified artifacts as excuse.

Gary Taubes is a fraudster, and Bockris, like LANL, or BARC , Storms, produced genuine tritium.


same for helium/heat


there is also iwamura & replication
the numerous Oriani/Storms/McKubbre/ENEA/NRL electrolythic cells replications
the F&P/Longchampt replication...

please stop saying there is no evidence, this is perfect example of unfounded claim that you assert just to make naive people consider it may be real. knowing your competence you cannot one second believe in what you say.

this position is pure BS, point.

you can with some huge bias challenge NiH and E-cat reality (less documented, not very scientific but business), but please don't insult science, and agree LENR is real, have always been real.

13.  Richard Gates    Friday, August 21, 2015

So, denigrate those with whom you disagree and not even consider waiting for, then using evidence to decide either way. OK...are you trying to be a stereotype for the article above? Because if you're not then - oops!

14.  maryyugo    Friday, August 21, 2015

If you have bothered to follow the story for 4 years, like I have, there is ample evidence that both Andrea Rossi and John Hadjichristos (and the rest of the Defkalion group) are consistent liars. Inasmuch as they took money from investors on false pretenses, they are also crooks and scammers. They do not deserve respect and there is no evidence to wait for. All the evidence you need is already in their past promises, announcements, test results, methods and remarks as evidenced by the various forums and web sites which follow their activities. If you don't know those, I will be happy to provide links for you.

15.  maryyugo    Friday, August 21, 2015

Alain, if you think there is evidence for sustained high power LENR, please tell me where I can read about it. A specific article or link, and not idiocy like Rossi and Defkalion or gross uncertainty like Brillouin, madness like Nanospire, and fruitless claims like Miley and Swartz.

I have no position on low level, low power LENR. Except that while it's possible, nobody has yet done a proper experiment using precision (not isoperibolic!) calorimetry with proper calibration and blank runs.

16.  maryyugo    Friday, August 21, 2015

Stop comparing Rossi to the Wright Brothers. There is not the slightest similarity. The Wright Brothers flew airplanes and within a few years took up passengers and the press.

Rossi claims he heated a building in 2007 (EIGHT years ago) with an ecat and since then, he has shown absolutely nothing which works. What he has shown are defective demonstrations and experiments which unfortunately bamboozled and flummoxed some not very experienced and not very bright Swedish scientists who know nothing about and took no pains to protect against trickery.

Now ask yourself: if you had the greatest invention of the century worth billions if not trillions of dollars, would you sit on ONE example in an old surplus shipping container for an entire year supposedly testing it? REALLY? Well, according to him, that is what Rossi is doing right now.

As usual, even allowing for the language barrier, I am afraid most of your writings, Alain, make no sense to me at all. Maybe you should consider getting assistance when you write in English?

17.  Richard Gates    Friday, August 21, 2015

Last first - yeah sorry about that. Stupidly supposed I was working through Twitter. Not very familiar with either Discus or Twitter I'm afraid.
As to Rossi
Believe? I'm waiting.
8 years previous? Don't know enough to say.
Why throw in the lying bit? It doesn't add to your argument. If anything it reduces its power.
No customer? If I was a commercial enterprise owner/ceo I don't think I'd have the courage to admit it with banks or shareholders watching until its proved.(more so if it isn't)
No ecats? Again courage. Who is going to buy something until its commercially proven.
Developer's labs? I think if it's real, 8 years is nothing. If it's not real then it will take forever. Don't forget if it's real, the antagonism from the established scientific community has discouraged every one of the other researchers as well. Although there do seem to be accounts from across the world of others who have succeeded in finding excess heat and even duplicating Rossi's results who are not reluctant to detail the equipment and process. They could still be untruthful but it's difficult to label them all as charlatans. As I said before, I will not be celebrating just yet. I'm waiting. With interest.

18.  we want LENR Fusione Fredda    Saturday, August 22, 2015

...or can we compare Rossi to Louis Pasteur? Intentional boycott through shaming and personal insult, though it may prove to be intimidating and protective towards the status quo ante, is contrary to any common sense scientific approach - which should be curious about new possibilities.
Actually, if you read Saviano, shaming and ridiculing it is the age-old method used by the mafia to discredit people who touch 'sensitive' issues...

19.  Richard Gates    Saturday, August 22, 2015

Hi sorry about the delay. It was UK bed time. You keep making assertions: ample evidence - consistent liars, took money from investors on false pretences. Where is your evidence of that? Who and where are those investors who must be pursuing him for fraud? I can find websites showing his promises, announcements, test results and so on. Show me this other material.

20.  AlainCo    Saturday, August 22, 2015

if you admit there is evidence of clear phenomenon verified with scientific instruments, even at tiny power by at high sign, then admit LENR is real.

the rest is engineering.

no need of high power event in science (it is even a problem, and E-cat test questions show the problem of high power measurement with skpetic way of mind)

you abuse of tea kettle fallacy.

I talk of science first, LENR is real and you cannot deny it.

now we both know LENR is real, measured precisely with huge sigma, even if it is working 50% of time,

High power and industrial application is just a painful engineering question.

You are using the teak kettle fallacy.
I could call it the Boeing 777 fallacy... when people would have denied Wright brothers because they flyer could not transport as many people as a the titanic.

stop denying LENR and abusing the readers here by mixing engineering and business questions, with fundamental scientific question, and the clear denial of reality you show.

you are exactly the example of what the article show.
mixing fear of change of science, and huge bias against novelty, with absolute lack of honesty in argumentation.

21.  AlainCo    Saturday, August 22, 2015

about calorimetry,
fist isopêribolic can works if well done and well calibrated. this was well done by fleischmann, and confirmed by Longchamps, Miles and many.

McKubre used isothermal flow calorimetry. and it worked.

Oriani used like Ed Storms seebeck calorimetry.

the problem with you is that whatever method is used you say there is hidden wires, hidden pipes, bad measurements, inverted clamps...
sometime possible, sometime impossible, who cares if what you claim is possible, you frighten the innocent readers who cannot check what you say themselves.

22.  maryyugo    Saturday, August 22, 2015

I think you should compare Rossi to Sniffex, Steorn, and going much further back, Charles Redheffer, John Ernst Worrell Keely, Josef Papp, Tom Bearden, and Dennis Lee. Also all the video compression scams.

23.  maryyugo    Saturday, August 22, 2015

Good question. The evidence comes from following Rossi and Defkalion's scams over the years. You can see the pattern in how they develop. It's not the usual constant improvement and better results of real research. It's less and less performance as time goes by -- classical for a free energy scam.

Additional evidence is from Rossi's numerous claims of things that had already happened but years later, no evidence for them existed. For example his million ecat a year robotic factory, self-destruct devices, and cheap ways to make exotic isotopes. Also his many sales to the military and his sales to civilian "customers" -- none of which have ever been named or have made any appearance.

Rossi's power and so-called COP was enough to heat a whole factory in 2007. It was 135kW peak and COP 30 in Levi's never repeated liquid calorimetry experiment. It was 10kW or less and COP 6 in the experiments Lewan witnessed and it was about 3kW and a COP ranging from 1 to 3 depending who you believe, in the so called independent third party experiments. Now Rossi claims a 250kW reactor but of course, nobody has seen, much less tested it.

Further evidence is that this has been going 8 years! By Rossi's own admission. That would never happen if the claims were real.

Commonly, investors in such schemes as Rossi's scams do not pursue the scammers. There are three possible reasons. First, they may have signed "best effort" agreements and it is very hard to sue when those are in place. Second, it makes them look like fools. Third, it costs money and by the time the suits come to an end, there is nothing left to recover so suing is a bad investment. Scammers depend on this.

24.  maryyugo    Saturday, August 22, 2015

I don't admit there is anything, Alain. I just have no interest in small amounts of power and energy or in small quantities of transmuted materials-- those experiments are extremely prone to large errors.

So show me ONE credible and replicated result where there is large power and energy for sustained periods. It is supposed to be nuclear, right? A million times or more the energy from chemical, right? So where is it?

25.  maryyugo    Saturday, August 22, 2015

Hey, what happened to Defkalion? They made essentially the same claims as Rossi and presented similar test results... and they are as dead as a doornail.

26.  maryyugo    Saturday, August 22, 2015

Nonsense. The most absurd part is that if I am indeed who it is said I am, then I am a world class expert in calorimetry, Rossi's worst nightmare. The second dumbest part is from those who fuss about my using a pseudonym... and they write from a pseudonym themselves!

Anyway, who writes what is irrelevant. Try addressing the facts presented. I am sure you can't or you would.

27.  we want LENR Fusione Fredda    Sunday, August 23, 2015

'Time is a gentleman'. Everything is going to fall into historical perspective, and you are likely going to scramble to deny your own intellectual denial.

28.  Gerard McEk    Sunday, August 23, 2015

This is an excellent peace Sarah, my compliments. I am sure that the Sceptopath will deny everything you said and that Pseudoskeptic will think that they do not belong to that group of sceptic behaviour.

29.  Pathoskeptic    Sunday, August 23, 2015

Yes, the individual who wrote this piece seems to be called Sarah. My bad..

Anyways, should be the same person cowardly deleting my comments.

30.  Pathoskeptic    Sunday, August 23, 2015

That is pretty precise.

31.  Bernie Koppenhofer    Monday, August 24, 2015

My name is Bernie Koppenhofer what is yours?

32.  Richard Gates    Monday, August 24, 2015

I think you might be in the wrong place.

33.  Richard Gates    Monday, August 24, 2015

Well. I'm not converted either way but I appreciate your answers. Your last comment to alain worries me a bit! I accept you don't believe it at all because of various reasons. However, to dismiss the entire possibility because of low value results seems odd. Even if Rossi clearly turns out to be a crook there are some honest, clearly described experiments which show anomalous heating. That includes some big companies and research organisations/universities. I know I don't know enough Physics to be an entirely intelligent observer but their results make me think something's there that has been previously missed.

34.  maryyugo    Monday, August 24, 2015

Try social media, Bernie.

35.  maryyugo    Monday, August 24, 2015

Richard, I don't dismiss the possibility that the low level results are real. I simply am not interested in them. And most such studies I looked at of that type were from bad to awful to dismal. For example, many use so-called isoperibolic calorimetry which is not calorimetry at all but instead consists of point temperature measurements.

Muon catalyzed fusion, on the other hand, has been proven real by reliable studies, replicated and published in peer reviewed journals. But it is inherently limited to very lower power because of the difficulty of employing muons. So I am not interested in that either.

What I am interested in and am good at evaluating are claims for high power, high energy LENR/cold fusion done with table top devices. That is easy to evaluate and so far, every one I looked at was either a scammer or a self-delusionist.

36.  Bernie Koppenhofer    Monday, August 24, 2015

Why are you afraid to attach your real name to your posts?

37.  Bernie Koppenhofer    Monday, August 24, 2015

no I am not, maryyugo will not put his real name on his posts, he wants to be able to disappear when his rants about LENR are proven wrong.

38.  Bernie Koppenhofer    Monday, August 24, 2015

Please be specific what "power and energy" would you accept as proof of LENR.

39.  maryyugo    Tuesday, August 25, 2015

Sure, Bernie, since you obviously have not followed earlier discussions of this issue elsewhere.

Power: 100 Watts
Energy: 100 kWhr (appx 360 megaJoules)
Power ratio (out/in): 6 or better


1) Acceptable energy production depends on size of device. Specified amount is for the original tennis ball sized ecat.

2) Tests completely independent of Rossi or Levi or any of his colleagues including the Swedish Professors. Completely independent means the experimenters provide EVERYTHING other than the ecat including the power source for the experiment and all the equipment for reading the output power.

3) Tests must include calibration and blank runs over the entire range of power expected from a power run.

4) Tests conducted by a university officially OR by a major government test lab officially OR by a major testing organization like UL.

5) Test results published in a peer reviewed journal and replicated by at least one other university, or lab, or test organization.

Note that the requirements are between one and three orders of magnitudes (10 - 1000X) **less** than what Rossi and Defkalion claimed, both in power and in energy and exactly what Rossi claims as to power ratio ("COP" for the believers). Note that nobody has even come close to meeting these requirements thus far. Hence I conclude that nobody has properly demonstrated that high power LENR/cold fusion even exists.

You do know the difference between power and energy, do you not, Bernie? Sometimes, it seems this distinction escapes Rossi.

40.  maryyugo    Tuesday, August 25, 2015

The reason I do not place my real name on internet forums of any sort is because they are frequented by strange people such as believers and stalkers. More important, there is no reason to identify myself inasmuch as I do not claim any special authority or knowledge except for the facts and observations I post which anyone can confirm independently (or "indipendently" if you're Rossi).

Tell you what, Bernie, I promise to reveal my name, home phone and home address, and to make a public apology in every forum I've written in on the day that Rossi's ecat can be purchased by the ordinary citizen in an ordinary store like Home Depot or Amazon. Heck, I'll even do it if the ecat becomes a readily available industrial heater which sells in the dozens to ordinary companies, not affiliated with Rossi and open to inspection by regulatory authorities and the public. Don't hold your breath until that day, Bernie, or you may turn blue or even purple.

What do you think of that, Bernie? If you turn out to be wrong about Rossi, as is virtually certain, what will you do?

BTW, most believers in Rossi's ecat also believed Defkalion's claims about the Hyperion reactors. Tested by the world's largest companies, they were being prepared for sale very soon to science and industry. Yah shoore they were. Where are those jackasses now? Why did Hadjichristos quit? Why can Defkalion no longer be found anywhere or visited? Hey, Bernie?

41.  Broncobet    Tuesday, August 25, 2015

A lot of intelligent people applaud your courageous stand against these charlatans and their soft headed believers.

42.  maryyugo    Tuesday, August 25, 2015


43.  AlainCo    Tuesday, August 25, 2015

if the LENR is real, and you admit it is, the it is a scientific revolution.

then it is a question of time for engineers to make it usable.

What Rossi claims to have done, like Pianteli, Miley, is simply in line with that.
not extraordinary.

the circumstantial evidence around E-cat make it clear it is real, even if we don't know it's performance, but E-cat could even be wrong, and LENR will still be the revolution of energy for next decade.

thanks for your support, even if it is only on the scientific question.
this is the main point.

44.  Bernie Koppenhofer    Tuesday, August 25, 2015

Hey there maryyugo: I am afraid your promises are
empty, because there is no reason for not using your own name.

You are right I have not followed every discussion about LENR. It appears to me you have made a full time job of searching out every article about LENR and Rossi in order to try to debunk LENR and Rossi,
too bad you are not being paid for all your hard work, or are you.

As far as Defkalion goes this is what I have been saying about them for over three years:

“I would not trust anything Defkalion says: The quote below is from the 11/29/2011 article in Ny Teknik written by Mats Lewan

This proves to me whatever Defkalion has it was stolen from Rossi.

The above article quotes Alexandros Xanthoulis, President of Defkalion:

“- Let’s say I have Rossi’s formula, but I do not say it
officially. My scientists have found a way to accomplish it. They need three months. I know what is in the reactor. I know everything. It was done with spectroscopy at Siena University of Padova (…)
They tested the reactor without [Rossi] knew what they were doing, he

Rossi as stated from the start Defkalion never received the IP because they failed to complete the transaction

45.  maryyugo    Tuesday, August 25, 2015

All that suggests is that Xanthoulis is as big a liar as Rossi, though not nearly as prolific.

As for the time to follow this crap, it takes 15 - 30 minutes every other day or so, or every day when more fecal matter is produced like the current ridiculous and completely useless patent.

46.  Bernie Koppenhofer    Tuesday, August 25, 2015

The US Patent Office does not issue "useless" patents. As you start thinking about all those words you will have to eat your adjectives are becoming very nasty, very revealing.

47.  Jarea    Wednesday, August 26, 2015

wtf . It is easy to say that. where are these intelligent persons? only in your sentence?, are they lazy? do they have arguments against LENR? do they have fear to provide arguments against LENR?. do they have fear to do science with LENR? are they really intelligent?

I can also say, there is a lot of intelligent people that support LENR and that is not relevant, because if you really are intelligent, you would understand that what is important in a premise is the argumentation, not the number of persons that support it.

48.  maryyugo    Wednesday, August 26, 2015

Of course the patent office issues worthless patents -- by the thousands each year, actually. Rossi patented a slightly novel configuration of an electrical heater. Big deal, Bernie. Big deal.

Did you actually read the patent? Do you understand what you read? I doubt it.

49.  maryyugo    Wednesday, August 26, 2015

You're correct and the facts and "argumentation" [sic], in the main, support that Rossi is a typical free energy scammer, following the usual script to perfection. See and Google, for example, Sniffex, Dennis Lee, Carl Tilley and Steorn.

50.  Bernie Koppenhofer    Wednesday, August 26, 2015

You changed "useless" into "worthless", big difference.

Yes I did read the patent and I understand it. And I really doubt you know anything about patent/trade secret strategies.

51.  Broncobet    Thursday, August 27, 2015

Actually at ECW they have found the Mw plant in Miami near where AR bought all those apartments with the proceeds from some very foolish investors. There is a Google street view it's a light industrial park next to a tile distribution company not near anyone who would need heat, I'm pretty sure Rossi is to lazy to move it and it's still there. It's the same old container that he has used for years, these suckers never learn.

52.  Broncobet    Thursday, August 27, 2015

He's not wrong as the last eight years have proven, they still can not boil one cup of coffee.

53.  maryyugo    Thursday, August 27, 2015


Could you link the mention of this in ECW please? It may be the same old container but some of the millions Rossi got via Industrial Heat were used to buy some new weird looking boxes and hardware... including a giant 440V 3 phase power panel which could probably supply a megawatt from the mains.

Here are the photos (click on them for larger versions):

To my view, this is indeed just the usual collection of random plumbing and electronic parts that Rossi claims is a power plant but these seem to be different junk than before.

54.  Bernie Koppenhofer    Thursday, August 27, 2015

We could be very close to finding out your real name, address an phone number!


55.  Thomas Clarke    Thursday, August 27, 2015

What this account leaves out is a skeptical evaluation of the hard science evidence.

It, like all soft science analyses, gives only half the picture. and because it is soft science the half it gives is highly contentious. Skeptics can put forward a very good case for Rossi's not having what he claims based purely in the business logic of his actions, That makes sense if he has nothing that works, makes no sense if he has a working device. Even one.

For me, the strength of arguments goes:

(1) Science data (experimental results etc)

(2) Business logic: are the actions consistent with a rational entity having working product.

(3) Psychology: can we try to second guess why actors do what they do, are they sane/delusional/deliberate liars etc.

I find (2) in principle capable of multiple readings, though in this case one strongly predominates. I find (3) requires speculation and is totally unsafe. Once you go down that route you are lost. (1), on the other hand, is the guiding light if you can find it.

In this case the independent testers made a definitive test, the only even vaguely independent one, which they claimed showed nuclear energy generation beyond chemical. I took this work seriously - since for all its scientific faults it was obviously written seriously and deserved proper scrutiny. See my carefully written paper on lenr-canr. Here is the page where are linked the original claims and my reanalysis:

If you read this you will see, I think, that in no way can my arguments be seen as those of a skeptopath or crypto-denialist. They are transparent and based on hard calculation accepting the data from the profs, who got the calculation wrong. I explain how they did this in detail. I sent them a draft before publishing and they never answered. Nor have they replied publicly, as is proper in scientific discourse when your results are challenged. It is very bad form from them, since my correction is an easy one to understand and they should fess up, either agree and retract the conclusions or point out some mistake I've made.

There have been other rebuttals of the Rossi tests but most show the results are uncertain, and that process can more easily be confused with skeptopathy - rubbishing things from a fixed standpoint. My contribution was to engage thoroughly with the science (it took me a lot of research, and because I am quite slow to puzzle things through I spent a long time before I had a coherent explanation). That is expected - when given a problem you need to abandon preconceptions, look at it from all angles, to see what works. I'm proud of this contribution which though negative for the testers is satisfying because it is a positive and precise explanation of an anomaly. You need to have a particular sort of mind to care more about the internal consistency of the argument than whether it shows one thing or another. That sort of mind is the opposite of both skeptopathy and crypto-denialism as defined here.

I have been awaiting the Lugano testers response to my criticism. Maybe I got it wrong (although there is a certain amount of internal self-checking in my arguments - the numbers are telling). Maybe I got it right but they have some different evidence. They clearly thought their effort was important. That they do not buttress their arguments now shows to me that either they cannot, or they choose not to in a way that is, to me, reprehensible.

Given the current state of play on these tests - and the fact that they are by far the best most detailed scientific evidence that exists on Rossi's devices - extreme skepticism about Rossi's claims is merited.

I think though that many people just do not have confidence in scientific debate. They cannot for themselves validate these arguments, because they do not have the necessary high school math and physics, or because they just do not have the considerable time needed. The whole matter then leaves (1) and becomes some combination of (2) and (3) weighted by how much you trust statements of other people.

Luckily science is stronger than that. The Lugano test paper, and my rebuttal, is archived. Anyone, now or later, can read both and comment. If they do I will respond. based on part evidence however the testers may not respond, which is a shame.

56.  Thomas Clarke    Friday, August 28, 2015

See my comment above for answers to all your questions. I hereby affirm that, yes, by the standards you hold I am "really intelligent". No fake intellectualism here! And while a coward in everyday life I am pretty fearless when it comes to rational debate - admitting unpalatable facts is more important than winning!

57.  Thomas Clarke    Friday, August 28, 2015

Just a comment on the psychology here. If you look at the supporters of Rossi they behave like skeptopaths in not allowing doubt or criticism. the only prominent Rossi supporting website has a policy of not allowing criticism. Even I got banned from there and I'm very tactful and moderate in my statements. Also, whatever my failures in tact, I have promised to respond to any followup on my critique of the second "independent" test. That test, and its analysis, should be of real interest to non-skeptopath-like Rossi supporters. They would doubt, and their doubt would be most swayed by independent scientific evidence from direct tests.

I find the ECW website, with its policy of moderating out rational, polite, discourse that is contrary to the prevailing worldview, a classic sanctuary for those seeking confirmation of held views.

There is, no doubt, plenty of skeptopath opinion on the web, too. That does not validate Rossi. The fact that few "real" scientists bother to comment could perhaps be because the scientific evidence is so well rebutted it deserves no more attention? Most scientists like to spend time and energy on things that have some likelihood of panning out.

58.  Thomas Clarke    Friday, August 28, 2015

"We hope that it is clear that in light of the handful of independent verifications of the eCat technology by various truly skeptical scientists... "

This comment implies that there is significant positive evidence from independent tests of Rossi's devices or other related devices. Perhaps, Sarah, you could detail what you feel to be strong evidence, referencing also other comments and reanalysis of the evidence, and putting such results in context?

After all, given amateur experiments with possible calorimetric flaws, it is likely that some will produce apparent positive results even when there is no real effect. That is not a problem. The positive methodologies can be re-examined, tightened up, and if the effect remains it is worth further investigation. Has this happened? I'm not aware.

By far the best independent test methodology for devices like Rossi's hot cat is Brian Aherne's "device in oven" method. This removes completely a large number of artifacts due to the presence of a heating coil, local temperature gradients, etc. In the oven, after equilibration, any local temperature gradient is a sign of heat production or absorption.

So what happened with Brian's tests?

59.  Thomas Clarke    Friday, August 28, 2015

Sarah, you will forgive me from multiple posting I hope.

Your comment above just keeps on giving.

Let us consider the statements about the scientific establishment. True, there is bias (always) and corruption (occasionally). The scientific process relies on numbers, rewards for novelty - also scientists in general are highly interested in novel ideas - and the fact that correct science can be replicated and validated. That distinguishes hard science from soft science where there is usually a strong element of subjective opinion in the interpretation of results, so that whole theories remain just possible interpretations, one no better or worse than another.

As I see it you argue that if some fringe area of science receives little attention from scientists that is because of bias. You also argue that a few scientists have been interested in it (BTW you might want to ask Josephson now what he things about Rossi's device. He asked Rossi to tighten up a flawed experimental protocol - which would have been easy - and got a brush off) and therefore it is validated.

So: what level of scientific interest would you expect in some fringe science area that was in fact wrong? I respectfully suggest you might get a few scientists - even prominent ones - taking up an interest outside their normal field and most ignoring. Old famous professors have a habit of taking up weird ideas - Laithwaite (Perpetual Motion from gyroscopes), Penrose (Quantum Consciousness). Such pet ideas are usually wrong, so interest from a single prominent scientist in no way validates a theory. It is a measure of the robustness of the scientific process that scientists can and do hold a wide range of ideas, most of the extreme ones being wrong.

60.  AlainCo    Friday, August 28, 2015

the proble with you thomas, is that you are much more reasonable than the mass of pseudo-skeptics.

you make sometime good arguments.

on Lugano you have a nearly good argumentation, sign of competence, except when you support conspiracy theory of inverted clamps, and at the same time refuse in thermography discussion on emmissivity to integrate fully the consequence of your claims on calibration.

you are uportunistically using all your competence, to very intelligently push a theory, like a good disinformer.

Mary is ridicule sometime, and tyy is always, and you are just dishonest at the minimal visibility required.

Note that you , like mary, never challenged, nor anyone have, the initial work on LENR.

you are right that attacking E-cat is easier as scientifically it is not a solid claim, in fact not a scientific claims (just business).

anyway you deny with conspiracy theories that are laughable if one draw it fully, all the business evidences. As 9/11 conspiracy shows it can work as most people prefer a clear story telling to complex reality.

In a way you are what is described here a very competent crypto-denialist, using meta-disinformation (accusing your opponents of disinformation), and disinformation (mixing mostly true claims, with small dose of lies and hidings, to make people conclude wrongly).

the article is a bit exaggerated but explains the two facets of scientific denial, like agains lenr or darwin.

one facet of LENR denial is fear of change, and preference to statu quo. it express itself by blind trust in theory and rejection of evidences.

other facet of LENR denial is a consequence of the previous, probably in the context of a groupthink mutual assured delusion as explained by Benabou

cryptodenialism is not an emotional weakness it itself, unlike skeptopathy, but a strategy of manipulation, best implemented by intelligent and competent people.

As I explained itself it leads either to disinformation tactics as you implement very well, mixing true with false.
it can also be brutal terror against the dissenters as Tyy is trying to do, trolling, to frighten and influence the innocents.
bullying the dissenters was well done with cold fusion initially, to the point that frauds were hidden, and myth was taken as consensus.

61.  AlainCo    Friday, August 28, 2015

that science love innovation, disruptive innovation, is a myth

an old myth, that will survive us.

what science love is innovation that is inline with habits.

note also that innovator organise and create the new normality (see how it happened with the crackpot scientists of quantum mechanic) and history is rewritten so that all looks nice.


(this chapter in antifragile is much better than this one on finance).

62.  AlainCo    Friday, August 28, 2015

anyway whatever you judge as weird domain, cold fusion is not weird, it is a domain with experimental results.

there is no deep violation of physics laws, except the one of lasiness.

the reason why particle physicists and plasma physicist reject LENr is simply because they only think in term of 2body physics.

any physicist in material science is conscious that when thousands of particle are un coherent state like in a laser, unimaginable things happen.


you can doubt they happen from theory, but if the experiment says so, they happened, that is what a chemist or a material science physicist accept. Guess what, I've discussed with many nanotech/material-science scientists in conference.

the problem is not with weird science, LENR is not weird, it is with conservatism.

and Thomas Kuhn, like Feyerbabend have made tons of books to detail the way conservatism happen and hide it's tracks.

just reading that


or that


(HTSC were not accepted smoothly as the legend says, they were hidden as footnotes)


worst of all see

and reading the history of germs theory you will immediately understand that the legend that it was a problems with aristocrats is pure myth. the reality is that educated doctors were rejecting the germ theory not because it asked to wash their hands, but because it was challenging the spontaneous genesis theory, and this was what changes with Pasteur who proved not that cleaning your hand was useful (Semmelweis did it perfectly and nobody could challenge his claim rationally) but that spontaneous generation was wrong.

the problem is theory, not evidences.

problem of LENR is just that nobody found the theory, nor build a weapon that could be sold to a foreign army.

63.  Thomas Clarke    Friday, August 28, 2015


Re Lugano I keep an open mind. That includes open mind as to competence of scientists in detecting fraud and Rossi in conducting fraud.

Mostly I suspect Rossi is self-deluded and actually believes his stuff works, while also fudging some things. But as I've pointed out psychology is just not a strong argument, and anything I suspect is weak,

I currently don't at all support inverted clamps in the second Lugano test, since that would mean the loss of 66% of the electrical power in.

On the other hand I remain truly skeptical about the first test - the electrical measurements are just not described well enough, and mistake or fraud remain on the table.

The difference is that given highly weak evidence like the first Lugano test, or other LENR results (weak in different ways - but all weak) you put them together to make overall strong evidence. That is a statistical mistake - because you forget that teh weak positive results you consider are a self-selected sample from very many experiments many with negative results, and the weakness of the methodologies and/or results means that a significant number of false positives is expected.

Other things that would indicate reality - like coherence - do not exist.

64.  Thomas Clarke    Friday, August 28, 2015

"anyway whatever you judge as weird domain, cold fusion is not weird, it is a domain with experimental results."

That is not a valid argument. Most weird science areas are characterised by (weak) exoerimental results and nothing else. Think UFOs, spiritualism, etc.

65.  Thomas Clarke    Friday, August 28, 2015

Generalisation is a crude and innaccurate argument when applied to people, which is why we so detest racism, sexism, etc.

In the case of science you need only one scientist to publish good results, and continue, strengthening them as time goes on. There are hundred's of thousands of scientists and even if most are biassed as you claim that leaves more than enough.

The problem with the LENR results is that they do not cohere. No-one has a methodology that produces consistanetly good results. Note that even if that was 1 in 3 successes with a given fixed methodology it could be deemed good - each success would be strong evidence if teh methodology was bulletproof.

What happens is that whenever successful experiments are replicated with better methodology the results vanish.

66.  AlainCo    Friday, August 28, 2015

some good points.

note that about negative result, it is not medicine, and you don't judge of physics /chemistry phenomenon with statistic.

one Hiroshima prove the bomb, no need to make the statistic of all failures in the US desert.

again this fallacy, the misapplication of clinical studies problems is something that seems unbelievable for pretended skeptics.

note that this problem was well listed in Beaudette book, around the writings of Ramsey

"Ordinarily, new scientific discoveries are claimed to be consistent and reproducible; as a result, if the experiments are not complicated, the discovery can usually be confirmed or disproved in a few months. The claims of cold fusion, however, are unusual in that even the strongest proponents of cold fusion assert that the experiments, for unknown reasons, are not consistent and reproducible at the present time. However, even a single short but valid cold fusion period would be revolutionary."

this is the problem of nuclear physicist to understand how complex is material science, and chemistry.

moreover when applying some method increase the success, whatever is the measurement method, it indicates there is something real, even if unknown, happening.
see triggering conditions

you cannot ignore that text, nor that concept, so I repeat my statement that you state thing that you cannot sincerely believe, to convince innocent readers.

this is very common attitude however, the cryptodenialist attitude, to pretend using rational reasoning while simply playing with words like an attorney.

67.  Thomas Clarke    Saturday, August 29, 2015

"you cannot ignore that text, nor that concept, so I repeat my statement that you state thing that you cannot sincerely believe, to convince innocent readers."

I think your statement that I an duplicitous is uncalled for and also (to any observer) absurd and so will ignore it.

I will however deal with the comments you have made above which you claim justify it.

"Ordinarily, new scientific discoveries are claimed to be consistent and reproducible; as a result, if the experiments are not complicated, the discovery can usually be confirmed or disproved in a few months. "The claims of cold fusion, however, are unusual in that even the strongest proponents of cold fusion assert that the experiments, for unknown reasons, are not consistent and reproducible at the present time..."

Here we agree. However you do not consider the simplest reason for this unusual status - which is that the positive results are all varied experimental and methodological errors. For example, the Lugano tests appeared to be strong evidence until I (and others) went over the calculations carefully. That was only possible because of the unusual detail in which methodology was described. No fraud, just subtle mistakes from established scientists. Note also that the Lugano testers (this is unusual) do not retract/modify their statements or argue against the criticism. That is reprehensible in my book, and shows something different from science.

"... However, even a single short but valid cold fusion period would be revolutionary..."

In principle, a very well instrumented, bullet-proof, single occurrence would be a big deal. However the LENR one-off observations are not well instrumented and bullet-proof. They are not described in much detail, or they are accounts written up from memory a long time after, etc. There are possible mundane explanations. Those include fraud, given what is at stake, although the vast majority of the cited evidence is (in my judgement) not fraudulent. In fact I'm not aware of anything written up well enough to be good evidence that is likely fraud - generally fraudsters are bad scientists. This has been gone over many times, but I remain perfectly happy for you to cite one single "short but valid cold fusion period" that is adequately described. I will examine it. (Limitation because it takes time and is boring - nothing new here).

this is the problem of nuclear physicist to understand how complex is material science, and chemistry.

"...moreover when applying some method increase the success, whatever is the measurement method, it indicates there is something real, even if unknown, happening."

There are no strong such correlations. Weak ones, such as are claimed exist, are not proven or even likely direct cause and effect. All you need is for some extraneous factor correlated weakly with the output measurement to be also correlated weakly with "applied method".

If the results were clear, this would not be an issue. But then you would not need this secondary argument. With the results clear mystifying apparent slight correlations between one thing and another are the bread and butter of experimental work.

The way to approach these is as with the real results. repeat, find a correlations, drill down to eliminate or reduce extraneous factors, etc. You end up with an explanation but it is time consuming work and LENR researchers with a very few exceptions are not motivated to do this. It makes the apparent positives go away, brings them no plaudits, excitement, or funding.

The researchers who do it hit continual negative results and have to be very unusual to continue in the field.

Oh, BTW if there were such a "prove LENR stochastically" effect, with strong enough evidence, it could be written up and published. Physics is happy to deal with stochastic results, look at QM.

68.  AlainCo    Saturday, August 29, 2015

again you clarly state wrong facts.
there is strong corelation.
helium with heat...

there is also cristallography suface state with excess heat in ENEA

there is loading with excess heat.

I am tired of people who claim false things trying to fool the reader.

I know you know, please stop.

69.  Broncobet    Saturday, August 29, 2015

You make excellent points but how do you suspect Rossi is well meaning and self deluded when he switched the ash before analysis?

70.  EEStorFanFibb    Saturday, August 29, 2015

Thomas Clarke! You old rascal! Still wasting pixels I see.

71.  Broncobet    Saturday, August 29, 2015

The silence of the third party replicators is deafening.

72.  Broncobet    Saturday, August 29, 2015

Sorry for the delay,I didn't mean new pictures but the Google view of the light industrial park right outside Miami where Rossi has his container. The true believers on ECW found it but of coarse it hasn't been mentioned since. It shows it's next to a tile distributer (not a manufacturer) and of coarse this is where(Miami) that Rossi lives with his wife and all the apartment they bought with the loot from some gullible investors.

73.  Thomas Clarke    Saturday, August 29, 2015

I try not to get into exactly why. IF he switched the ash (neglecting contamination) then he obviously wanted false positive isotopic results. That may of may not be fraudulent - a legal issue. It is dishonest. But it is also consistent with him genuinely believing his stuff works but worrying that without extra evidence he will not get his patent, or not get additional funding, etc.

The whole issue of why he did what he did must be uncertain - and better not to elaborate too much because we have too little information.

I also think that self-deluding can cover a lot of weird behaviour. People don't have to be rational.

74.  Thomas Clarke    Saturday, August 29, 2015

AlainCo. What you say here is improper. I can assure you that I do not know the things you state. that is, some correlation excess heat and helium has been claimed in some experiments, nothing convincing (mundane explanations being possible). Were it so a replication would convince all, would it not?

surface with excess heat - I have not looked at this but surely there are obvious mundane explanations here.

The world is a complex place - correlations of this sort are very weak evidence, and require a lot of additional work to even begin to convince. Just because you cannot imagine non-LENR mechanisms - does not mean they don't exist.

I notice in your arguments here a general failure of imagination and inability to doubt.

Relevant to the OP?

75.  Broncobet    Saturday, August 29, 2015

OK but I think the right model for AR's scams are the ancient art of alchemy, that he switched the ash for some Ni62 which cost him $20,000 (didn't they find a guy who sold it to a man fitting Rossis' description?) and it is very clear that the E cat doesn't work as he claimed or Rossi would be a multibillionaire by now and the price of Ni62 would be much less than $20,000/gram. BTW You do realize when the test were done in Lugano Switzerland that it is the same place as Milan Italy and the lab was Rossi's brother's apartment?

76.  Broncobet    Saturday, August 29, 2015

EEStore; how do you like your EEstore stock at $.25 when it was $6.68 in 2008? I suppose it's all a conspiracy to keep the stock down. I do like batteries and capacitors , at least those are real devices unlike all of Rossi's inventions.

77.  maryyugo    Saturday, August 29, 2015

Rossi's frauds are both primitive and incompetent and only appeal to the lowest common denominator. This is usual when someone tries to get money from investors for scam. After all, what's the point in appealing to smart people who will eventually discover the cheating?

Scientists, particularly low level professors, are not clever at detecting sleight of hand and other deception. Neither are some reporters.

Rossi's great gift is in knowing the people he can fool. And when competent people tried to test his ecat (from NASA and from Quantum/Australia in 2011), the ecat conveniently did not work, in spite of Rossi saying elsewhere that he had a dozen or more under continuous testing.

But Rossi screwed the pooch at least twice when distributors conducted adequate tests of the ecats and found no excess power. And also when he failed to pull the wool over your eyes, Thomas Clarke, and you presented your conservative and measured calculations.

78.  maryyugo    Saturday, August 29, 2015

That make sense to you, Bernie? And if not, why not?

79.  EEStorFanFibb    Monday, August 31, 2015

Yes indEEdy, investors in ZNN/ESU have endured a lot of painful waiting. No doubt about it. But I'm confident that those still hanging in there will do ok in the end. There are, of course, no guarantees. I might be dead wrong. But there are some encouraging signs from the 3 Intertek test reports and from electronics expert Dennis Zogbi's recommendations/analysis.

80.  AlainCo    Monday, August 31, 2015

it is not weak corelation, you know it.

you just spread FUD when you don't have evidence with a vague critic that nobody can deny.

He4/heat evidences are replicated and clear.

tritiums evidences are clear and much above ambiant.

you simply have no evidence to support your theory.

81.  Thomas Clarke    Monday, August 31, 2015

So, as I understand it ZNN/ESU have test reports for a capacitor they are trying to sell. I can't see any pseudo-science or free energy in the claims. The most recent report (Intertek August 2015) shows samples with a total volume of 40um * 3cm^2 = 0.12cm^2 (sorry for hybrid units!) They have a stated capacitance of around 4nF at a voltage of 1500V.

That looks like a very low valued and normal sort of capacitor. I'm sure there is a market for many different capacitors, and I wish you and fellow investors luck with this one, but I can't see why it would be better than existing high volume offerings. It, IMHO, is a difficult market to break into without some killer spec because volume counts.

82.  Thomas Clarke    Monday, August 31, 2015

It must be the other way round Alain. I need no evidence. YOU, on the other hand, need evidence of Helium or Tritium concentrations that is extraordinarily strong and also replicable. The only such evidence I've seen is for marginal results well within possible contamination or outgassing etc etc. There was also one set of Helium experiments that caused controversy because Krivit claimed it was bogus.

I'm happy to look into such evidence - have not done so for a while - but I'm not aware of anything strong and new. (The Brillouin Tritium claims, if you refer to them, are for just double background count - though the data is a bit weird so I'm not certain on that one. After electrolysis it is very possible that radioactive contamination could move into the electrolyte. And those claims have no correct quantitative relationship with excess heat as would be more convincing).

83.  EEStorFanFibb    Monday, August 31, 2015

Beyond any shred of doubt Dennis Zogbi certainly knows better than you whether the technology is valuable.

84.  AlainCo    Monday, August 31, 2015

you are wrong, it is not possible to be contamination.
first by correlation He4heat, second because tritium is very rare, and it is replicable and have been replicated by labs like BARC or LANL.

heat also is much above chemistry and have been replicated with very precise calorimetry, with perfect calibration, and the sape of the signal itself let no doubt it is anomalous.

you work by claiming false things, inventing all the time.

you can attack E-cat, but please be serious on those scientific works.

you are simply a very smart and soft talking liar.
you are the crypto denialist of the best level.

mixing truth with FUD and pure lies.

beautiful example.

85.  Thomas Clarke    Tuesday, September 1, 2015

He suggests eestor implement a killer app that their product is completely unsuited for (because its volumetric density is much too low - the caps would be much larger than competitive tech and size is a key parameter for implantable cardiac defibs). That rather speaks against his knowing much. I'm not saying I know much, but enough to detect BS in a report.

86.  maryyugo    Wednesday, September 2, 2015

Yes, thanks. Do you have map coordinates or the link to the original mention, please? I'd like to see this for myself! I've seen Rossi's condo building. Can I find the tile distributor nearby on the Google maps?

87.  Broncobet    Wednesday, September 2, 2015

Oh my!! A request from Mary Yugo!! I feel like I've been caught bluffing into a big pot( I play poker every day where we deduce people's holdings with incomplete information, a process which validates your opinion of Rossi.). It's somewhere on ECN about 2 or 3 months ago, I'll start looking now. Once again it's an unusual honor to discuss this with someone with integrity like you.

88.  Broncobet    Wednesday, September 2, 2015

The 1Mw plant is located at 7861 NW 46th st Doral Fl 33166. This is from May 5 2015 post by Frank on ECW. Next door is Rossini Marble Supply 305-716-8878 This was all done for trademark as is done by actual companies and scams as what they have is a name but not a working devise. Of course this is close to where he lives and Im pretty sure he's too lazy to move this container that he's used forever because the true believers on ECW blocked this from their consciousness even though they profess to an interest in where this miraculous devise is because they understand that this knowledge is something they do not want, like the apple of knowledge in the garden they will have to leave the Eden of Ignorance if they take a bite. For this reason this subject on ECW was never investigated.

89.  EEStorFanFibb    Wednesday, September 2, 2015

Once again... the above baseless accusation that DZ is a BSer (your MO) has been captured and passed along.

90.  maryyugo    Wednesday, September 2, 2015

Hi Broncobet. Could you kindly email me at maryyugo [at] yahoo [dot] com please? I can't find Rossini Marble at that location on Google Earth. I do find it nearby but not very near and Yelp says the location is closed. Hey, maybe Rossi bought it or rented the whole space. After all, he has some $20 million or so to play with.

This is the Yelp link:

91.  Broncobet    Wednesday, September 2, 2015

Do you follow Sunvault?

92.  Broncobet    Wednesday, September 2, 2015

Don't know Zogbi but I doubt it, Thomas Clarke has made reasoned arguments and you are a fan of AR, besides wall street has already shown what they think of EEstor, that could change of course.

93.  Broncobet    Wednesday, September 2, 2015

Are you the Jarea who claimed he had only a week to live? I'm glad you feel better. I agree with your reply to me, what I was doing was the equivalent of cheering at a football game, I just wanted people to know which side I'm on. It's still true that all of you true believers show mental deficiencies, just look at the things that this blogger believes, all anti scientific, evil .

94.  Broncobet    Wednesday, September 2, 2015

We know exactly where the 1Mw plant is and it doesn't produce anything.

95.  Broncobet    Thursday, September 3, 2015

EEstor you have to check the news on Sunvault, they are building a supercar with Edisobn Electric with quickcharge grapheme supercapacitor.

96.  Broncobet    Thursday, September 3, 2015

How are you Fredda? I don't get to chat with you as they don't allow contrary opinions on ECW.

97.  Broncobet    Thursday, September 3, 2015

I'm pretty disappointed that my email to you did not go through, that address isn't working.

98.  Broncobet    Thursday, September 3, 2015

Email me at

99.  Mark S.    Thursday, September 3, 2015

The current physics (standard model, black holes, etc) is a pseudo-science. Actually i do think it is. More like numerology, continued fixing of epicycles and asking for more cash on ridiculously expensive experiments that no one can replicate because we are "to big to fail."

100.  Mark S.    Thursday, September 3, 2015

Particle physics as practices since 1930 is a futile enterprise in it's entirety by physicist Alexander Unzicker. He's not the only physicist saying this but he is more blunt and doesn't try to package that message in a pleasant way. "It's crap"

101.  maryyugo    Thursday, September 3, 2015

I received your email and will reply as soon as I look at a few maps some more.

I am not able to see anything so far which looks like Rossi's container -- maybe it's not outdoors but then how does anyone know where it is?

Anyway, for the record, my email is indeed maryyugo [at[ yahoo [dot] com and I look at that email every day or two most of the time and I did receive yours.

I also suggest you edit out your email from your post. If you post an actual email anywhere on the internet, you stand a risk that so-called "spyder" programs will pick it up and resell it to scammers and purveyors if malware.

102.  maryyugo    Thursday, September 3, 2015

Rossi's patent is indeed useless-- that is what I meant. It's not "worthless" inasmuch as he can use it to scam more people and collect more money with it.

103.  Jarea    Saturday, September 5, 2015

wtf No i not that one but you have said so many words and nothing related with my questions. could you answer and say something about what i said?. It seems the mental deficiencies are in other head.XD

104.  Jarea    Saturday, September 5, 2015

Good first thanks at least for some answers and going to the topic, however your next sentences in your comment are some kind of not aligned with your argumentation premises above.
Really, stop bullshitting around and having personal opinions about other people you dont know. Is that is your standard and you consider that is good for science then i disagree with you. Besides, it is easy to comment and disqualify without doing your own experimentation. I don´t know why do you say that the LENR community is accepting this and that as facts. Do you mean they accept as fact that Rossis device work? i can tell you that they dont see that as a fact but, as good scientific that applies the scientific method, they want to see more of the anomaly and study it so they support him and avoid blackmail.

Anyway, if you haven't understood that by now then i think that your position is more as the article describes above.

105.  Mark    Thursday, September 10, 2015

Great article, Sarah! You're an awesome chick for doing this! I can't say that I'm a huge fan of the psychology community, but I do think that this is the sort of thing that we need a lot more of. Too often it is the pseudoskeptic side that uses psychological analysis (very disingenuously) to try to make it look like people have something wrong with them if people would even seriously consider ideas that pseudoskeptics think are "extraordinary." It is about time that people on our side started turning this back on them, albeit in a more honest manner. I hope that you keep more articles like this coming.

Also, I think that it is an odd mix of hilarious and disturbing that George Hody, A. K. A. "Mary Yugo," would think that it is a good idea to post in the comments section on an article like this, thereby drawing more attention to this article! At one point, in the comments section, Hody, writing under the name maryyugo, even said that he refuses to give his real name, as if we can't all read his real name in the main article! LOL!!! In all seriousness, though, it seems to me that it is possible, if not likely, that Hody has crossed the line from stupidity into outright delusion...

106.  Pathoskeptic    Saturday, September 12, 2015

Exactly so.

Actual skeptopathy includes denial of climate change etc.

Promoters if woo, however, have captured the term, so it does not have much real life use, other than automatically spotting crackpots and fools of course.

107.  Pathoskeptic    Saturday, September 12, 2015

The magic trick is often prepared before the actual performance.

108.  Pathoskeptic    Saturday, September 12, 2015

"you don't judge of physics /chemistry phenomenon with statistic."

Bullshit Alain. But I am glad you are so persistent in showing your ignorance.

109.  Pathoskeptic    Saturday, September 12, 2015

Well, Thomas should also know you know he knows for the common knowledge induction to be complete.

110.  Pathoskeptic    Saturday, September 12, 2015

What is there to deny? Nonsense is nonsense, it does not need denial. Sometimes it needs pointing out, so the people learn to recognize thinks like this more easily. It is quite simple, actually.

You Gerard, you will also see the facts in due time, but you will never understand them, because your journey to the dark side with rest of the crackpot congregation is complete.

111.  Pathoskeptic    Saturday, September 12, 2015

Why would you need arguments against LENR?

If the phenomena claimed are real, just prove it and build the damn thingo.

The problem is that you can't do that, and that's when you start needing arguments FOR the LENR.

Of course, if your are con-fusionist, this is obvious. If you are just a believer and a fool.. well, then you are.

112.  Pathoskeptic    Saturday, September 12, 2015

You should really be more careful in your writing and reconsider your style. Unless, of course, you actually are the illiterate fool you appear to be.

113.  Pathoskeptic    Saturday, September 12, 2015

Mats Lewan also keeps making this childish comparison with Wrigth brothers. I am starting to believe he is with the con-fusionists, not the believers.

114.  Pathoskeptic    Saturday, September 12, 2015

Who remembers the Great Oil Sniffer hoax?

A good story to read.

115.  Pathoskeptic    Saturday, September 12, 2015

Yes, everything is going to fall into perspective. Still some of you will never going to understand.

116.  Pathoskeptic    Saturday, September 12, 2015

Your blindness is extraordinary, Alain.

117.  Broncobet    Saturday, September 12, 2015

These True Believers are so trapped in Groupthink they cannot form a rational thought. The simplest explanation for all the evidence is that AR is conducting a scam.

118.  Broncobet    Saturday, September 12, 2015

Obviously they are not that intelligent as you'd have to be a cretin to swallow AR's manure.

119.  AlainCo    Saturday, September 12, 2015

it seems you unintelligence is to the highest level.

if I make a barbecue, I prove fire.

if you failed 99 barbecue, you are just incompetent.

1 success is just proving the point.

120.  Pathoskeptic    Sunday, September 13, 2015

And what is that one success?

LENR is very similar to paranormal, full of anecdotes. Stacking small pieces of shit only produces a huge smelling pile, nothing else.

121.  Pathoskeptic    Sunday, September 13, 2015

What could be more obvious than that.

122.  AlainCo    Sunday, September 13, 2015

what is your criteria for anecdotes?
does 153 experiments done are 153 anecdotes.

You remind me creationists.

find evidences first before stating anything.

123.  we want LENR Fusione Fredda    Monday, September 14, 2015

'are never going to' or 'will never'. Whatever.

124.  Pathoskeptic    Monday, September 14, 2015


125.  Pathoskeptic    Monday, September 14, 2015

Yes, Alain, you got part of it. Anecdotes actually are characterized by their cheer number. In contrast to actual observations, that are characterised by content.

One is enough, well documented and readily replicable by anyone. We don't need 153.

126.  AlainCo    Monday, September 14, 2015


anecdotes that get above 50% success if you control metallurgy...

and more if you read more.

not afraid of ridicule.

127.  Pathoskeptic    Monday, September 14, 2015

Ridicule is the only option left with you crackpots.

128.  maryyugo    Tuesday, September 15, 2015

What a brilliant and comprehensive defense of Andrea Rossi. Your mother must be so proud.

129.  Mark    Tuesday, September 15, 2015

Thanks, George Hody. Ya know, if you really are not George Hody, you could always just say that you're not George Hody, George Hody.

130.  skeptickle    Thursday, September 17, 2015

Mary, George, Cude, Milstone etc etc. suffer OCD and delusions of grandeur. You will note the responses have become ever-more hysterical with each new LENR success.

These unfortunates cannot help themselves - they were born that way. But many have found un-gainful employment with various underground agencies such as Britain's GCHQ. They thrive on ad hominem attack witnessed above as delusion and self-loathing has robbed them of logic.

They are the laughing stock of the online community and we should have pity.

131.  Thomas Clarke    Friday, September 18, 2015

@Mark -

The problem is not serious consideration. I'm a fan of that about anything under the sun. The problem is lack of serious consideration - and advocating hare-brained ideas that do not pass first base when checked.

However, I'm not complaining. People are like that, and to rail against it is silly. But, when Sarah posts such a misinformed article it is fair to correct her wrong assumptions.

As for drawing attention... The idea that cold fusion is a secret that the whole world would accept as true if properly informed is clearly false - else leakage over a 25 year history (and banner headlines for the first 12 months of this) would have generated this widespread following.

There are a few niche websites that have heavy moderation and present a woefully distorted view of facts to anyone changing upon them. ECW being the classic example. From this comment it sounds like Sarah has been reading such sites without putting her thinking cap on.


Fascinating that you believe those arguing against you on this topic to be employed by GCHQ. I don't follow your logic but guess it is related to a self-agrandising conspiracy ideation - " i'm important and strange things in my life are therefore due to givernment agencies snooping and interfering with me".

PS - I'm not employed by GCHQ nor any other government agency - overt or covert. Though I guess were I covert that is what I'd say anyway?

132.  bkrharold    Tuesday, October 6, 2015

Spiritualism is not weird science, it is outside the domain of science altogether, along with other subjects that do not yield to the scientific method like precognition, near death experiences and consciousness itself. This does not mean they do not exist.

133.  bkrharold    Tuesday, October 6, 2015

Your information is incorrect. LENR can be consistently reproduced. You should acquaint yourself with the latest developments in LENR before attempting to comment on the subject.

134.  AdrianAshfield    Tuesday, October 6, 2015

Thomas Clarke aka eetom is a well known skeptopath from the EEStory blog, where he accused Rossi of being a fraud and a criminal. He also was certain LENR was not possible although he refused to be pinned down to actually say it. Like Lucia L he believed there was a .000001% chance
He is also a Believer when it came to AGW, but lets not get off topic.

Apart from Lugano there have now been three independent replications of the hot cat. The latest here:

See also

And there is now a theory!

135.  Mark    Wednesday, October 7, 2015

I wasn't even talking to you, son. Oh, well, your reputation precedes you, Thomas Clarke. I've read some things that you posted, (including stuff in this post) and I believe that you are a pseudoskeptic, and, because of that, I can't trust you to "fight fair," so to speak. So, this will have to be my response to you:

136.  Broncobet    Wednesday, October 7, 2015

Well said.

137.  greggoble    Thursday, October 8, 2015

Thanks Sarah,

Your presentation of this subject is excellent. Skeptics, skeptopaths, and cryptodenialists are all just part of the audience, observing the process of discovery. Discovery is a never ending drama, played out before us, which is taking us where we've never been before. If not for the process of discovery this audience would not exist, science would fade away, and the resultant force of silence would be complete and without meaning.

Dedicated to my heroes...
Inventors, Free Thinkers, and Solution Seekers.


It’s of great use to wonder
Why our minds wander
In awe of it all

Being forever true
Seeking the new

We are just now discovering
That which has always been

Impatiently awaiting us
Craving our keen attention
Hoping for deeper understanding

Awesome is
The wonder of discovery

And the power
Of awe


Vectors - Motion and Forces in Two Dimensions

Resultant Force

The resultant is the vector sum of two or more vectors. It is the result of adding two or more vectors together. If displacement vectors A, B, and C are added together, the result will be vector R. As shown in the diagram, vector R can be determined by the use of an accurately drawn, scaled, vector addition diagram.

138.  Fred Zoepfl    Monday, October 26, 2015

It appears that you are trying to analyze the "Great Inventor" (Rossi) and his E-Cat scam with psychology-based arguments, a few ad hominem attacks, and a little name-calling thrown in for good measure. Well, let me frame this for you in your chosen field: Andrea Rossi is a convicted criminal and a well-known fraudster. I have actually asked several psychiatrists and neuroscientists to review Rossi's absurd "Journal of Nuclear Physics" blog, and they told me that he is either a pathological liar or a delusional sociopath, or maybe a little bit of both. If you really like him so much, then you should try to get him some professional psychiatric help. If you are actually gullible and ignorant enough to believe his preposterous claims of "transmuting" elements and producing energy, then you should seriously consider getting some professional psychiatric help yourself.

139.  Broncobet    Tuesday, November 17, 2015

I just read the great oil sniffer hoax,it's hard to believe that Alain is not aware of it he being French and the amount swindled by Italians so big, many billions in current money, and just crude techniques, just like cat things that wouldn't fool a competent fith grader.

140.  Broncobet    Tuesday, November 17, 2015

Fredda,please read the great oil sniffer hoax , the link is just below.

141.  Sarah Vaughter    Saturday, February 6, 2016

I support Rossi, and I've deleted zero comments here that call me misguided, Rossi a criminal etc. I normally DO censor disrespectful comments but I always make exceptions when the comments are self-incriminating - now or in the future.

Rossi is not validated because crazy people criticize him. Rossi is validated by a plethora of third parties, all having either verified his technology or having independently replicated it. If it was enough for an ex-president of a Skeptics Society and the Physicist CEO of a billion dollar hedge fund (who also advises the US President on energy matters) to buy the rights for an eight figure amount, it's good enough for me, after examining a dozen or so LENR studies.

You guys are noisy negativists. "Don't confuse me with the facts - my mind is made up". If Rossi is a crook, the world won't need your help shutting him down. He'll be in jail soon enough without your endless accusations and denialism.

142.  Sarah Vaughter    Sunday, February 7, 2016

Rossi is a helluvalot smarter than the Wright brothers. The Wright brothers failed in commercializing their invention. They became mired in patent litigation. Their technology development stalled and competitors sold much better planes. Inductrial Heat LLC, blessed with experienced engineers and managers, learnt of the Wright Brothers' mistakes and first develops and patents their tech, such as to secure a dominant market position with advanced technology. If you'd read their first patent, you'd understand that commercially viable LENR technology is orders of magnitude more complex than producing aircraft. If Industrial Heat LLC makes a small mistake, China will eat their lunch.

143.  Sarah Vaughter    Sunday, February 7, 2016

Defkalion were criminals. They admitted to stealing Rossi's industrial secrets. What further transpired is unknown, perhaps Rossi threatened to sue them. More likely is that a bunch of thugs with no relevant engineering experience or the grit to develop the tech failed in moving forward, securing investors, engineers etc. Successful companies usually rely on a single person for the technology, like with Apple's Steve Wozniak. Only Rossi more-or-less understood the eCat and has only very recently disclosed what's actually going on in terms of nuclear reactions. Before that he deliberately mislead everyone, Defkalion included, into the principle of operation. He admitted to that and said it was a strategy to put competitors on the wrong footing.

144.  Sarah Vaughter    Sunday, February 7, 2016

I have not deleted any comment in this thread. Normally I do delete accusations of a person committing a crime (claiming Rossi is guilty of fraud) or personal attacks on someone's character (claiming that I am a coward) but in the case of LENR skeptopathy the comments of the skeptopaths are useful to illustrate my point. Skeptopaths attack the messengers, calling them mentally ill and evil. They never attack the scientific evidence.

145.  Sarah Vaughter    Thursday, February 25, 2016

Yesterday yet another 3rd party announced successful replication: The Martin Fleischmann Memorial Project. Better yet: They disclosed exactly how they did it:

146.  psi2u2    Sunday, February 28, 2016

I truly do wonder why any psychiatrist would presume to say the things you say they have said about Ing. Rossi based on The Journal of Nuclear Physics. What allows a psychiatrist to pass any judgement based on the articles published on that website about Rossi's state of mind, let alone use the terms your represent them as using based on such a brief acquaintance with a website treating articles of a highly technical nature? Pretty bad ones as far as I can tell.

And the "neuroscientists"? Give your readers a break from this flim-flammery.

Not many are gullible enough to believe these tales. Kindly do not reply by telling me that I am in need of "professional psychiatric help." I am not the one stumbling about in public like a raving Savonarola.

147.  FredZ777    Tuesday, March 1, 2016

If you are actually "gullible" enough to believe Rossi's absurd fantasies of "proton-lithium fusion" in a box, then you already have a lifetime's worth of stupidity. Try taking a nuclear physics course if you really want to learn about this subject. Otherwise save your ignorance for someone who actually cares. As for the "neuroscientists," give me your e-mail address and I will give you their names. The "" blog is a study in inanity and insanity from a convicted criminal and delusional lunatic.

148.  psi2u2    Tuesday, March 1, 2016

I am quite content to wait another six months or even a year to see the egg on your sanctimonious face.

Anyone actually curious as to the current "state of the science & debate" on this topic may wish to visit:

149.  FredZ777    Tuesday, March 1, 2016

We'll see who gets the egg on his face when "Ing." Rossi is indicted for fraud. He is not an "Ing." because he has no engineering degree whatsoever. He used to claim he had a B.S. degree in chemical engineering from "Kensington University," which was a notorious diploma mill that the authorities shut down. His "doctorate" is actually in philosophy, not in science, and my cat knows more about nuclear physics than Rossi does.

If you really want to get into this instead of wallowing in your own ignorance, then take a look at this:

This is from Dr. Gene Mallove, a godfather of cold fusion/LENR, who founded "Infinite Energy" magazine.

proton + lithium-7 --> 2 helium-4 +17.3 MeV or

proton + lithium-7 --> beryllium-7 + neutron - 1.6 MeV (consumes energy).

The first reaction is expected 20% of the time.

The second reaction with Li-7 is expected 80% of the time.

Lithium-7 constitutes 92.5% of naturally-occurring lithium.

I know you don't understand enough about nuclear physics to realize the significance of this, but I will try to explain it to you at an eighth-grade level. Rossi's latest lie is that the E-Cats run on "proton-lithium-7 fusion." If they did, then he and his entire "magnificent team" would be dead from neutron and gamma radiation exposure from these reactions. Also, the E-Cats would be full of Be-7, which is radioactive and has a 53.22-day half-life.

So start wiping the egg off now, dumb-ass.

150.  psi2u2    Tuesday, March 1, 2016

very funny. You really need to do a little reading outside your comfort zone. good luck.

151.  FredZ777    Tuesday, March 1, 2016

Apparently I have already done more "reading" on Rossi and his E-Cat nonsense than you have. If your "comfort zone" is ignorance of nuclear physics, then you are set for life.

152.  Frechette    Saturday, March 12, 2016

If you claim video compression is also a scam then I know you're definitely full of shit and a liar to boot.

153.  Graham Simms    Saturday, March 12, 2016


154.  psi2u2    Saturday, March 12, 2016

Keep watching. I know very little about physics. It was knowing "too much" about physics that is now condemning the critics of so-called "cold fusion" to the dustbin of history. Details:

155.  Fred Zoepfl    Sunday, March 13, 2016

Well, I have a Ph.D. in nuclear engineering, and I actually do know a little bit about nuclear physics. I can assure you that Rossi is a delusional sociopath and a pathological liar. What he is claiming is physically impossible. He really should be in prison or in a mental institution.

As for your absurd reference, this "60 Minutes" video is from 2013. Why don't you do some follow-up research and find out what happened with all these nutty ideas? Oh wait, I can save you some time: absolutely nothing happened with any of it. That's why they call it pseudoscience. You would be better off being a fan of ESP or polywater than "cold fusion"/LENR. And you should ask yourself why you feel compelled to believe such utter nonsense like this without knowing anything about this subject.

156.  psi2u2    Monday, March 14, 2016

Good for you, Dr. That may explain your inability to process what Gregory Bateson would call "news of a difference." Personally, when it come to researchers like Rob Duncan, I'm a bit circumspect in my conclusions. He followed the scientific method of investigating anomaly, rather than sanctimoniously attacking the messengers.

You've got a lot of nerve to to assume I haven't done any follow up. The question is, why haven't you done any?

157.  Sarah Vaughter    Monday, April 4, 2016

Rossie stated a year or so ago (could be 1.5 years) that he lied about how the eCat worked, in order to put competitors on the wrong footing. He said that he was doing everything possible to obfuscate the truth for that reason, including initially claiming it was Nickel + Hydrogen. Later, when he received his first patent, he was forced to admit that Nickel was merely a catalyst. He has been honest for a long time that the theories he proffered and the ingredients he disclosed were disinformation. Time will tell..

Rossi isn't a scientist. Rossi is a very hungry entrepreneur. He could care less about anything else but commercial success. He hardly has an ego and he cares naught about a Nobel prize. All he wants is succeed in his technical development and in his monetary compensation.

158.  Sarah Vaughter    Monday, April 4, 2016

I read his book and I agree with what he claims. I agree that the entirety of quantum physics is a fraud. I believe in a modified EPOLA hypothesis ("Electron-Positron-Lattice", an Ether theory) and I believe Newtonian mechanics lies at the basis of quantum mechanics, in other words it's purely a mechanical matter. QM is a fantasy world, with Quarks that have never been seen for example. QM is nothing but a mathematical dreamscape.

159.  Fred Zoepfl    Tuesday, April 5, 2016

You are certainly welcome to believe whatever you want, but as a Ph.D. nuclear engineer, I can assure you that your story is false. Did you even read my comment above? Proton-lithium-7 fusion always happens the same way (only 80 years of experience with it). The predominant reaction produces copious amounts of fast (2-3 MeV) neutrons. So maybe Rossi is lying again?? If not, then he and his "magnificent team" would all be dead from radiation exposure. He actually tried to patent the nickel-proton nonsense! If he was "lying" about it, then why would be spend tens of thousands of dollars to prosecute a patent application he knows is bogus? By the way, these patent applications received final rejection notices from both the EU patent office and from the USPTO. Rossi fairyland is a wonderful place where nuclear reactions occur without emitting any ionizing radiation. You would be better off believing in Santa Claus and the Tooth Fairy.

And you are absolutely right about Rossi not being a "scientist." He has a high school diploma and a Ph.D. that is actually in "philosophy," not in science. He probably couldn't tell you the difference between an absorption cross section and a capture cross section. And this idiot savant has solved proton-lithium "cold fusion"?? Good luck with that. He is a pathological liar and a delusional sociopath.

160.  Sarah Vaughter    Friday, April 8, 2016

Rossi's biography has an anecdote that in the very beginning with his eCat experiments, he was urged to wear a lapel neutron flux indicator, after some eCats has melted. One day, an eCat exploded and Rossi nearly got hit by metal shrapnel. The neutron flux lapel indicator had become opaque, indicating significant exposure. Rossi's either a psychopatic liar or he's onto something. I think he's onto something. He kept saying he would always lie about how the eCat exactly worked to thwart his many potential copycats.

161.  Fred Zoepfl    Saturday, April 9, 2016

Well, he lied about the neutron stuff, too. He told the Florida Bureau of Radiation Control (BRC) that his E-Cat device(s) emitted no neutrons or ionizing radiation. The measurements during the absurd Lugano test showed no neutrons or any other ionizing radiation. The fact is that Rossi wouldn't recognize a neutron if it bit him on the ass.

You can tell Rossi's going to lie whenever he opens his mouth. In your business, I believe this is called "pathological lying." If he were really "onto something" then do you think Industrial Heat would have dropped him like a warm turd?

162.  Fred Zoepfl    Saturday, April 9, 2016

What say you now, dumbass?

"News of a difference" indeed!

163.  psi2u2    Sunday, April 10, 2016

Sorry but I have no interest in discussing someone with your potty mouth. Good luck.

164.  Sarah Vaughter    Sunday, April 10, 2016

Rossi was paid 10 million USD for proving that his device worked, I refer to the contract and the litigation, where Rossi says he was paid a total of USD 11,500,000 by IH. IH only paid him the ten million after they built their own eCat replica and independently verified that it worked. It's just the rest of the dough they don't want to cough up - and who's surprised.. They're heavily invested in Brillioun and Brillioun has a large, highly respected team behind them so perhaps IH wants to continue with them, having given Rossi's IP to Brillioun, presumably.

165.  Fred Zoepfl    Sunday, April 10, 2016

And good luck to you on your quixotic quest for the elusive "cold fusion." Be sure to let me know when you find some.

166.  Fred Zoepfl    Sunday, April 10, 2016

Honestly, Brillouin is just as nutty as Rossi. They too have no commercially viable product after years of hype.

Rossi was not "paid $10 million" for "proving that his device worked." This was simply another Rossi-staged dog and pony show that was sufficient to fool some very gullible people. After eight years of this nonsense, haven't you had enough of it? Rossi is a liar by your own admission; his latest delusional fantasy is an "E-Cat-quark-X" that produces "100 watts," "thrust," and light of many colors. Do you believe that too?

167.  Sarah Vaughter    Wednesday, April 13, 2016

Do you think Rossi is a criminal?

168.  Fred Zoepfl    Wednesday, April 13, 2016

Sarah, I think this is more your area of expertise than mine. I am just an engineer, and I can assure you that what Rossi claims (proton-lithium fusion) is physically impossible under the conditions he describes. I am certainly not a psychologist, but to me it seems that Rossi lies constantly for no reason, and maybe he is even delusional. He does appear to fervently believe his own lies. Will the authorities like the FBI and INTERPOL go after him now? I don't know. I don't know what IH will do either. IH could just buy him off with a settlement, or they could systematically destroy him. They have the resources, so they will decide.

If Rossi is really mentally ill with something like grandiose delusional disorder, is he a criminal or a mental patient? I don't know. His former business partner Sterling Allan is in prison for molesting young girls (under 14). Is he a criminal or is he mentally ill? Again, I don't know. Those decisions are way above my pay grade.

I don't think that Rossi has anything that works, or else he would show it to everyone. A truly independent test at a lab or a university with positive results would make him richer than Bill Gates and more famous than Einstein.

169.  maryyugo    Tuesday, April 19, 2016

Now, it seems that Industrial Heat is agreeing with me and with the skeptics. Rossi has nothing, according to their law suit. How is that working for you, Sarah?

170.  Broncobet    Wednesday, June 8, 2016

It's been three months and there is no "magnificents" only "snakes and clowns". If one test doesn't scam people out of their money just extend it, we now have Rossi suing IH.

171.  Graham Simms    Saturday, August 6, 2016

It looks as if Rossi is being countersued by Industrial Heat for all the money he received from them plus penalties and sanctions. Wow.

172.  Thomas Brennan    Friday, December 23, 2016

Nice work. Check out my book "Understanding Sonoluminescence," published by IOP, where I tie together sonoluminescence, LENR and atmospheric lightning. I'll get you a free copy if you'd like.

173.  maryyugo    Monday, June 26, 2017

Rossi's contract dispute supposedly comes to trial soon. Follow the fun here: (and following pages)

Anyone want to bet on the outcome? Now that it should be clear to everyone that Rossi is a crook and a liar and never accomplished anything except fraud, is Vaughter going to apologize for the inane crap written above? For the insults to legitimate skeptics of Rossi's idiotic claims and bad methodology?

174.  Sarah Vaughter    Monday, June 26, 2017

Some days ago, Rossi made a statement that made me start to doubt him. He claimed that the scientific concensus on Anthropogenic Global Warming was a fraud and that there was no such thing as human-caused climate change.

This means that Rossi is not a scientist but a conspiracy theorist as it is usually used in the worst sense of the word - a kook. He may still be a kook with a cool invention, but he has shown that he is not a true scientist, that he does not follow the scientific method before making claims.

Since I am a scientist and since I am honest and ethical, I will publicly apologize if it becomes PROVEN BEYOND REASONABLE DOUBT that Rossi's eCat-related claims turn out to be false. I add this condition, since multiple 3rd-parties have independently tested his eCat and published reports that it worked as claimed. Also, multiple 3rd party scientists worldwide have successfully replicated his eCat.

So, even though Rossi clearly is at the very least intellectually lazy and not behaving as a true scientist, since we know LENR is real and we know his device has passed independent auditing as well as the "Rossi Effect" been succesfully replicated, I need hard evidence that Rossi behaved fraudulently.

When responding to another comment, please mention its number.
Comments need to be approved. Check updates to this page with F5.
We reject comments with profanity, sloppy writing, suspected SPAM,
requests for medical treatment advice, customer support issues or
criticism to the article without using logical, scientific arguments.


After Saturday comes?