Dubious Denial of E-Cat Reality (Guest Post)

The following is a guest post by Rick Allen. The opinions expressed in guest posts are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of E-Cat World.

On Friday afternoon a press release was published announcing that the rights to Andrea Rossi’s E-Cat (Energy Catalyzer) have been acquired by Industrial Heat, LLC. In the press release, it is made clear that testing of the technology by experts has indicated it does indeed work. Instead of accepting reality, certain parties are continuing to try and dismiss the technology as being fake. They seem either to have an agenda to stop the progression of the technology, or to have deluded themselves.

E-Cat technology works – it produces more energy out than is input. In some tests, it has produced tens or hundreds of times more power out than in. These tests have been performed over and over again by multiple scientists. These tests have been performed in different ways. For example, using a thermal camera to measure output, producing hot water, and producing steam. Excess energy has been detected regardless of the method used.

Some claim that the excess output comes from some hidden fuel source.In a Popular Science article published yesterday titled “Dubious Cold Fusion Machine Acquired By North Carolina Company” it is mentioned that not all of the chemicals used in the device have been revealed. However, that is irrelevant. The amount of output produced by E-Cat devices have exceeded any known source of chemical energy. The reason that the catalysts have not been revealed is to protect intellectual property. It seems like certain detractors want Rossi to give away the secrets of his technology free to the world, but in reality, no one in his position is going to do that.

It seems that some who are attacking Rossi are desperate to find some way to negate the countless successful tests that have taken place, and so they are going to avoid dealing with the facts. Instead, they are going to bring up his past – which is a complicated issue, but which has no relevance to his technology. Also, they are going to post links to the websites of individuals who have been attacking the technology from the start.

If these individuals were unbiased they would look at the overall results of positive tests and conclude the technology works. Have there been a few unsuccessful tests that failed for technical reasons such as leaks or contamination of fuel? Of course. However, the truth is that when you look at all the testing combined it becomes clear that E-Cat technology works.

If someone claims the technology does not work, they have to ignore:

* The testing done by Defkalion
* The countless tests performed by Rossi.
* The tests performed by Focardi.
* The tests performed by third party scientists (including Levi et al)
* The tests performed by Cherokee.

Andrea Rossi’s technology works. Some of the detractors of the E-Cat may claim that the technology is dubious and notorious, but they are the ones that could one day be in the history books, remembered as those who attacked the most amazing breakthrough of the century.

Rick Allen

  • jousterusa

    There’s a well-known saying in the investigative journalism field: “Follow the money.” The kind of full-bored attack you describe is funded by someone. As with the Gizmodo attack I sent Frank yesterday, the source of the skepticism is not scientific but subjective.

    I suspect some of the authors used in the attack are deeply ashamed that they had not seen the E-Cat’s value and likelihood of being genuine, and out of shame and anger and guilt were easily coerced by the aforementioned financial interests into becoming their talking puppets.

    The E-Cat is going to gore whole herds of oxen. That could include the makers of batteries and conventional generators, of conventional auto engines, producers of heating oil and natural gas, manufacturers of heaters, all the way up to the big power companies like Duke and Progress, the big oil companies like Exxon and Shell, and the big appliance makers like GE, Honeywell, et al. Between them, they can pay for a hell of a lot of critics, but I doubt they can manage a stampede this time.

    As I say, a lot of oxen stand to get very badly gored, and perhaps put out of business entirely. You should expect Popular Science to be a shill for them, just as they have been for oil companies that have opposed hydrogen-on-demand supplements to gasoline.

    And it is one thing to put words into a scientist’s mouth and to trot him or her out as a “talking head,” as they did in the Pons-Fleischmann flap, but quite another to put false measurements and the unsupported facts into a scientific study published in a respected peer-review journal, which they were able to do with the support from MIT back then.

    Presumably, the editors of Science and Nature and the several fine journals like them will be looking for that kind of stuff this time around. I don’t expect a full frontal assault like the P-F folks got, since this has unfolded at a glacial pace and would be so hard (if not impossible) to undo scientifically, and let’s recall that unlike in the P-F case, there was no official NASA video championing the science. Having that on our side is a huge plus.

    And you’ll recall that Dr. Joseph Zawodny’s NASA video was strongly attacked, and he had to make a new one that backed down his claims a little, but the subsequent LENR testing and science are by now virtually unassailable, so it’s all going to be smoke and mirrors with very little hard science.

    “By their facts you shall know them” (apologies to the Bible) should be our rallying cry.

    • I don’t think that money is important there.
      This is a tragedy of ego. PopSci, like SciAm, nature and Science, futura-science mods, hardware.fr mods, and all nuclear physicist, refuse to admit they are wrong, and the run forward into the trap, instead of admitting their pathetic failure, the scientific tragedy of the century, their voodoo science.

      If you read the data, the facts are not doubtful… they are clear.
      there are some questions, but not on the key points.

      Even on rossi reputation, we have most answers already, from his career, his employers, his wealth…
      The scam theories are disproven, beside being judged as without legal reality.

  • Charles

    Is this the same Popular Science that back in the 50s was telling us the Hydrogen Economy was just around the corner. (Yes, I am old enough to have read it back then). Well, PS, here it is! The hydrogen based economy. You didn’t even notice that did you, PS. So is Black Light a hydrogen based energy. Huh, PS?

    Not only that, but PS stated in the article that it was based on “chemical reactions”. It matters not whether that was a blatant lie or not, it proves the stupidity of the writers at PS. I have a hunch they are all jurinalist majors with no knowledge of the difference between chemistry and physics.

  • Curbina

    I still can see the article, has not been removed, at least from my notebook it’s still there..

  • Freethinker
  • LENR G

    “First they ignore you, then they ridicule you, then they fight you, and then you win.” – Gandhi

    I’d say we’re at 2.4.

  • Freethinker

    Well now.

    The “article” is really full of smear. And of in-your-face ignorance. Dumbstruckingly so.

    To me, the not so outstanding publication – and authors – have since a while back proven themself worthy of the contemt of myself, and may I dare to add all people of sound mind and a faiblesse for fair play.

    Never shall I read their raggish texts trusting what they write in areas I am less versed in. Beacuse I now they do not fair play, they do not tell the truth, but forge their own reality, not be trusted. So it goes. The future will punish them.

    I took a screenshot of the fantastic piece of prose, keeping it for future amusement. Or possibly for future rubb-in on the nose of the unfortunate author.

    But let’s see past this. It is nothing more than flak, as so beautifully pointed out by Alan DeAngelis below.

    • Alan DeAngelis

      Thanks, I’ve always liked this analogy but now it seems to be becoming a meme on the internet.
      On websites like infowars.

  • bachcole

    This sort of thing is really unprecedented, at least in my experience. I was born 42 years after Kitty Hawk. I was born 2.5 months after Hiroshima. Nothing has happened in my lifetime that comes even close to this. It is no surprise that there is so much resistance. This is like the entire Industrial Revolution (which is still going on, even in the USA) taking place in 15 years, from horses to Bentleys.

    Because this is so unprecedented, sometimes even I don’t know quite how to behave. My 14 year old son is supportive and excited. But my wife acts like I am talking about little green men who like to play chess in our basement; she simply won’t respond no matter what I say.

    I have sent two emails to Joe Hight of the Colorado Springs Gazette, with no response so far. If you want to support me in this, that might help. His email is [email protected]. Don’t hide the fact that you are supporting me. Tell him that I am not crazy and that you agree with me about the importance of this story.

  • Daniel Maris

    I generally agree but am happy to accept we haven’t yet seen a full demonstration of this technology. Until we do, there will be room for skeps to cite hidden cables and so on.

    I am looking forward to some notable developments in the next few months as IH put their plans into practice.

  • Alan DeAngelis

    “If you’re not catching flak, you’re not over the target.”

    a B-17 pilot in WWII

  • US_Citizen71

    The hardest thing for anyone to admit is that they are wrong, this includes the media. Popular Science’s article is an example of their inability to admit they were wrong. It is an article/blog entry that a good media source would never have ran other than as a clearly marked editorial/opinion piece. Small blogs and news sites like this one are the last bastions of what the media use to be. One of the basic tenets of journalism is that opinion should be claimed and not expressed as fact. To me Frank seems to do a great job of this while many mainstream sites seem unable to do it. The main stream media is not doing it’s job and is failing the world.

    • Daniel Maris

      The PopSci article was a particularly egregious example of denial by smear.

    • Mark

      “The hardest thing for anyone to admit is that they are wrong…”

      It’s interesting that you say this. It makes me think of an article that I was reading, years ago, about a liberal celebrating the fact that they were right about The Iraq War, and conservatives were wrong. I think that it was on buffalobeast.com, but don’t quote me on that, because my memory is not that great. Anyway, at one point in the article I think it said something like: “The only thing that is harder to admit than the fact that you were wrong is the fact that the other guy was right.”

    • Fortyniner

      When smart people notice they are in a hole, they stop digging. Anyone who doesn’t is either not smart or doesn’t care about the hole because they have other reasons to keep digging. In the case of the popsci rags they run in harness with the publicity machinery that fringes big bucks research, and owners/editors will feel obliged to repeat whatever line is coming from these sources. The nasty but ultimately pointless rearguard defence we are seeing won’t change until there have been some fairly drastic and far-reaching changes within the physics research community in particular, whose distorted views are being reflected. The rags concerned will pay heavily in lost subcriptions for this deliberate spreading of misinformation when the truth finally outs.