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

John Hadjichristos – Defkalion’s CTO Interviewed

August 31, 2012

Peter Gluck details a new interview with Defkalion GT’s CTO, John Hadjichristos on his blog, here.

While he offers nothing to demonstrate they have anything of substance, there are a number of interesting additions to the story they tell. When asked about the company history, JH tells us that Rossi’s deal with Ampenergo was problematic in that it interfered with their rights to Canada. As an aside, he also says that the Ampenergo deal collapsed later, too. It is certainly curious to see no movement from that quarter (not even a site update) for months.

I treat anything the company says with caution until they do what they said they would do but there is enough story-telling meat in this interview that those looking for meta-data might find it interesting. If we ever get lucky in finding that the company has more than words to offer, this new ‘information’ could turn out useful.

There is more on Peter’s blog; Ego Out

In the mean time, Rossi signed a contract with Ampenergo that was in conflict with our contract. Ampenergo would act like us in US, but due to their contract with Rossi, for the whole American continent exclusively. Ampenergo published their relationship with Rossi on 25 of June 2011, that created us a huge problem: our Greek-Canadian share holders were basing their investment on our company under the hypothesis that we could distribute products to Canada also….

And on the discovery process:

What most people do not know is that we got very big help from what had been published already in CF/LENR literature. Most of the scientific announcements, including those of Rossi made in public, indicated us WHAT NOT TO TRY. On the other hand, a lot of positive indications and useful scientific knowledge related,  had already been published in public domain from other fields such as plasma physics, astrophysics, chemistry, metallurgy, volcanism, new material science, nanotechnology etc.

And on the tech:

Very quickly we realized that the “thermal method”, as well all the “gas loading methods” were not giving us the expected results that could lead to an industrial prototype due to their very slow feedback. We designed then our R4 lab reactor where a more aggressive triggering method (plasma ignition or ion-bombardment as some people call it) was introduced.




Posted by on August 31, 2012. Filed under Defkalion,Media & Blogs,Press/Blogs,Rossi. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0. You can leave a response or trackback to this entry

870 Responses to John Hadjichristos – Defkalion’s CTO Interviewed

  1. GreenWin Reply

    September 7, 2012 at 10:31 pm

    Here’s some advice for Popee’s programmers from a well established (highly educated) former director of MIT’s Artificial Intelligence Lab, Dr. Patrick Winston:

    “Winston speculated that the magic ingredient that makes humans unique is our ability to create and understand stories using the faculties that support language: “Once you have stories, you have the kind of creativity that makes the species different to any other.”

    Of course formal education provides an excellent method of focused learning. The failures arise when professors become politicized as have Gell-Mann, and Ballinger, Parker, at MIT by hot fusion. It is an insidious funding trap easily fallen in. Unfortunately scuttling the research of fellows is likely criminal and certainly unethical – and those who have done so will have to answer for their actions.

    Hopefully, all on IGZ-2013!! The story is King.

  2. Shane D. Reply

    September 7, 2012 at 11:56 pm

    JNewman says: “Shane, please elaborate. What information is literally flooding in about LENR? Clearly I am too biased and narrow-minded to recognize it when I see it. Can you help me out?


    You and I for once agree on one thing; you are indeed “biased and narrow minded”… lol.

    Now to your pandering, or was that mocking? “can you help me out Shane”… come on Newman, get out there and look!

    Celani/funding/demo, Brillouin new funding/China patent, DGT paper to be published/new RSH theory, Pirrelli HS (Agundo) Athanor now replaced with newer cell. Much more.

    Not going to do your homework for you. Go to ecatworld. Lots of info there.

    • Al Potenza Reply

      September 8, 2012 at 12:06 am

      A couple of points for Shane:

      Everything you alluded to is what somebody says, usually the people who are the ones making the claim. None of it is verified in any way. None of it represents significant amounts of properly measured power for long periods. In other words, it’s just the same old crappola we’ve been subjected to for TWENTY THREE YEARS.

      Wake me up when you have enough power for long enough independently verified.

      Tired of skeptics repeating themselves? It’s because believers keep recycling the same old type of trash in new wrappers.

      Let’s take an especially egregious (read: stupid) example. DGT paper to be published? Really? What about? What publication? Who reviewed it?

      What DGT needs is a single properly verified independent test of their ridiculously large claims and there would no longer be any argument at all about the reality of LENR. Their previous papers contained nothing but claims. They have been scientifically worthless. Why should we now expect anything different?

      Watch what Rossi does tomorrow and Sunday. Want to bet it’s the same bunch of Scheiße he’s done before? And I bet the believers will kiss his … hat.

      • JNewman Reply

        September 8, 2012 at 12:25 am

        Thanks Al. Saved me frm saying basically the same things.

        I guess the grand truth that escapes most of the believers here is that twenty or fifty or one hundred weak arguments cannot take the place of one strong argument. And we are still waiting for one strong argument.

      • Shane D. Reply

        September 8, 2012 at 1:15 am

        I’m not really at all surprised that you and Newman are unimpressed. Nothing new, or unexpected.

        Not that you two, and the other skeptics here, don’t make the occasional good point. If not I wouldn’t bother.

        But I’ll take my “preponderance of evidence”, or what you call “100 weak arguments don’t add up to one strong argument”, over yours on this issue.

        We will see.

        • JNewman Reply

          September 8, 2012 at 1:23 am

          Fair enough. You can only make up your mind on whatever basis that works for you. And indeed we shall see, although I believe I am on fairly safe ground in predicting that a month from now or six months from now or a year from now, very little will have changed. If that works for you, it certainly works for me. Afterall, I’m not waiting for anything to happen.

          • Ransompw

            September 8, 2012 at 1:53 am


            What I hear from you reminds me of the standard of proof we see in the legal profession. Some cases require a preponderance of the evidence, some beyond a reasonable doubt, but this is the kicker those supposed objective standards mean different things to different people. You and others remind me of a guy I overheard in the Detroit airport when the OJ verdict was coming in. He said, “You know forca verdict he has to be guilty beyond a shadow of a doubt”. It gave me a chuckle and you do too.

          • JNewman

            September 8, 2012 at 5:03 am

            Glad I can provide you some mirth. The legal analogy is not bad. As a lawyer, you see someone as innocent until proven guilty by the applicable standards. As a scientist, I see a scientific claim as false until proven true by the applicable standards. Those are clearly not the standards used by social scientists, metaphysics fans, conspiracy theorists, or lawyers who take an interest in science. We will simply have to agree to disagree about what rules to apply. But once again, I am pleased that I have brightened your day just a little bit.

          • Ransompw

            September 8, 2012 at 6:22 am


            My point was that even amoung so called scientists the standard seems fluid. I think there will be plenty of your ilk who will require the baseball bat to the side of the head level of proof and many others at levels below that blow your brains out level. That is what I find amusing.

          • JNewman

            September 8, 2012 at 11:46 am

            Ransom, my comment stands.

  3. Shane D. Reply

    September 8, 2012 at 12:52 am

    Just before the big event, Rossi suddenly sounds a bit subdued, and appears to be lowering expectations…. “nothing special”/”encouraging results”:

    Mr. Rossi

    I hope that you are well.

    Can you tell us what scientific publications will be attending your conference tomorrow?

    Have a safe trip to Zurich?

    Andrea Rossi
    September 7th, 2012 at 4:46 PM
    Dear Brian:

    I do not know, but my paper tomorrow will not be anything special: it will explain a R&D work, with the description of measures made on the Hot Cat: such R&D work will have to be completed, so many other tests will have to be done before having a high temperature industrial application.

    We got encouraging results and we will describe them.

    Warm Regards,


    • Al Potenza Reply

      September 8, 2012 at 1:43 am

      Rossi is simply going to try to do what he does in his blog except in person. Which is to run his mouth and nothing else.

      I’m not sure he is going to get away with it except for the dumbest of the believers but then that’s who he aims for most of the time for reasons that have already been discussed — they’re the ones who are most likely to give him money.

      None of them will ask themselves why Rossi is talking about 1200 degree ecats when he has never had a 120 degree one properly tested. He could easily bring any number of properly instrumented devices (gee, he could even use NI Labview for that!).

      But he won’t.

      This should be interesting. I wonder just how low he will go and how far down his followers will accompany him.

  4. Shane D. Reply

    September 8, 2012 at 2:04 am


    There are few times I can’t mount a good counter argument and this is one. Thanks for the reply:

    Hi Shane,

    I go up and down on LENR. Unlike most of my physicist colleagues, I’m still interested and willing to give LENR a hearing, as long as I feel like I’m dealing with an honest experimentalist and not a used car salesman. And there are still several in the small LENR community that I feel are decent and honest scientists. There are even still some experiments that I would like to try to replicate myself.

    But to be completely objective, I must admit that it’s difficult to counter Popeye’s main argument against LENR, which I paraphrase as the following:

    1. LENR researchers claim to be making ongoing progress, understanding better the conditions for materials preparation and creating a good “nuclear active environment”, for triggering and exciting via various current waveforms, photonic or phononic stimuli, as well as the degree of loading require, and a variety of other parameters that initially were not well understood or controlled.

    2. Given this claimed progress, one would expect greater reproducibility, larger anomalous effects, and ever more definitive results as the years and decades go by.

    3. Sadly, after 23 years, it’s still difficult to point to one definitive experiment that unequivocally demonstrates a non-chemical reaction to be taking place. Especially one with a published recipe and protocol that can be independently replicated in another lab.

    In fact, many researchers report highly suggestive results at the annual ICCF conference, and the next year they are either completely silent, or they are reporting similar suggestive results in some new technology. What one rarely sees is step by step, year by year, ongoing improvements in both experimental methodologies, results and replications. Iwamura was one notable exception, continually improving his experiment over the course of several years. But he ran into some difficulties with an attempted NRL replication and also now appears to be reduced to talking about results from five years ago. ENEA was also making ongoing improvements, but somewhere along the way the progress, as measured by larger and longer duration heat anomalies, seemed to stop. At least that’s my impression, but I am no longer as close to the community as I once was so perhaps I’m mistaken.

    So what is one to think? At some point one expects “suggestive” to move into the “compelling” phase. Of course, “compelling” is somewhat subjective, but even wearing my most optimistic hat I must admit to being underwhelmed by most of the LENR papers that I read. And even for a near perfect experiment, it’s still nearly impossible for even an expert to say for certain that no mistake has been made. The CERN faster-than-light neutrinos is a good example. That’s why any trained scientist tends to stay judgment until the results can be independently replicated.

    I guess today I’m just slightly downside of neutral in terms of expectations, but slightly upside of neutral in terms of hope. Perhaps someone from the LENR camp can set me straight again.

    • Jay2011 Reply

      September 8, 2012 at 2:57 am


      Regarding “whack-a-moling” Paul Stout, I admit to piling on with Popeye and a few others. But Paul seemed up to the challenge, both mentally and emotionally, and I rather enjoyed conversing with him.

      I also enjoy seeing Popeye challenged. If he’s an AI program, he’s a pretty darn good one. I’d challenge him myself except unfortunately I mostly find myself agreeing with him.

      Maybe LCD can initiate a new challenge.


      • JNewman Reply

        September 8, 2012 at 5:09 am

        Actually, Paul seems to be a thoughtful and intelligent individual who actually tries to apply technical analysis to the ongoing circus. The only reason I have any urge to give him grief is his annoying habit of bragging about how conceited he is and how superior he is. I find that sort of thing fairly repugnant. But if one ignores that little foible, he is high up in the pantheon of local believers with genuine smarts.

    • Jay2011 Reply

      September 8, 2012 at 4:37 pm


      I’m sorry for using obsolete data, and thanks for trying to set me straight. But is SPAWAR the most recent and best example you have? And by SPAWAR, do you mean the claims for radiation emissions (not anomalous heat) published and presented over the past several years?

      I’m not certain how reproducible these results are. Many others attempted to replicate this experiment but dispute that the CR-39 film tracks are evidence for nuclear radiation. Moreover, SPAWAR backed off of their initial claims of copious radiation tracks and lately seem to focus solely on rare events they call “triple tracks” that they claim are evidence for fast neutron events. Unfortunately fast neutrons are rather common background radiation and SPAWAR never seems to present any control data, so I cannot conclude very much from their papers. Perhaps you have another example?

      • Alain Reply

        September 8, 2012 at 5:57 pm

        I’m tired…
        2009 is old? and NI, you will reject…
        and 97 at CEA grenoble it is so old it does not have value…
        to be honnest data was ther in 89, and only because of lack of curiosity did nasa GRC don’t find the proof (gas permeation…)

        I don’t care of CR39, neither theory… heat is enough.

        look also Report 41…

        look isothermal mckubre calorimetry.

        get to, I’ve put the data there. google or search.
        at worst instead of arguing, you can find fraud proofs in all the results I’ve gathered… if you can cancel all, I’ll get less confident.
        ther is less data today because rationaly
        the scientist have discovered that there is no way to convince the mainstream… and that there is a huge change to be rich.

        that all is said, all is proved…

        face the fact… I cannot do it for you.

        unlike you if you give me just a keyword about a credible critics, I’ll get info and put it in the thread, and change my mind…

        • Jay2011 Reply

          September 8, 2012 at 8:24 pm


          Thanks for the links. I’m not trying to convince anyone. Except maybe myself. Actually, I’m hoping someone from the LENR community can convince me. Be careful about painting everyone with the same broad black and white brush. Just because I don’t find the SPAWAR CR-39 data to be that compelling doesn’t mean I’m closed minded.

          But I am a physicist and I like good experiments. And 23 years of excuses doesn’t work for me. If I perform a half-ass experiment and have difficulty to get it published and folks tell me that my control experiments were not convincing or my calibrations were wrong or whatever, I don’t go off and cry and say “stop persecuting me” and “you wouldn’t believe me anyway” and then flit off to the next hot LENR flavor of the day. And I wouldn’t point to my neighbor and say “well his half-ass experiment and mine together make one whole experiment, so why don’t you believe us?”

          I would say to myself “I’ll show them”, improve my experiment, fix all the things that everyone objected to, and hammer them with the data until they were forced to take notice. And I would publish my recipe in an open forum and try to get as many independent replications as possible. But that’s just me.

  5. GreenWin Reply

    September 8, 2012 at 3:21 am

    The tirade against failed AI like Popee and ilk has even come from the hardened skeptic:

    “As one observer put it, neuroscience appears to be making “antiprogress” — the more information we acquire, the less we seem to know.”

    “You might wonder why aren’t there any robots that you can send in to fix the Japanese reactors. The answer is that there was a lot of progress in the 1960s and 1970s. Then something went wrong.” MIT, Marvin Minsky

    No, with the current state of failure in AI education – it would be cruel to machine intelligence to send Popee to the Island of Generale Zarcofagus. Even if he could swim.

    But it would rate very well!

    IGZ-2013 Resistance is Circuit Breaking 🙂

    • Jay2011 Reply

      September 8, 2012 at 4:05 am

      Thanks for the links. I agree regarding general disappointing progress in AI (the Popeye program being the one notable exception).

      Not sure I agree with the premise that an understanding of human language and semantics is a precursor to intelligence. There are plenty of examples non human species exhibiting all kinds of adaptable and resilient problem-solving capability (intelligence by my definition) requiring no human language whatsoever, and no reason to think that AI’s couldn’t do the same. Even the “creative storytelling” example used in the article is not entirely dependent upon human language. Dance and music are two more obvious examples of creative intelligence not depending upon an understanding of semantics. It’s not even really clear that the ultimate grand unified theory of physics, whatever that may be and assuming such a thing exists at all, will require an understanding of human language semantics.

      Just saying..

    • Quax Reply

      September 8, 2012 at 4:05 am

      Greenwin, your ability to get things backwards never ceases to amaze me.

      Your Marvin Minsky quote is pretty funny. I can tell you exactly what went wrong, it was Minsky publishing his proof that perceptrons cannot perform a XOR function.

      This killed the research on artificial neural networks as it wasn’t realized at the time that this limitation does not apply to multilayered perceptrons. Minsky killed this line of research for a good long time although an efficient learning algorithm for multi-layer perceptrons was published the same year by a less notorious scientist.

      Today all these running, walking robots that you can admire in various youtube videos use artificial neural networks, rather than the formalistic approach that Minsky favored.

  6. GreenWin Reply

    September 8, 2012 at 4:27 am

    Gentlemen, I shall not pretend to parse the details for the same reasons I chose to learn C rather than assembly code – a preference for high level languages.

    Jay, your examples are fair for infant level use of tools – the crows, and gorillas with ant sticks. There is the genius chimp in Japan that has photo-memory but he’s one of a kind. Where Popee fails to impress is a distinct lack of human “texture” – OCD-type energetics, zero understanding of the term “brevity” and vacuous comprehension of humor. His programming reflects a mechanical condescension remarkably like the Cylons of BSG.

    I’ll be interested in his “upgraded” performance. But it won’t hold a candle to a master like AR who has both heaven and Earth all a-flutter.

    Think about appearing on my show. I pay scale! IGZ-2013…

    • Jay2011 Reply

      September 8, 2012 at 4:48 am


      On the contrary, the animals often appear more intelligent to me than the humans studying them. But that’s just me, I guess.

      And my Beethoven AI was doing pretty well with it’s 11th symphony, but now I guess I should just scrap it and teach it Dick and Jane instead.

      Regarding humor, it may be one of those things in the eye(s) of the beholding species. The jokes I could tell from back home… But I guess you’d have to be there.

  7. Jami Reply

    September 8, 2012 at 9:06 am

    Rossi’s apparent toning down happened some time ago – in fact it started right after the 1 MW demo last October. He hasn’t given any demo since then and his messages now have a kind of “down to business” ring to it.

    Makes sense, in a way. Until October, he tried to lure in names (NASA, Kullander etc.) in order to gain credibility with potential i(diots)nvestors – and once he built that up, he turned to pampering these investors in his messages rather than the scientific community or the general public. He doesn’t talk about theories or testing any more. He simply wants to give the impression that the science is proven and commercialization (which is all the investors are interested in anyway) is all he cares about now.

    In Zürich, there isn’t a single scientific topic on the agenda. It is all about business development and opportunity management.

    Oh – and the Hot Cat, of course. Right after a speech emphasizing some boring business opportunities in “process heating” from a car sales woman, Rossi will announce in modest words (no need to brag any more in front of these folks), that the really big fish (electricity generation) is still out there and he just invented the rod to catch it with – the Hot Cat.

    I bet the message, in a nutshell, will be this: “Dear idiots. Thanks for talking countless other idiots into giving you money which you in turn gave to me. Over the last two days you’ve heard how the e-cat will make you all rather rich very soon. NOW is the time to convince even more idiots to give you (and me) even more money for the Hot Cat (sorry, did I mention your (non)existing contracts only cover the e-cat?) and become very, very, VERY rich in deed. We’ll hold the Hot Cat investors conference in February 2013. See you then – at least those of you who don’t fail me and bring in enough money.”

    They’ll give him a standing ovation for that.

  8. Jami Reply

    September 8, 2012 at 9:46 am

    Here’s another, revolutionary idea. A bunch of LENR reactors packed together in a shipping container and sold as a power plant!! Sounds familiar? But this one has been approved and co-developed by an Italian scientist. Sounds familiar, too? Hmm. The scientist himself never managed to show anything more than a pitiful energy gain derived from a questionable formula – and that only sometimes. But still the product churning out megawatts will be sold very soon – Q1/2013. Does that ring any bells?

    Well, it is NOT Rossi this time. It is a company called Kresenn and the Italian who made it all possible isn’t Focardi, but none other than Francesco Celani himself.!lenr/vstc2=products

    The world has gone completely mad. I just don’t remember when it happened.

    • Bettingman Reply

      September 8, 2012 at 11:42 am

      I have to agree that this is not reassuring with respect to the possibility that Celani will come through with/collaborate with independent tests results and verification.

    • Jay2011 Reply

      September 8, 2012 at 1:17 pm

      Oh Oh..

  9. dsm Reply

    September 8, 2012 at 9:48 am

    The cream on the cake 🙂
    This was posted on eCatWorld.
    ” Renzo on September 8, 2012 at 7:01 am

    other comments this morning by Cures/Fioravanti

    The report is not signed by Rossi. Who, moreover, after some kicking and screaming, left ensuring that he will behave as a normal and accommodating person, ”

    “Rossi is well-intentioned to start testing soon after returning from Zurich. He’s had enough too. We can only hope that there isn’t anyone who will make jump his nerves on purpose. It takes very little.””
    Supposedly posted by “cures” in Italian & the above is a translation.
    What I understand it could mean is the report is just that and not signed (your guess is as good as mine as to what these people mean by ‘the report’) .Everyone, please please don’t stress or antagonize the great meister at this event. You are privileged he even turned up (we got him there screaming & kicking). He has been working sooooo hard and as soon as your party in Zurich is over he has to rush back to keep working.
    Don’t ask him *any* questions that might upset him !”.
    My my
    DSM 🙂

    • Dale G. Basgall Reply

      September 8, 2012 at 10:11 am

      When in trouble, when in doubt. Run in circles, scream and shout!

  10. Jami Reply

    September 8, 2012 at 10:21 am

    “Everyone, please please don’t stress or antagonize the great meister at this event.”

    Interesting, where the hero worshiping has lead.

    Somebody on e-catworld commented on the admin (Frank) apparently receiving the “report” in advance:

    “To ALL….

    I would ask that people Please refrain from asking Frank for details. Even the Tiniest little tidbit. Rossi providing advance info to Frank is a matter of privilege of Trust & Integrity.”

    Come again? What on earth did Rossi tell him? “Dear Frank Acland – I know you don’t know shit about physics or engineering and are just a devoted believer – but I send this report to you anyway. Please read it (or don’t – I couldn’t care less) and only hint on your blog that you received it. But don’t, I repeat, DO NOT talk about it.”

    Why would he do that? And why would anybody abused in this way feel privileged and honored about it?

    The ass-licking is reaching pornographic dimensions. No wonder google ads is pestering me with S&M toy adverts when I open Frank’s site.

    • MaxS Reply

      September 8, 2012 at 11:45 am

      if anyone would still have doubted, the fact that the Great Prophet would send this report beforehand to Mark for publication at an agreed point in time is another evidence that ecatworld is the official marketing and propaganda arm of the great cult leader Andrea Rossi.

  11. CuriousChris Reply

    September 8, 2012 at 10:21 am

    Dear DSM I obviously got under your skin about the Rohner scam. never mind I have a solution.

    A: The burden of proof is on Bob Rohner. Not me or anyone else. When it comes to making impossible claims, guilty until proven innocent I am afraid.

    B: My statements about Mike McKubre stand. He should not be making such statements as he believes in the Papp engine. Irrespective of the outs you attribute to him.

    C: You are busy slandering me while accusing me of slandering others. How more hypocritical can one get?

    D: Mats Lewan did not withdraw his statement about DGT. You got it wrong but accused me of lying.

    E: You repeatedly and consistently refuse to answer my questions of you. But become abusive, condescending and irrational when I don’t respond in the way you want me to.

    F: I Didn’t base my opinions on the video actually. I based it on the claim he makes is impossible under current known physics. I based it on correspondence I had with him via email. On comments he has made on other forums. The known fact that Papp was a fraud, The fact his brother is a fraud and proven scammer. The fact he becomes irrational and abusive if you dare to question him. From correspondence others have had with him. Because he lacks the basic knowledge someone would require to make the claims he makes…

    G: You think you are rubbing our noses in it, that my friend is a joke. Yet another example of your condescending attitude.

    and finally …

    H: The solution.

    You have previously admitted to not being the best at picking up on scams and therefore defer to the likes of Mike McKubre. So here is the solution. If you can get your friend Dick Smith to review your claims that Bob is an all round good guy and Mike McKubre didn’t debase himself by saying he believed in the Papp engine based on nothing more than anecdotes and if Dick Smith writes that here on this forum. Then I will withdraw my claims that Bob is a scammer and that Mike McKubre was wrong in supporting Bob. I will kindly ask the others to do so as well, but they will probably just say I am BSC.


    • dsm Reply

      September 8, 2012 at 11:40 am

      Thanks for the effort – I do appreciate your intention. I have commented on points (in italics) to your post – Cheers DSM
      Dear DSM I obviously got under your skin about the Rohner scam. never mind I have a solution.

      A: The burden of proof is on Bob Rohner. Not me or anyone else. When it comes to making impossible claims, guilty until proven innocent I am afraid.
      Chris, the main issue was Bob did an open demo at a show-and-tell conference, Mike attended, the event was <b a show-and-tell. It was NOT a scientific treatise. Whatever proof individuals need is up to each person to decide/evaluate for themselves. Mike said he would do his own evaluation & had ideas that he wouldn’t publish until he had more research. He added that a fully equipped lab may well be need to do a deeper evaluation. In my mind McKubre at a show-and-tell event spoke responsibly. Any assertion that he stated that the Noble gas expansion/contraction demo was totally proven in advance of his research are false assertions !. He never said that.
      B: My statements about Mike McKubre stand. He should not be making such statements as he believes in the Papp engine. Irrespective of the outs you attribute to him.
      Chris, if your statement that Mike was a dupe of a scammer is what you mean. Then that may stand for you but not acceptable to me. And McKubre NEVER sad the engine worked without qualification NEVER ! – quote where he said that (but in full context) !
      C: You are busy slandering me while accusing me of slandering others. How more hypocritical can one get?
      Chris, What slander have I done about you ? – quote me please !. Slander is “a malicious, false, and defamatory statement or report” So Chris, where have I slandered you ? – you never point this out !. I am left thinking this person doesn’t get it 🙁 – everything I said about you was provable but am happy to apologize if you apologize for calling Bob a scammer based on that demo he did. PS If you want to call John Rohner a scammer I won’t object nor ask you to prove it, BUT, this was never about John Rohner and that is another point I kept repeating & seeing it be ignored. I see further down you drag him in yet again !

      D: Mats Lewan did not withdraw his statement about DGT. You got it wrong but accused me of lying.
      Chris, now you are deviating onto an entirely separate topic & I will state up front unless you quote what I said that offended you I won’t even bothr to deal with the “DGT stole Rossi’s eCat stupidity” here in this post.
      E: You repeatedly and consistently refuse to answer my questions of you. But become abusive, condescending and irrational when I don’t respond in the way you want me to.
      Chris if it is the questions I think it is, you kept asking me to describe how the Papp engine (& I assume Bob’s demo) worked & I kept telling you (eventually in sheer frustration) that I didn’t f’ing well know because I wasn’t scientist & neither were you (Mike’s job to work out if he can). Also that it was irrelevant to Bob doing a live demo. You made a point at in one post that Bob Rohner didn’t understand how it worked & again in frustration I posted back Bob didn’t f’ing well have to know how it worked, all he needed to do was demo it and leave it to Mike McKubre to prove/disprove. I sit here right now wondering how you can’t grasp this simple point ?. Mike said he would do his own research on it. You appeared to me to become obsessed about proving/disproving how the Papp engine cycle worked. As I say, I still can’t understand why you insist I should answer such questions ? – that’s a scientists job & McKubre stepped up to the mark to do so!.

      F: I Didn’t base my opinions on the video actually. I based it on the claim he makes is impossible under current known physics.
      Chris – yes & McKubre STATED that very pouint !. I based it on correspondence I had with him via email. On comments he has made on other forums. The known fact that Papp was a fraud, Chris, point to any scientific web site that has a proof that Papp’s engine was a fraud. This is another point you just don’t grasp. There are *many* people who *think* it was a fraud, & there are many sites that think Papp was crazy. Gene Mallove thought differently & he was a respected scientist with much greater insights that you will ever likely have. Introducing that unproven point as a defense or a justification to call Bob a scammer & Mike a dupe is pure unadulterated s*** ! & you just do not get it ! The fact his brother is a fraud and proven scammer CHRIS, John Rohner has F-all to do with your statements about Bob Rohner’s Tesla demo. This is when my blood boils because you just keep darting off into the ether to grab some totally separate issue to try to use it to justify your slander & your confusion !. The fact he becomes irrational and abusive if you dare to question him Chris, if I were Bob Rohner trying to deal with you I hit you with a 4 x 4 clue stick as often as I could. Hasn’t it sunk into your brain that in this regard you are the problem. Even now I sit here having started out calmly, thinking god who let this idiot out of grade school ?. This is why I kept using the drongo word & am fighting using it yet again !. From correspondence others have had with him. Because he lacks the basic knowledge someone would require to make the claims he make. CHRIS PKLEASE LISTEN – IT ISD UP TO SCIENTISTS TO DO THAT & Mike McKubre has volunteered. Do you grasp that !.
      G: You think you are rubbing our noses in it, that my friend is a joke. Yet another example of your condescending attitude.
      Chris you really have me fired up now !. WHO The F is your friend ? WHO ?. The nose rubbing I have mentioned inposts I made is rubbing your nose in your statement that Bob was a scammer & Mike a scammer dupe ! & never posting a proof. I will continue to rub your nose in it & AP’s & JM’s if any of you you stupidly keep stating it & never offer the proof that Bob was or is running a scam. !.

      and finally …

      H: The solution.

      You have previously admitted WTF ? – I have said that whenm it came to Rossi & DGT i defer to Dick Smith !. to not being the best at picking up on scams and therefore defer to the likes of Mike McKubre.Fer F’s sake Chris where did I say that ! So here is the solution. If you can get your friend Dick Smith to review your claims that Bob is an all round good guy You F’ing idiot !. I never ever said that nor implied it. I said you were a slanderer for calling Bob a scammer & Mike a scammer’s dupe ! and Mike McKubre didn’t debase himself by saying he believed in the Papp engine based on nothing more than anecdotes Chris this is pure BS rambling and if Dick Smith writes that here on this forum. Then I will withdraw my claims that Bob is a scammer and that Mike McKubre was wrong in supporting Bob. I will kindly ask the others to do so as well, but they will probably just say I am BSC.

      Deal? Chris – you are an utter drongo
      (DSM & I thought this evening was going to be nice & quiet & sane 🙁 )
      CuriousChris. Please show a link to Bob Rohner that shows he is soliciting funds for engines, agencies or any miracle devices. SHOW A LINK. Do not point us to that imbecile Gary Wright’s site where he emailed Bob & offered to give him money & Bob said (in a nutshell) wait until McKubre has validated the device !..
      CuriousChris Please read & absorb this :- If you had only ever said you *thought* Bob Rohner was a scammer, I would most likely not have intervened even though I didn’t think that was based on my research. BUT, you then called Mike McKubre a dupe & stated he should never have supported Bob Rohner at the event. CHRIS that is your opinion not a global fact that proves the notions of ‘scam’ or ‘dupe’ after your vomit on Bob & Mike, our resident skeps AP & JM picked up on that and (because I believe they knew sweet fa difference between Papp, Bob R, John R or Sabori & other players) started repeating it (no proofs & both of them darted under rocks when asked to provide proofs).
      To this day you keep confusing again & again, your obsession with Bob & the demo being impossible, with your right to call Bob a scammer & because in your mind that is what Bob is, Mike a dupe & a scammer supporter. Chris, you have a truly f’ed up thinking process that does not serve you very well.
      PS thanks for a great(not) evening – please just crawl off into your cosy nest of bats – nice & warm & Gary will soothe you.

      • Jami Reply

        September 8, 2012 at 11:52 am

        FWIW, please count me in on the growing “you have a truly f’ed up thinking process” crowd, Dough. Because I too am totally puzzled about your passionate defense of an obvious scam and a deluded and naive scientist blunderingly supporting it.

        • dsm Reply

          September 8, 2012 at 12:01 pm


          Please get it right. Where is the scam ?. Also
          I am defending McKubre against insult by association to a strawman lie. I sure as shit do not want to have go through what that means yet again. CC, AP & JM all accuse McKubre of incompetence across the board (we can detail the issue if needed) because he attended a Tesla event demo & said some words of encouragement. CC AP & JM slandered him based on a personal bias not on any EVIDENCE.
          Tesla event was about Bob Rohner doing a demo and Mike McKubre saying he was interested enough to be there & to want to do an investigation.
          Jami where does that become a scam ?
          Where does that become an opportnity to call Mike McKubre a scammer dupe.
          Where does the above set of opinions become a right for CC, AP & JM to then question everything McKubre does because of the above ‘allegation’ (never proved & still isn’t).
          Please explain ?

        • dsm Reply

          September 8, 2012 at 12:20 pm

          In addition, you well know we have been tearing apart eCat believers mercilessly. We have attacked them for stupidity, lying, naivette, suffering from Pied Piper syndrome. etc: etc: etc: etc:.
          So If I am to be 100% honest, when I see skeptics twisting facts & then lying, it would be totally remiss of me to ignore it. I am not one sided here.
          I have no interest in Bob Rohner’s future only a curiosity of the past & the Tesla event – that was very interesting. But I do see red when McKubre is slandered & that is EXACTLY what CC & AP & JM did. I asked each of them to explain. At first politely, then more forcefully. None did or would but each started warping the story then lying.
          The conclusion I have come to is that in regard to attacking believers, some skeptics just lie more cleverly & this was a line in the sand for me & will remain so because noy one of them has provided a proof to back their statements about Bob & Mike based on the Tesla event BUT all three have used the Tesla demo strawman scammer argument to attack McKubre as incompetent on other matters. That is PURE SHIT !. That is what I am defending, McKubre from falsely founded smears.

          • Jami

            September 8, 2012 at 12:44 pm

            McCubre is making an absolute idiot of himself at the Tesla event. He’s telling anecdotes about how Robert Rohner showed him one of his engines in operation – how he (McKubre) told him he wanted input vs. output measured. How Rohner complied and McKubre observed “ten times” output over input and how that got him “semi-hooked”.

            Semi-hooked. Yeah. Riiiight. Here is a cold fusion researcher who typically claims a couple of percent COP when conducting his experiments (well – sometimes) – emphasizing that this is his “day job” and he witnessed and measured a machine running at COP >10 and that got him “semi hooked”. It is like a Bigfoot researcher (who so far gathered some hair in the woods which he thinks could be from Bigfoots) tells you he was invited to a party at another Bigfoot researcher’s place. And next to him at the bar stood a couple of Bigfoots and they had a drink together and talked about the weather… and that got him “semi-hooked”.

            You can go ahead and believe it and point out that nobody can PROVE the entire story is full of shit and it would therefore be unethical to call the researcher untrustworthy – but I’m afraid you’ll be very alone. It is your right, of course.

          • Dsm

            September 8, 2012 at 12:50 pm

            Jami wrong answers.
            Please see my post where i asked you to quote what i said that justifies iyour claim In your post that I am supporting a scammer. Without a quote you may be as deluded as CC ?. Quoting me allows us to deal with a ‘real’ point 🙂

          • Jami

            September 8, 2012 at 1:05 pm

            “wrong answers.”

            Wrong assumption. I’m not answering. I’m telling you why I think this is a scam and why it will bite McKubre in the a* and why you are wrong defending him. And don’t ask me to quote you. Reading your stuff is normally quite fun – but when Rohner is concerned, I’m hard pressed to glance at it even once.

            Oh – and yes – these are only my opinions, obviously.

          • Dsm

            September 8, 2012 at 1:11 pm

            Again wrong answer. Please quote what i posted that justifies your claim that I am suppoting a scammer. Waffling on about what you belive of noble gas demos is irrelevant and does not explain your statement about me.
            Please tell me where ?
            Thanks Jami.

      • dsm Reply

        September 8, 2012 at 11:58 am

        My apologies for getting the italics out of synch – that has messed up some replies. As the post wore (bore) on I was battling fits of apoplexy that just kept escalating (not a pretty sight). Also I didn’t have enough time to go over & fix all the bits in the alloted 4 mins.
        I am sorry this bit of s*** blew up again but CC is teaching us a lot about his thinking processes & also how he has an incredible knack of driving some of us to the limits of our (my 🙂 ) friendliness. GreenWin is the other complimentary person (on the left wing) that comes to mind. Chris being on the right.
        By the end of the post I realised Chris was not at all sincere just point scoring in his diminuitive way & I also realised his ‘friend’ is probably Gary idiot Wright.
        Chris when you read this can I suggest you contact me directly at dsm at internetage dot com & we can sort this out privately where I can promise to leave my 4 x 4 clue-stick at home.
        Please DO NOT burden us with any such endless & going nowhere ramble again. I am expecting the cat to return in a few days but the dog may take longer – my wife did survive but kept asking what was going on with my fingers & my keyboard. I have plenty of spare keyboards so one worn out (flattened) set of keys is nooo problem.
        Sleep well. All 🙂 (unless you are just waking up for the big Zurich bash 🙂

        • Mickey Reply

          September 8, 2012 at 12:43 pm


          Why not discuss it here?

          After reading your slander and attacks of many of the posters here I have questioned why the owner of this blog has not banned you yet.

          Since I am new to this site – I can only guess talk like that is OK here.

          You can count me as one of your enemies too. Mike was absolutely wrong to say what he did at the TeslaTech. Bob’s only reason for being there was to get funding.

          Bob has spent hundreds of thousands of dollars of other peoples money and all he has to show for it is that popper.

          Did you see the fake popper video Bob put on his website?

          • Dsm

            September 8, 2012 at 12:47 pm

            Please quuote else you have nothing 🙂

          • CuriousChris

            September 9, 2012 at 3:38 am

            Hi Mickey

            Welcome to the forum. One of the great things about this forum is the way Paul (the owner and ‘admin’) allows people to express their opinions. So please feel free.

            But no-one here is anybodies enemy. We simply have difference of opinions. Some are more emotional than others. you missed the george hants rants and some are totally clinical like popeye. and a great mix in between. It is one of the reasons this site is so addictive.

            The believers could go to sites where only believers are allowed but to their credit they are prepared to duke it out with their intellectual superiors (just joking). The critics well I guess we enjoy the show.

            So I hope you will enjoy the show…

        • John Milstone Reply

          September 8, 2012 at 1:41 pm

          dsm, You don’t seem to realize that it is you who is challenging GreenWin for most ridiculous poster here.

          Bob Rohner is behaving almost exactly like Rossi did throughout most of 2011. He is claiming a revolutionary, physics-breaking discovery, but backing it up with lousy dog & pony shows. He is also claiming (or you are claiming on his behalf) that he isn’t trying to raise money, just as Rossi did throughout most of 2011.

          Mike McKubre has stated that he “believes” Rohner, based on nothing more than some emails and videos of Rohner’s dog & pony show, just as Kullander, Essen and others did with Rossi.

          You seem blind to the striking similarities between Rossi and Rohner.

          • Alain

            September 8, 2012 at 2:10 pm

            elephant are grey,
            not all grey is elephant…

          • John Milstone

            September 8, 2012 at 2:23 pm

            If it walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck…

          • GreenWin

            September 8, 2012 at 4:45 pm

            Narcissistic Personality Disorder, or NPD, is one of a cluster of Personality Disorders that includes border-line personality disorder, antisocial personality disorder and histrionic personality disorder.

            “Patients suffering from NPD exhibit a pattern of traits and characteristics that display self-infatuation, self-obsession to the exclusion of all others. Narcissists feel they are always right and often treat others as if they are inferior. The narcissist attempts to control and manipulate others and must always be the center of attention.”

          • dsm

            September 8, 2012 at 10:24 pm

            John Milstone
            You AP CC & now Jami are showing you suffer from a mental disorder (a brain fart) where you all confuse the following …
            (please google brain-fart 🙂 )
            1) Commonsense says extraordinary claims need extraordinary proof
            2) Someone demos ‘impossible’ technology
            3) A scientists is present & says he will investigate this ‘impossible’ demo (which is fulfilling point 1)
            4) Someone suffering a brain fart then calls persons 2&3 scammers & / dupes because person 4) is convinced that so called ‘impossible’ technology can’t be demoed & should not be encouraged & anyone who does is a scammer/dupe
            5) another person steps in and seeks to defend the rights of persons 2 & 3 to do the demo & investigate it per point 1
            Then the brain fart gets repeated by person 4 or other people with the same disorder, but this time person 5 may or may not be being added to the list as supporting the ‘scam’. That is a nuance in the level of the brain fart (not everyone goes to level 5)

            This is such an incredible quirk that I have a full description I will post as to where the brain fart originates and also point out how oddly it only happens in certain strident skeptics brains. This new brain disorder even has a very apt acronym & I” divulge all after the Zurich Dog & Pony show is ended.
            What is good for the goose is good for the gander.

          • dsm

            September 9, 2012 at 12:10 am


            You posted this ”

            Narcissistic Personality Disorder, or NPD, is one of a cluster of Personality Disorders that includes border-line personality disorder, antisocial personality disorder and histrionic personality disorder.

            “Patients suffering from NPD exhibit a pattern of traits and characteristics that display self-infatuation, self-obsession to the exclusion of all others. Narcissists feel they are always right and often treat others as if they are inferior. The narcissist attempts to control and manipulate others and must always be the center of attention.”
            Now let me take you back to a thread where I posted that Jim Dunn a former NASA exec had said that DGT have a working reactor.
            You Greenie read that post and it offended you (I still don’t know why? – as a supporter on LENR I would imagine you welcomed the statement. I later concluded you had some agenda in regard to DGT).
            So you decided to check out Jim Dunn’s background & you appeared to go to PESN (I worked this all out later) & they had his bio at their site because he is very well known in energy circles but they f’ed up their entry just where it said Jim Dunn had been a CEO of NASA CTC. The had posted a link to some org called CTC but nothing to do with NASA CTC. You went along that link & found the wrong CTC and searched its history & found proof there had never been a Jim Dunn as CEO (of course Jim Dunn was former CEO of NASA CTC not the place you went to view).
            Then without any further questioning you posted on my thread that my friend Jim Dunn was a ‘liar’ (your words). When I asked you to explain yourself you stated that you had decided to check Jim Dunn’s background & could prove he was never CEO of ‘CTC’.
            You calling Dunn a liar was at first very confusing because I know Jim & I know he had been CEO of NASA CTC. My resonse was WTF? – So because you kept posting the liar accusation I did forensics on how you might have come to your erroneous conclusion also I was not at all amused that you were openly attacking Jim Dunn in a global forum based on some fallacious notion you contrived.
            That was when I uncovered the PESN screw up & then I pointed this out to you but true to the very definition you posted up above you refused to admit you were wrong & again upped the ante by further posting again that Dunn was a liar.
            That was pretty sick allowing that you had been told where you went wrong and asked to retract it.
            Greenie, your post about narcissists is a very good description of you especially this bit “Narcissists feel they are always right“. In the above Dunn story you knew you screwed up but refused to admit it because you are NEVER wrong. Had you admitted it the matter would have ended at that point. I would not have brought it up ever again. But because it is unfinished business we are locked in a loop where it makes great evidence that after months you still refuse to admit you were wrong about Dunn. You are simply never wrong so never have to admit it. :O
            Also, after that pasting you took on the Dunn matter you have resorted to constant ‘disconnected’ pop-up rambling here which is further evidence to me that you have a personality disorder and that you also have a serious problem known to Psyches as ‘projection’ (go look that up in a psychiatric site).
            Are you ever going to admit that Dunn was not a liar about being a former CEO of NASA’s CTC ? – I’ll end my constant reminding you of it the day you do.

      • CuriousChris Reply

        September 9, 2012 at 2:35 am

        1: Accusing me of being a lying is slander, you have done that on multiple occasions. my vomit on bob and Mike. I’ll defer to greenwin but I am sure that would not go down well in a libel case.


        3: like other believers here They originally leaped to Rossi’s defence and stated he has never asked for investors. of course all that changed.

        4: if you can’t pick Rossi and DGT as scammers then its an admission you cant pick a scammer. or are you suddenly wise when it comes to others potential scammers?

        5: I never said it was more than my opinion. you attributed the global fact part.

        6: I never used a word like ‘dupe’. I am pretty sure falsely attributing words to me is libelous. greenwin?

        And my proposed a solution which you entirely ignored. Why is that?

        Its called deflection. Its a common trait and as a lot of our conversation here has turned to psychology I suggest you look it up.

        As everyone here knows and even you can’t hide from is Dick Smith would not be taken in by Bob Rohner. I am sure he’d get his mate Ian Bryce to review it and Mikes involvement. You know how that will go.

        And that I will say for me is the end of the matter on this forum which is about ecats/hotcats.

        • Quax Reply

          September 9, 2012 at 2:49 am

          “And that I will say for me is the end of the matter on this forum which is about ecats/hotcats.”

          DMS & CuriousChris and all the other participants: By all means please end this side show and let’s focus on all things LENR/ecat.

          • GreenWin

            September 9, 2012 at 3:05 am

            Quax, any reasonable person who reviews the above dialog will concur:

            “The narcissist attempts to control and manipulate others and must always be the center of attention.”

            BTW, your Einstein paper timeline is slightly off – noted in previous thread.

            IGZ-2013 All Things Must Pass

          • Quax

            September 9, 2012 at 3:14 am

            Greenwin, you must have missed my answer with regards to the Einstein paper timeline.

            As a certified narcissist I of course could not possibly tolerate to leave you with the last word on this, and so I answered in the previous thread:

            Thesis completed does not equal having yet received the degree, you first complete the thesis then you have to defend it and then you get the degree.
            Einstein had not yet received his degree when he published his most important work but his thesis work was already completed.

            The only reason why I am pretty up to date on these timeline nuances is because I researched them for the biographical piece that I wrote on him.

          • GreenWin

            September 9, 2012 at 7:46 am

            Quax, you clearly did not read my answer to your post in previous. If you wrote a bio, you would recall it was the paper submitted on March 17th 1905 (written in 1904) on propagation of light, that preceded his 7th paper also used as a thesis.

            BTW, you are FAR less NPD than some here. Wink.

        • dsm Reply

          September 9, 2012 at 7:49 am

          Bye sleep well & let go. It isn’t worth another post.

  12. MaxS Reply

    September 8, 2012 at 10:54 am

    Recent posting from Gerd Neuman in facebook. Exactly as predicted, technical problems…..
    “Hello friends, we have problems with the live-stream!! We want to make it ok!! Please give the information to the other!! We hope, we can make the problems away!! Please wait!!!”

    • MaxS Reply

      September 8, 2012 at 11:47 am

      his whole website of now offline. This is not a coincidence or technical issue with the stream. Probably the great cult leader called if off. No website, no live-stream.

  13. Frost* Reply

    September 8, 2012 at 11:00 am

  14. dsm Reply

    September 8, 2012 at 12:31 pm

    To Jami
    To avoid endless repetition please let us be precise. Please quote back to me some point I posted (in context) & explain where it supports you assertion that I am supporting a scam ?.
    This helps us avoid the endless confusion as to who is meaning what & also deals directly with your blanket post (in my mind dishonest) where you say ” your passionate defense of an obvious scam” when in my mind there is not one word I have written that fits that rather broad brush statement !.
    I am actually thinking you are being mischievous 🙂
    To avoid this please just quote me then why you believe what I said is a ” passionate defense of an obvious scam” . I don’t believe you can or will be able to back up your assertion!.

  15. Jami Reply

    September 8, 2012 at 1:08 pm

    In the meantime…

    Zürich is on the air. Horrible sound quality and an as yet almost empty room (not that it matters).

    • dsm Reply

      September 8, 2012 at 1:17 pm

      Jami Sie eigentlich sprechen Deutsch?.
      Wenn Sie nicht meine Frage beantworten in Englisch, Deutsch ist ok 🙂
      Aber ich bin sicher, dass Ihre Antwort wird sein Double Dutch


  16. Jami Reply

    September 8, 2012 at 1:38 pm

    ROFL. Rossi is accompanied by a bunch of fat bodyguards – earpieces, bulges under the left armpits and all.

    • GreenWin Reply

      September 9, 2012 at 7:49 am

      Hubris. Grandiosity. NPD.

  17. GreenWin Reply

    September 8, 2012 at 4:12 pm

    Apparently at least one celebrated poster here is actually attending Ing Rossi’s concert in Zurich:

    “By combining data from both sound and vision European POP researchers have developed technology that could facilitate robotic understanding and responses to human behavior…”

    An astonishing likeness don’t ya think???

    IGZ-2013 Resistance Was Futile!

  18. Quax Reply

    September 9, 2012 at 6:51 pm

    Greenwin, it’ll be a waste of our Einstein paper time-line scuffle if I didn’t use the opportunity to plug this excellent paper that takes a look at Einstein’s doctoral thesis.

    It highlights Einsteins sovereign mastery of statistical physics (spacegoat please take note) that came to full fruition in the paper on Brownian motion and allowed him to later pick up on Bose’s genius.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *