eCatNews Direct to your MailBox

Enter your email address to follow the ecat story ahead of the crowd

I loathe spam. You can unsubscribe at any time. I will not pass your details to a third party

Fox eCat Story Called Into Question

November 3, 2011

There is one thing certain in the cold fusion arena – there will always be someone who disagrees with almost anything written about it. When those with a little or a lot of knowledge fight constantly over the most trivial of points, it would be a miracle if someone new to it managed to report otherwise. This is why I wrote the eCatNews Briefs linked to in the menu.

Following the Fox article guessing at the identity of the 1MW customer, Sterling Allan of Peswiki posted in the comments section at eCatNews. He points out a number of errors and omissions in the article. I agree there are errors and said so in the first post. However, the journalist was not saying these things, he was supposed to be quoting specific individuals. That said, when it comes to Sterling himself, he denies those quotes and therefore we must be even more careful with the conclusions no matter how we might wish we were closer to the truth. This from Peswiki:

Let me make some corrections on his quotations of me.

First, he said:

“Sterling Allan, CEO of the alternative energy news agency Pure Energy Systems, told he attended Rossi’s demonstration and the E-Cat is self sustaining.” [snip]

…Next, he wrote:

“Allan hinted on his blog that an unnamed ‘customer’ of Rossi’s device is a military organization that starts with an N. Rossi said this customer measured and verified the test — and told that Paul Swanson with the U.S. Navy’s Space and Naval Warfare Systems unit (SPAWAR) can vouch for the demonstration.”

Correction: That reference to a U.S. (I didn’t say “military”) organization that starts with an N was not in relation to the “customer” but a previous entity that independently and successfully tested the E-Cat. I never intended to tie those two together, and I actually separated them in my communications with him (or at least I thought I did).

I don’t know who the customer is, so I can’t give hints about it. I told him as much.

Also, I didn’t give him the name of Paul Swanson. That must have come from someone else he talked to.


Those following the eCat story for some time are used to seeing newcomers to the subject struggle with the balance. I absolutely disagree with much of the negative reporting we see but fully understand why it comes about. Anyone – journalist or not – has little chance of pinning the tail on the donkey when faced with such an avalanche of apparently conflicting facts. All they can do is report what others say and make a call on the tone they wish to strike. We hope for more from the serious science publications when they eventually get round to covering the eCat. but even then, what are they to say when all their normal sources tell them it’s all nonsense?

This state of affairs will only be resolved when we get some certainty from Andrea Rossi or one of his customers. Why should we expect a journalist fresh to the subject to believe one party over another without evidence? And the apparent duff quotes? That’s something else. One of the most interesting comments is said to come from Dr Rossi. It would be fascinating to know if that was true or not. If it is, then the guess may have some substance (correct or otherwise). If not, we are back to NASA, NATO, Disney or Robert Park 😉


Rossi said this customer measured and verified the test — and told that Paul Swanson with the U.S. Navy’s Space and Naval Warfare Systems unit (SPAWAR) can vouch for the demonstration.


[As an aside – Sterling’s comment regarding the US entity beginning with N “..that independently and successfully tested the E-Cat…” N— successfully tested the eCat? That is new to me. Is that a typo, Sterling, or have I missed something important?]


Posted by on November 3, 2011. Filed under Media & Blogs. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0. Both comments and pings are currently closed.

18 Responses to Fox eCat Story Called Into Question

  1. georgehants

    November 3, 2011 at 9:39 am

  2. georgehants

    November 3, 2011 at 9:49 am

    Seems Brian Josephson feels the same as most of us, but I don’t know who he is talking to, but from Rossi’s page.
    Brian Josephson
    November 2nd, 2011 at 4:33 PM
    @Stuart Sanderson: my sources indicate that they would be satisfied with a positive report from a credible customer in place of a scientific investigation, and then official procedures could go ahead regardless of what the fear-dominated press might do. It is a pity that the earlier deal with *** fell through and the replacement customer is unwilling to identify himself, but no doubt future customers will be willing to. Alternatively a scientific lab could just buy a reactor and confirm the heat output with the kind rigorous measurements that have not been forthcoming as yet — they do not need to know the secrets to be able to do this.

  3. arian

    November 3, 2011 at 10:02 am

  4. georgehants

    November 3, 2011 at 11:25 am

    If Rossi proves his case in the near future it will be the fastest release of a beyond known science effect ever.
    To take the case of Quantum computers that where denied and abused by main-line science for years and years until a mathematician showed that they could crack any classical code in seconds, then only because of defense considerations research accelerated exponentially.
    Main-line science is inefficient, wasteful, incompetent, and led by people who should have no place in the premier occupation of FIND and RESEARCH new science in any area that an anomaly shows it’s self.
    Only the unknown is of interest and leave the army of ordinary scientists to work on and exploit known science for as long as they wish.
    Every person who does not want an answer to the UFO phenomenon and every other phenomenon is no scientist.
    Science cannot pick and choose, every unknown including the possible Rossi effect are as important as each other.
    People have been brain-washed by listening to a few closed-minds who are skeptical of everything new.
    There are NO REASONS WHY any unknown should not be viewed with excitement and eagerness to find out about a World that is put here for us to play with and discover it’s ultimate meaning.

  5. Bradley Beeson

    November 3, 2011 at 2:12 pm

    It’s too bad that Lewan or Svennson didn’t bring along a nice FLIR IR Thermal Imager to the Oct 28th demo. The images would have put to rest some of the theories being proposed such as non-functioning radiators etc. Just one good shot of the core of the plant would have been a powerful statement. Now of course our skeptic friends would have found some reason to question the relevance of such images, since they don’t provide “scientific evidence”, and hey the tool was in the hands of an amateur! and it wasn’t calibrated properly, and and and….

    Of course, this assumes that Rossi would have permitted its use, but if he’s really on the up and up, then why not? maybe next time.

    • John Dlouhy

      November 3, 2011 at 4:18 pm

      Dorothy, Tin Man, and Lion will be heart broken when they discover you have smashed their cohort to smithereens…!

  6. H. Visscher

    November 3, 2011 at 2:33 pm

    Hello Andrea,

    First of all I hope you and your family are doing well. This afternoon (Vancouver time) I have posted some questions on the Journal of Nuclear Physics. However, since then you have answered some other questions and I do not see my questions anymore. May be they have been “spammed” by your robot? Anyway, thanks to you we are living in some exciting times. May be you can answer these additional questions?

    As I recall, you have made arrangements with both the University of Uppsala and the University of Bologna to do research on the E-Cat. Why have you chosen to let two universities for research while it have been done by just one university?
    When does the scientific research of the E-Cat by the mentioned universities start?
    You mentioned that the industrial production of the modules of the 1MW plants has been started. Where does the production take place and do you have any job opening at these sites? If so where can I find postings of the job openings?

    Well Andrea, I thank you again for your openness and answering all our questions diligently. 

    Thanks for what you are doing!

    With kind regards,

    H. Visscher

    This morning he replied:

    I have already given enough information on these issues, I want not to return on issues I have already answered to.

    Warm Regards,
    Andrea Rossi

    Have i missed something?

    • Tony

      November 3, 2011 at 9:42 pm


      Of course you’ve missed something. Several things, actually. But, the red pill is in your hand and you’re starting to see reality.

      1. There is no LENR e-cat. No test has ever ruled out an energy density beyond that which ordinary chemical processes can produce.

      2. Since there is no e-cat, there is no factory. Do you honestly believe AR when he says he is in a position to produce these things at a rate of up to one a week and we have never seen the place where they will be built? Or the fact that he only has the Italian patent to work with? Who in their right mind would ever commit to making such a thing without a bulletproof patent protection?

      3. No third party will ever be allowed to work with the e-cat. The jig would be up faster than you can say “Bob’s your uncle!” All of this speculation would have been ended with a simple test. You can castigate MY, Popeye, and Thicket and besmirch them as you will but they are grounded in reality and are simply pointing out that the body of evidence screams fraud.

      4. How convenient that the customer has sent the plant to a “remote location” where it will never be seen again. Just like the unit that powered the Italian plant for two years that nobody, and I mean NOBODY, has ever been able to verify.

      You are becoming aware, HV. Congratulations.


      • H. Visscher

        November 3, 2011 at 10:44 pm

        Yes, you know with the fact that he does not want to answer the questions regarding the research at the Universities, ok that is something I can live with and that does not necessarily make me doubt Rossi’s intentions. However, the fact that I just cannot find a manufacturing plant for the modules or any job postings for positions for the production of the modules, that is something where BS gauge start working again. What Rossi is up to is still a mistery to me. He must have spend a fair bit of change on this all…

      • Tom Baccei

        November 4, 2011 at 12:45 am

        Tony, your acuity defies imagination. How I envy your certainty. Be sure to short Leonardo corp. when they go public. You’ll make a fortune. Such certainty, such hubris. A skeptic is someone who is not certain. You are not a skeptic. You are captivated by your own illusory world. Send us a note once in a while, from TonyEarth. There is no Tony, there is no Tony2. The reason Rossi is a mystery to you is that you have no ability to analyze a complex situation. Enjoy the flat earth, Tony. If you walk far enough on a straight line, you will never run into yourself. That’s a good thing for both of you. No hush up, Tony, and go shut your eyes!

        • Detony

          November 4, 2011 at 7:41 am

          Damn Tom! You went and spoilt Tony’s personally fabricated little fiefdom! Of course he’s not a skeptic. Tony2 is sitting in his mom’s basement hoping his puny pension don’t run out before they kick his ass to the curb. TonyEarth is a figment of Tonimagination – which is followed avidly by an audience of one. Tony’s mom. About now Tony will be crying like algore’s “no shared reality!” Listen up tone – your narrow-minded self-indulgent days are about up. Find another planet to pillage!

        • Stephen

          November 5, 2011 at 5:31 pm

          Blowhard. That’s the word I was trying to remember while reading these “non-informational” comments, from Tom , George, Soo, et al…

          • Tom Baccei

            November 5, 2011 at 6:31 pm

            Yup, but it sure beats all the “certainty” you skeptics seem to poses. Why are you all so desperate to convince everybody else of the wisdom of your denial. Why don’t you tell what in Tony’s list of guesses is informational? Or your comment for that matter? Like I’ve been saying to the “informational” crowd. First do some research. Second hope that Rossi does go public, and sells shares. Then you can short him to your hearts content and make a fortune while you are at it. Give me one fact that proves the ecat is a fraud. YOU ONLY HAVE GUESSES! I love exchanging pleasantries with all of you, because you never say anything original. You just keep trying to convince everyone else that you are right in your guesses. It really is sad that you waste your time. If you don’t believe Rossi, why not just go away? I am at least following a story which I hope to be true, but am not yet certain. But I am enjoying the drama, and the unfolding almost surrealistic developments. It’s like you guys are watching a soap opera, and constantly screaming at the fans that the story is not true. If you do not believe it’s true, why do you watch? And what do you care what I think?
            If you want to deny this story, go away. If you want to be a credible skeptic, stop repeating yourselves, and say something useful, and if you like the drama, stop pissing other people off with your superior ranting and raving of denial. I UNDERSTAND YOU DON’T BELIEVE ANY OF IT, so for cryin’ out loud, just go and visit some hot fusion web site, and tell them how excited you are in their vision of the future.

          • Stephen

            November 12, 2011 at 9:29 pm

            Example: “Maryyugo is all over that page’s comments. What a deranged person MY must be. I truly do not get MY’s obvious obsession with “debunking” the E-Cat. Surely MY is paid to scour the Internets and comment on every article posted about the E-Cat, in whichever obscure corner. It seems no article is too insignificant for MY to make her “scam” allegations under. I wonder if she realizes how utterly pathetic she appears to others. It’s beyond ridiculous and simply incomprehensible. She’s one determined person, I’ll give her or him that much. To what purpose, I will leave to others to speculate. She’s an idiot.”

  7. georgehants

    November 3, 2011 at 5:40 pm

  8. Sterling Allan

    November 4, 2011 at 4:46 pm

    There was a test by a U.S. entitity whose name begins with N, but they apparently are not calling it “successful” by the parameters of scientific rigor.

    • admin

      November 5, 2011 at 4:25 pm

      Thanks, Sterling. Do you mean they are simply hedging? In other words, few scientists would publish a definitive yes/no based on the same sort of test that might convince an engineer or customer – particularly in such a contentious arena.