Should There be Public Funding of LENR Research? [Update: Rossi Says Why Not]

It has been interesting to look at some of the recent comments on the Journal of Nuclear Physics where readers are discussing the public funding of LENR. Most commenters seem to be in favor of putting taxpayer money into the LENR research, citing examples of public funding for fundamental research, space programs and the nuclear industry as a way to boost research and development in areas that can promote the public good.

Andrea Rossi, however is decidedly against the idea. Some of his comments on the subject:

I am totally contrary to public funding of LENR. It is a high risk field, that must be funded by enterpreneurs, not by taxpayers. Taxpayers must not be exposed to industrial risks.

Yes, I agree about public funding of basic and foundamental research: without it the CERN could not exist. But the case of LENR is totally different.

Yes, the cases you cited are right [space programs, nuclear industry], but LENR are a totally different thing.

Maybe Rossi is thinking that because there is so little consensus among researchers about the theoretical basis for LENR that there could be a lot of wasted money expended in barking up the wrong theoretical tree. Perhaps that will all changed once there is an accepted theory for LENR.

Rossi has made it a matter of pride that he has never taken any government funding for the development of the E-Cat and has often said that he does not believe in taking the money of small investors to support his work. I think he values his independence, and probably does not want to be in a position to be accused of squandering the public’s money if things should go awry.

But I would imagine that if the value of LENR becomes widely recognized and seen to be a technology that has much potential to serve the public good, there will be people pushing for state-funded research and development — and likely even state-supported industrialization of LENR products.

UPDATE (July 15, 2014) This a post from Andrea Rossi today explaining why he is opposed to public funding:

Daniel De Caluwè:
If a LENR system works, it does not need public funding. If anything that works well needs funding, money arrives from investors. Think to Microsoft, Apple, etc. There are things that need public funding because they are important but do not produce profit, or the perspective of profits are too much distant in time to make them appealing for capital investments; in those cases is necessary that governments make funding: for example CERN, the conquer of Space, things like these. But it is not the case of LENR.
This is my opinion, obviously it can be wrong.
Warm Regards,
A.R.

  • Paul

    Perhaps the right question should regard BIG public funding on LENR, because a small research requires so small amounts of money that funding should not be a problem at all, compared with the possible benefits for the humankind. So, we should talk about the opportunity of investing in reaserch on LENR 100 millions of dollars (or euros) or more, not about 1 million funding, being the last surely affordable also for local entities (universities, medium companies, and so on).

  • Gerard McEk

    In my view, Cold Fusion requires fundamental research as it is totally unclear how it works. At the same time Rossi develops already products for the market, while he possibly does not really understand how it functions. This could mean that, once people start to understand how it works, after public funded fundamental research, huge steps forward will be taken by the industry without the lengthy and painstaking Edisonial development he had to undertake. To him this is surely unfair and it is understandable that he does not support public funding.

    • there is various style of funding for basic research…
      not only private corp research or state funded research.

      the idea of LENR-Cities is market-sponsored research in a ecosystem.

  • Gerard McEk

    In my view, Cold Fusion requires fundamental research as it is totally unclear how it works. At the same time Rossi develops already products for the market, while he possibly does not really understand how it functions. This could mean that, once people start to understand how it works, after public funded fundamental research, huge steps forward will be taken by the industry without the lengthy and painstaking Edisonial development he had to undertake. To him this is surely unfair and it is understandable that he does not support public funding.

    • there is various style of funding for basic research…
      not only private corp research or state funded research.

      the idea of LENR-Cities is market-sponsored research in a ecosystem.

  • Martin

    … And entrepreneurs don’t want to guard exclusivity Ha. Good one Andrea!

  • Zephir

    Rossi just affraids of competition, but most of solar, nuclear, etc, plant research is normal science and it’s already subsidized so. Rossi’s performance is nothing special anyway – we urgently need to throw more money into LENR research.

  • Omega Z

    “Taxpayers must not be exposed to industrial risks”

    Maybe the Right question hasn’t been asked with clarity.
    Rossi’s speaking from a product development point of view.
    He may respond differently if the question was phrased as a manor of basic research. He has defended this in the past.

    Like would he support the study of the physics involved in the LENR phenomenon.

    In the U.S. we’re well aware that politicians are good at selecting projects of contributors to receive funding. Not so much at picking winning projects.

    • Broncobet

      Would that include the recent Arpa-E funding of 20 projects of $500,000 max each for LENR only??

      • Robert Ellefson

        You have your facts wrong about this funding opportunity. ARPA-E did include the word ‘LENR’ in a call for proposals, but when asked for clarification, they stated that they were not intending to fund cold fusion research. I’m forgetting who wrote to them about this, but IIRC it was George Miley.

  • Omega Z

    “Taxpayers must not be exposed to industrial risks”

    Maybe the Right question hasn’t been asked with clarity.
    Rossi’s speaking from a product development point of view.
    He may respond differently if the question was phrased as a manor of basic research. He has defended this in the past.

    Like would he support the study of the physics involved in the LENR phenomenon.

    In the U.S. we’re well aware that politicians are good at selecting projects of contributors to receive funding. Not so much at picking winning projects.

    • Broncobet

      Would that include the recent Arpa-E funding of 20 projects of $500,000 max each for LENR only??

      • Robert Ellefson

        You have your facts wrong about this funding opportunity. ARPA-E did include the word ‘LENR’ in a call for proposals, but when asked for clarification, they stated that they were not intending to fund cold fusion research. I’m forgetting who wrote to them about this, but IIRC it was George Miley.

        • Broncobet

          I saw it on their site.Who’s George Miley? Never mind just looked him up…very impressive.But like I said it was on there along with some great statements like “Energy cannot be created or destroyed, it’s either radiated out to space or incorporated into products. They then listed maybe six types ie mechanical,nuclear,thermal,chemical, and others. What we want is exergy useful energy.Between nuclear and chemical is listed LENR.

  • Ophelia Rump

    Science has abandon the infant, and left it orphan.
    Someone has raised the prodigy and now that child is about to graduate and appears destined for greatness. Should they be allowed within 100 yards of the youth?

    This calls for a restraining order, not funding.

    • GreenWin

      Well put! ;>)

  • Ophelia Rump

    Science has abandon the infant, and left it orphan.
    Someone has raised the prodigy and now that child is about to graduate and appears destined for greatness. Should Science be allowed within 100 yards of the youth?

    This calls for a restraining order, not funding.

    • GreenWin

      Well put! ;>)

    • bachcole

      Outstanding!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Perhaps this is the beginning of the consequences.

  • as the Bourgeois of Bordeaux said to the king “Laissez nous faire” (let us manage).

    my best requirement to government is “don’t block us” (as usual).

    this project can be self funded, however we nee’d to organise people who are interested in a winning team, who reinforce each other…

    The LENR stakeholders have to organize cooperation and prevent battles..
    it is as stupid as battling for land when you are pioneer in West frontier with thousands of square kilometer, with incumbent occupant unhappy of your farming methods, and just enough water and food for all.

  • as the Bourgeois of Bordeaux said to the king “Laissez nous faire” (let us manage).

    my best requirement to government is “don’t block us” (as usual).

    this project can be self funded, however we nee’d to organise people who are interested in a winning team, who reinforce each other…

    The LENR stakeholders have to organize cooperation and prevent battles..
    it is as stupid as battling for land when you are pioneer in West frontier with thousands of square kilometer, with incumbent occupant unhappy of your farming methods, and just enough water and food for all.

  • georgehants

    Main-line science appears to be nothing more than a welfare scam for those scientists able to work their way into cushy, pension providing positions.
    Real science is now left to real scientists like Mr. Rossi et al.
    Main-line science has become a laughing stock of dreamers sitting on their backsides sending toys to Mars. lassoing asteroids etc. etc. while millions on this Earth suffer for lack of affordable Energy to provide clean water. food etc. etc.
    Fools like Dawkins and Hawkins preaching that an intelligent creator is not possible.
    Is there really anybody on these pages that is going to defend these wasters?

  • georgehants

    Main-line science appears to be nothing more than a welfare scam for those scientists able to work their way into cushy, pension providing positions.
    Real science is now left to real scientists like Mr. Rossi et al.
    Main-line science has become a laughing stock of dreamers sitting on their backsides sending toys to Mars. lassoing asteroids etc. etc. while millions on this Earth suffer for lack of affordable Energy to provide clean water. food etc. etc.
    Fools like Dawkins and Hawkins preaching that an intelligent creator is not possible.
    Is there really anybody on these pages that is going to defend these wasters?

    • Hector McNuget

      I make the defensivities georgehants. Not a scientist, but – you are? What is making your beliefs that your knowledge exceeded those of Dawkin and Hawking? You sound of sciences hate.

      I never believing in UFOs, no credibility evidence. Lump-making UFOs and LENR makes hurt of LENR.

      You sounds so much like knowing better than science, how so?

      • Broncobet

        You, however, make cogent points.

  • Owen Geiger

    Once LENR is completely out in the open with an operational plant for VIPs to see, the new independent report in a peer reviewed journal and final patents, it seems like interest from governments, industry and academia will explode no matter what. This will be the next big thing like computers, don’t you think?

    • Billy Jackson

      that is our hopes in a nutshell. It will still face many challenges those we foresee and those we don’t. This is a world changing technology that can change the course of our future. It will be disruptive in both the economical sense and socially. yet without it or something similar we face an even darker path in our future. Some of us can see that path quite clearly and the reprecussions of it…

  • Owen Geiger

    Once LENR is completely out in the open with an operational plant for VIPs to see, the new independent report in a peer reviewed journal and final patents, it seems like interest from governments, industry and academia will explode no matter what. This will be the next big thing like computers, don’t you think?

    • Billy Jackson

      that is our hopes in a nutshell. It will still face many challenges those we foresee and those we don’t. This is a world changing technology that can change the course of our future. It will be disruptive in both the economical sense and socially. yet without it or something similar we face an even darker path in our future. Some of us can see that path quite clearly and the reprecussions of it…

  • mcloki

    Short answer NO. Let the risk takers and dreamers out there fund the early development of LENR. Once established the “Public” should fund LENR research through grants to education institutions to further study LENR, in conjunction with industry, and tax grants for the building of manufacturing in your local jurisdiction. Let the educational institutes establish the Moors Law of LENR energy output. Doubling energy output every couple of years. Then let industry exploit that level in creating LENR devices.

    • Ophelia Rump

      What he said!

  • mcloki

    Short answer NO. Let the risk takers and dreamers out there fund the early development of LENR. Once established the “Public” should fund LENR research through grants to education institutions to further study LENR, in conjunction with industry, and tax grants for the building of manufacturing in your local jurisdiction. Let the educational institutes establish the Moors Law of LENR energy output. Doubling energy output every couple of years. Then let industry exploit that level in creating LENR devices.

    • Ophelia Rump

      What he said!

      Except that last bit, I contemplated the meaning of the words.

      ” Let the educational institutes establish the Moors Law of LENR energy output. Doubling energy output every couple of years. Then let industry exploit that level in creating LENR devices.”

      The termination of that growth sequence equals a very large explosion. We do not need the worlds first non radioactive metamaterial solid state thermonuclear device.
      An undetectable H Bomb on a chip would be insanity. Now picture that device being in the hands of anyone with a printer.

  • Robert Ellefson

    There will be public funding of LENR, on a massive scale, once the world figures out how profoundly this technology will help and transform humanity. I have no doubt about this, and I believe Rossi realizes this as well, which explains his intransigence and years of delays and monkey-business, while he gathers as much IP protection as possible before allowing the world to see the new reality..

  • Robert Ellefson

    There will be public funding of LENR, on a massive scale, once the world figures out how profoundly this technology will help and transform humanity. I have no doubt about this, and I believe Rossi realizes this as well, which explains his intransigence and years of delays and monkey-business, while he gathers as much IP protection as possible before allowing the world to see the new reality..

  • pelgrim108

    If you are funding hot fusion then you should fund focus fusion and cold fusion also.

    • Donk970

      I absolutely agree. You either don’t fund at all or make a commitment to fund all paths of research not just the most expensive and least likely to succeed.

  • pelgrim108

    If you are funding hot fusion then you should fund focus fusion and cold fusion also.

    • Donk970

      I absolutely agree. You either don’t fund at all or make a commitment to fund all paths of research not just the most expensive and least likely to succeed.

  • LuFong

    There are many ways of public funding of new technologies like LENR. There are outright grants to researchers and perhaps this is what Rossi is referring to. There are purchases of demonstration products much like the US Navy purchasing Rossi’s 1MW plant. I don’t remember Rossi saying anything contrary about this. And then there are tax breaks for manufacturers and tax credits for businesses and consumers for purchasing new innovative products which are deemed to be beneficial which, if Rossi’s E-Cats ever take off, I’m sure will see these as well. I think all of these properly applied would benefit society and so I’m a bit perplexed by Rossi’s statement. Perhaps he doesn’t want to see the competition.

    • Ophelia Rump

      Rossi seemed to be inviting competition the other day naming competitors he knows to have working technologies. Surely he knows his naming them will draw funding towards them.

  • Christopher Calder

    There is already USA public funding for LENR. One company I know of is “already on it.” I do not think one billion dollars would be too much funding for such a promising field of research. The crazy amounts spent on hot fusion are not justified. LENR is much closer to being market ready. Maybe Rossi (subconsciously) just does not want the increased competition that public funding would create.

    • Broncobet

      Would that be the $500,000 grants from Arpa-E ?? I can’t get any information about it but did read the funding opportunity on Arpa_E’s web site which was offering $20,000,000 to be used for LENR only.That foa is no longer open. Arpa-E doesn’t want sure things they like out of the envelope disruptive tech.If nine out of ten fail but the tenth is a home run we come out ahead. Stuff like the internet, fracking oil and gas,the returns are monsterous so LENR would be suitable.There are people that go the way AR is headed,you get money from an investor and only answer to him.Tell us about the funding if you can,all the other projects,there must be a hundred are on the Arpa_E web site.

  • There is already USA public funding for LENR. One company I know of is “already on it.” I do not think one billion dollars would be too much funding for such a promising field of research. The crazy amounts spent on hot fusion are not justified. LENR is much closer to being market ready. Maybe Rossi (subconsciously) just does not want the increased competition that public funding would create.

    • Broncobet

      Would that be the $500,000 grants from Arpa-E ?? I can’t get any information about it but did read the funding opportunity on Arpa_E’s web site which was offering $20,000,000 to be used for LENR only.That foa is no longer open. Arpa-E doesn’t want sure things they like out of the envelope disruptive tech.If nine out of ten fail but the tenth is a home run we come out ahead. Stuff like the internet, fracking oil and gas,the returns are monsterous so LENR would be suitable.There are people that go the way AR is headed,you get money from an investor and only answer to him.Tell us about the funding if you can,all the other projects,there must be a hundred are on the Arpa_E web site.

  • Billy Jackson

    The key word is “Public Funds” aka Tax Payer monies collected via local, state, or federal agencies for the use of various public services or running of government institutions. It is my belief that these monies should not be gambled with but used as intended when they were collected. Or in a manner that Guarantees the public’s monies will not be wasted with no hope of gain.

    Despite our verbal and daily viewership in support of the e-cat here at E-Cat World. It is still considered a fringe science that has yet to produce a single proven working device. We are still at the stage of collecting, sorting and analyzing the latest evidence.

    It is my belief that the tax payer should expect a guaranteed return on their money. at this moment the e-cat and LENR is not in a position to provide this guarantee. Should the next report produce a possitive outcome followed by a working device. Then and only then should we be willing to provide public funds for further research or production.

    For now it is best left in the hands of those who are in a position to support and fund the e-cat through business or private ventures.

    • LuFong

      You have a very limited and idealistic view of the role of government which is completely at odds with the US Constitution and our history. In the US Constitution, one role of government is to “promote the General Welfare” or provide for the “General Welfare.” This is a very broad role and the government has acted accordingly since its very inception. We would not be the great country that we are without this role of the US government.

      As to risk, there is no expenditure without some risk. Some expenditures have more, some have less. Building a damn has risk: physical and economical. Investing in defense systems have risk. Are you saying for example Government should not make small business loans as there is always an element of risk in this? The key is to decide exactly what the role of government should be to promote our general welfare. This includes considerations for supporting basic research and development.

      • Billy Jackson

        I based my response mainly on the subject at hand which is LENR and the E-cat. Unfortunately it would be a huge article to write about every type of funding the government should or shouldn’t do. and i have no doubt that i would not have the education or intellect to bring such into a cohesive whole that would remain understandable.

        I have no doubt that some of the big projects that get research funds go through many types of checks, rechecks, verifications or endorsements via other accredited scientists before they receive millions if not billions in research funds. this is as it should be.

        I am more concerned with the smaller fringe stuff so that we can avoid another Solyndra type situation. Even small business loans require you to submit 5 year business plans so that the SBA can see if you have a reasonable chance of knowing what you’re doing.

        Even then i do realize the risk, and even accept that their will be failures. Note that i do not put military research as public funds.. they have their own budgets specifically for research, and alot of the named projects in the responses (nasa, nuclear ect.) started or has partial military research funds supporting them.

        • LuFong

          Your post sounded very generalized to me and reflected some of the ludicrous political discourse making the rounds these days. I agree that fringe science should have limited investment but there are cases for moonshot investing as well (as long as it’s small).

          I wouldn’t lump Solyndra in this scenario however. The Solyndra affair is very much politicized so you have to be careful about what you hear. It was actually quite good technology with job producing prospects but succumbed to the market bottoming out in the solar panel prices, partially as a result of China dumping their solar panels in the US (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solyndra). Still it ended with a a net loss of $400 million to the American taxpayer and additional losses to venture capital companies not unlike Cherokee funds.

          Ever heard of DARPA? Much of the US defense is public funding of technologies that have high potential but also high risk. Many of these projects get completed and then mothballed. Some turn out to be very successful –the Internet was created along these lines. Rossi has also availed himself of this a number of times.

          • Billy Jackson

            my apologies for the impression then. it was a failure to express myself correctly. i was thinking of LENR and the E-cat (and other fringe research) when i wrote the article but i can see after i went back and read it that i should have been more specific.

    • Ophelia Rump

      Not a guarantee of return on every piece of research, a net gain from having supported broad research is all that is required.
      This is an application of Dollar Cost Averaging and gains an extremely significant advantage for the investor or merchant.

      If you cast your net to tightly, you might catch fish, but not as many, and somehow the big fish are always first to escape.

      • if the industrialist organize well they will just have to fund shared market research, instead of a state research.

    • Donk970

      No corporation can risk the first mover costs of developing something like a fission nuclear reactor or hot fusion reactor. We would not have developed the LWR’s that we use today in our naval vessels and civilian power plants without taxpayer money – full stop. LENR is different though; LENR has first mover costs that are orders of magnitude lower than other energy technologies. So, short answer is as far as LENR goes we should not publicly fund but for technologies like MSR’s that have a high first mover cost we should absolutely fund with public money.

      • Broncobet

        MSR’s are one of favorite topics and at this stage we work with the Chinese.Right now it’s not expensive at all,this is all to be working by 2030 (you have to pass NRC standards. The money for LENR is much lower and your government has made it clear that it wants to invest in it, and it has deep pockets,now there could be absolutely no LENR effects at all,we can be sure that most of the work is a fraudulent scheme,but we are hoping that some of them are real,remember it only takes one. AR is very convincing,but he doesn’t want no stinking grant.

    • I have the opposite vision as we more and more try to follow your cautious behavior.
      the result is counterproductive, and lead to subsidizing fashion like solar or hot fusion.

      community money, whether it is a government (NASA), a local authority (SRI) or an ecosystem (Elforsk), or a state industry (CEA), or an ecosystem (lenr-cities?) should fund cheap and hopeless research (see Navy Spawar&NRL) or required and commercially uninteresting (LHC?ITER?).

      If the return is certain or just predictable, community have nothing to do, except if they organize like a cooperative company.

      the problem is setting the question and my conviction is that there should be no single criteria, no single policy… there should be various fashions, rules, policies, irrationality, heresies…

      finally as Feyerabend says, i support anarchic science.
      please no method.

    • Christopher Calder

      I support *MODEST* federal investment into basic research, but not one penny of government funds for tax breaks, production subsidies, or use mandates. All energy subsidies and mandates should be abolished. Let consumers decide what energy products they wish to purchase. The USA is supposed to be the nation of freedom of choice, not a nation of BIG BROTHER government mandates.

      • Ophelia Rump

        This is bigger than the U.S.A.
        This civilization is on the brink of collapse, the world cannot wait much longer.

  • Billy Jackson

    The key word is “Public Funds” aka Tax Payer monies collected via local, state, or federal agencies for the use of various public services or running of government institutions. It is my belief that these monies should not be gambled with but used as intended when they were collected. Or in a manner that Guarantees the public’s monies will not be wasted with no hope of gain.

    Despite our verbal and daily viewership in support of the e-cat here at E-Cat World. It is still considered a fringe science that has yet to produce a single proven working device. We are still at the stage of collecting, sorting and analyzing the latest evidence.

    It is my belief that the tax payer should expect a guaranteed return on their money. at this moment the e-cat and LENR is not in a position to provide this guarantee. Should the next report produce a possitive outcome followed by a working device. Then and only then should we be willing to provide public funds for further research or production.

    For now it is best left in the hands of those who are in a position to support and fund the e-cat through business or private ventures.

    • Ophelia Rump

      Not a guarantee of return on every piece of research, a net gain from having supported broad research is all that is required.
      This is an application of Dollar Cost Averaging and gains an extremely significant advantage for the investor or merchant.

      If you cast your net to tightly, you might catch fish, but not as many, and somehow the big fish are always first to escape. The fisherman who casts their net too tightly sometimes goes home empty handed.

      I do not believe the government should be funding the research in LENR now that the cat is out of the bag. They should recognize it’s existence and demonstrate leadership in it’s rollout, once there is product on the market and a running factory, the government should start a WPA like project jump-starting the industry and the economy. They could start by developing a clear concept of a sustainable global LENR future. It might pull humanity back from the brink.

      • if the industrialist organize well they will just have to fund shared market research, instead of a state research.
        They just need to build contracts that make them happy to share their basic research results with their colleagues, and compete on applied research only, or given the size of the market not even compete but collaborate to cover the maximum surface of the huge market…

        it is a West frontier story, not a battle in starvation camp.

    • Donk970

      No corporation can risk the first mover costs of developing something like a fission nuclear reactor or hot fusion reactor. We would not have developed the LWR’s that we use today in our naval vessels and civilian power plants without taxpayer money – full stop. LENR is different though; LENR has first mover costs that are orders of magnitude lower than other energy technologies. So, short answer is as far as LENR goes we should not publicly fund but for technologies like MSR’s that have a high first mover cost we should absolutely fund with public money.

      • Broncobet

        MSR’s are one of favorite topics and at this stage we work with the Chinese.Right now it’s not expensive at all,this is all to be working by 2030 (you have to pass NRC standards. The money for LENR is much lower and your government has made it clear that it wants to invest in it, and it has deep pockets,now there could be absolutely no LENR effects at all,we can be sure that most of the work is a fraudulent scheme,but we are hoping that some of them are real,remember it only takes one. AR is very convincing,but he doesn’t want no stinking grant.

    • I have the opposite vision as we more and more try to follow your cautious behavior.
      the result is counterproductive, and lead to subsidizing fashion like solar or hot fusion.

      community money, whether it is a government (NASA), a local authority (SRI) or an ecosystem (Elforsk), or a state industry (CEA), or an ecosystem (lenr-cities?) should fund cheap and hopeless research (see Navy Spawar&NRL) or required and commercially uninteresting (LHC?ITER?).

      If the return is certain or just predictable, community have nothing to do, except if they organize like a cooperative company.

      the problem is setting the question and my conviction is that there should be no single criteria, no single policy… there should be various fashions, rules, policies, irrationality, heresies…

      finally as Feyerabend says, i support anarchic science.
      please no method.

    • I support *MODEST* federal investment into basic research, but not one penny of government funds for tax breaks, production subsidies, or use mandates. All energy subsidies and mandates should be abolished. Let consumers decide what energy products they wish to purchase. The USA is supposed to be the nation of freedom of choice, not a nation of BIG BROTHER government mandates.

      • Ophelia Rump

        This is bigger than the U.S.A.
        This civilization is on the brink of collapse, the world cannot wait much longer.

  • robyn wyrick

    I don’t know how you would characterize any interest by China other than government funding.

  • robyn wyrick

    I don’t know how you would characterize any interest by China other than government funding.

  • Mark

    I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again. I don’t like this Rossi guy. I hope that he is successful, but I don’t like him. He has WAY too oversimplistic of an attitude on this and many other issues.

  • bachcole

    I believe that LENR is way too “unproven” or controversial for public money to be spent on it. YES, you and I know that it is real, and thousands of scientists are just as certain that it is NOT real. When LENR becomes obvious, then we can sort out whether we should pay for it or not.

    • I understand what you say, and you are right
      the detail is that in reality it is much more proven than many assumed real science and technology… not industrial, but sure real, checked, cross checked… since 1991…
      Since so long that many people when informed imagine this cannot be true, because the rational system of state intelligence and market greed cannot have missed its so long. but it did.

      cold fusion is challenging all our confidence in human system, either statist or pretended “laissez-faire”.

      in fact outr market-driven econoy is a junky of public money, of public opinion, of state funded academic opinion, of academic funded high impact journals, of high impact journal supported academics, of academic supported funding comitees… a land of consanguinity and self-enforced delusion.

      when politician who fund state research following the advice of academics who are powerful because of the high impact journal who are funded by academic money given by state grant.
      just make some noise, some fashion, some bias, some good position that finally is wrong, in the academic world, in the politician world, in the journal world, and all get locked out of reality.

  • bachcole

    This question is moot because of how controversial LENR is now. No public official or bureaucrat is going to risk their job funding it. When LENR is recognized as being obviously real, then the question is still moot because we wouldn’t be able to stop public officials and bureaucrats from funding LENR.

  • bachcole

    This question is moot because of how controversial LENR is now. No public official or bureaucrat is going to risk their job funding it. When LENR is recognized as being obviously real, then the question is still moot because we wouldn’t be able to stop public officials and bureaucrats from funding LENR.

  • Observer

    What is your intent, to be funded or to develop LENR?

    If your primary purpose is to be funded, then you will have no incentive to solve the problem.

    Your results will always be “More study is needed”.

  • Stefan Israelsson Tampe

    This is for the joy of @georgehants:disqus , so I put it here as an off topic. The background is that popeye is a very vocal and knowledgeable skeptic that bats his way at ecatnews. I wanted to see the skeptics explanation of Mills amazing result, by getting a scientific answer like formula 123 contain an error etc, but they simply refuses to do science and lend their argument against what the sirens tell them and not with facts (He uses excellent facts elsewhere so if you want to get some understanding about something head down there and ask, he will beat you but you will get a great understanding) Have fun,

    QUOTE
    @popeye quote,
    “No, and I don’t intend to look for it. Mills hydrino theory is a crackpot theory,”

    My response:
    ===========
    Sure the paper is massive, but if you concentrate on the core question that I posses now. “How does Mills foul the ‘g-factor’”. Start with the conclusion and go backwards you will see that he does not use any of the tricks you suggest. It is clear to me that the expert in the field are lazy and base their science on rumors or you would have found out some sane critic on that matter of the exactness of the g-factor. The accomplishment of it in QM is a poster child of how amazingly correct it is for gods sake and Mills does the same. Actually what smells like crackpot is the QM deduction of the ‘g-factor’ but that is a rumor that I heard so I would not put to much weight on it with more than it was a huge effort to deduce it in QM, not in Mills crackpot theory. You do pretty god arguments elsewhere, but do not convince me in your argument here. I am prepared to accept that Mills theory is crackpot theory if you can discuss with me how he fools me, else it is a clear cut case of insane ignorance from the people in the field.

    UNQUOTE

    • Ophelia Rump

      When will Mr. Mills be able to heat me a decent hot cup of tea with that thing?
      I do not care about his theory or video or sparkle machines.
      Be a dear and bring me a cup of tea, then we can talk.

      • Stefan Israelsson Tampe

        OR,
        This is not a question of Mills hydrinos and his magic machines. This is about theory and about scientist not doing their work. Don’t do the same mistake as they to think his theory is the same as the hydrino and the magic machine.

        • Ophelia Rump

          Basic design, if it did work, then by his own numbers It requires 20% more energy to cool than it produces as working output.

          • Stefan Israelsson Tampe

            OR, The discusison is Mills theory. Not his machine, his machine can be crap, but the theory can still have merrit. They are not tightly linked.

          • Ophelia Rump

            I cannot believe that you just said his theory and his device are not significantly linked. You said tightly. You could debate the semantics if you like.

          • Stefan Israelsson Tampe

            All physical “solutions” (sort of) of the atom could be linked to Mills theory. But I have not found any proofs that all solutions to Mills theory is a physical reality (think hydrinos), do you get that? If you haven’t seen this argument before it is in fact a a common theme in mathematical modelling. You might need to refine Mills theory to get more precise conclusions, that is science, you take something of merit, you examine it, take the good points, see the bad points refine and with hard work you will get perfection. The science of Mills theory never started, it has merit, that’s my point. O.R. learn this, the world is not black and white, people are both bad and good, don’t throw mud on one piece to show you argument somewhere else, that is what a politician do, not scientists be precise.

          • Ophelia Rump

            If there is other work in the field, you need not base anything upon the theory of someone untrustworthy. Follow someone trustworthy’s theory. Follow test results, forget Mills.

          • Stefan Israelsson Tampe

            Quantum mechanics have solutions that seams to match reality very well. It has also have hydrino solutions that have gotten a lot of thought and in the end shown to be un physical by some investigations. But you are right Mills theory is not the final step you need to merge the knowledge of Mills theory and QM. Especially Mills theory is a theory of standing waves. It is not a theory that handles transients which (this is a good guess) is the main feature you will need to decide about if the solutions are physical or not.

          • Stefan Israelsson Tampe

            O.R. people lye, not math. I did not follow Mills, I followed the math.

          • Stefan Israelsson Tampe

            O.R. You are so blinded by your sceptisism here that you can’t see that I have given you a gift. If someone says that “he can calculate the g-factor to 11 digits surely hydrinos and his magic machine is true” you can counter with what I told you. Leave it at that.

          • Billy Jackson

            On September 12, 1932, within seven months of the discovery of the
            neutron, and more than six years before the discovery of fission, Leo
            Szilard conceived of the possibility of a controlled release of atomic
            power through a multiplying neutron chain reaction, and also realized
            that if such a reaction could be found, then a bomb could be built using
            it.

            On July 4, 1934 Leo Szilard filed a patent application for the
            atomic bomb In his application, Szilard described not only the basic
            concept of using neutron induced chain reactions to create explosions,
            but also the key concept of the critical mass. The patent was awarded to
            him – making Leo Szilard the legally recognized inventor of the atomic
            bomb.

            It wasn’t till July 16th 1945 at the detonation of the trinity test that we had a working atomic bomb.

          • Ophelia Rump

            That is fascinating, I have never heard about Leo Szilard before.
            Why does society and history rob the greatest minds so frequently?

          • Billy Jackson

            Mr Mills can be a most charming individual with the honesty of a saint or a snake in the grass who is utterly reprehensible.

            If you asked Tesla, Thomas Edison and Westinghouse were not the most honest of people.. but that did not stop them from inventing usable inventions and then making them profitable. that allowed us to further our advances in science.

            we can call into question that he has a theory. or that he plans on ever releasing it.. but once released.. we will then quickly become aware whether he is correct or not.

            Fortunately for us.. you cant base a theory on a intentional scam. sooner or later you will have to produce the working device or theory.. and then .. its game over.

            Much Respect!

          • Ophelia Rump

            You have reduced this to it’s simplest form. Thank you.

      • Obvious

        At 5V 20000A, there should be a considerable EMF near the device, so put a few magnets in your tea cup (filled with water) and let the magnets stir the water to a boil!

        • jousterusa

          Why doesn’t Rossi – or Mills – run his lab off LENR?

    • georgehants

      Stefan, so you have met Popeyes, Ha, ECN is a bad place to try and talk any sense.
      What will be will be and no crackpot “opinions” will change that.

      • Stefan Israelsson Tampe

        I was not trying to talk any sence. I wanted information. If you formulate some question that they feel to have an obligation to answer, you will get excellent information back. Sure there is a lot of overreactions and use of vivid imagination to hack on people, but that can be ignored. I did really learn a lot. I’m actually really curious of why so much black paint is thrown at his theory, I’m a phd in mathematics and the deduction for the g-factor seams to be fine with no mysterious factors or tricks that muddies the water. All people who have claimed to have gone through the deduction seam to tell that it is ok e.g. that the physics used is ok, for which my background is a little weaker.

        • georgehants

          Stefan, to me replying to your question with —–
          “No, and I don’t intend to look for it. Mills hydrino theory is a crackpot theory,”
          is not sensible or in any way science.
          ——–
          Interesting that you are a mathematician who I think would work in a much cleaner environment regarding the clear subject matter that all mathematicians can work on without many distractions.
          Clear rules that have been handed down and adhered to whereas in general science the most basic rules have been disregarded and it seems to be nothing other than who can outdo somebody else with “opinion” alone, Facts and Evidence mean almost nothing.
          It would be good if you could get more of your colleagues to cover the work you have done re. Mills and confirm your findings.
          That then feels like very good science to me.

          • Stefan Israelsson Tampe

            I quitted my academic career and headed working for a company so The work I do tend to be more dirty than the clean mathematical theories. I do have a colleague that is a Phd in physics who also speaks warmly about Mills (it’s from him I got that link)

          • georgehants

            Stefan, very good to have on page somebody who looks at the Facts
            ( math and physics) regarding Mills and not just worthless “opinions”
            Nothing is finished until the fat lady sings.

    • jousterusa

      Hows do we even know Popeye was capable of reading the theory, which is as thick as molasses in December.

      • Stefan Israelsson Tampe

        He knows QM, then he should be able to start with the conclusion and go backwards to see if there is any tricks, takes 30 minues.

    • Stefan Israelsson Tampe

      The reply was that he basically wouldn’t do it. So his bluffing, by some reason you can’t get a skep to discuss that derivation. It is bloody easy to find an error in those formulas and it would take a skep 30 minutes to see if there is one. It’s that simple math and well lay out logic. Of cause an educated scepto would not find a serious issue with it. So folks we have proven it Mills can predict the g-factor two 11 digits, just as well as QM. Mills theory is serious buisness.

  • Stefan Israelsson Tampe

    This is for the joy of @georgehants:disqus , so I put it here as an off topic. The background is that popeye is a very vocal and knowledgeable skeptic that bats his way at ecatnews. I wanted to see the skeptics explanation of Mills amazing result, by getting a scientific answer like formula 123 contain an error etc, but they simply refuses to do science and lend their argument against what the sirens tell them and not with facts (He uses excellent facts elsewhere so if you want to get some understanding about something head down there and ask, he will beat you but you will get a great understanding) Have fun,

    QUOTE
    @popeye quote,
    “No, and I don’t intend to look for it. Mills hydrino theory is a crackpot theory,”

    My response:
    ===========
    Sure the paper is massive, but if you concentrate on the core question that I posses now. “How does Mills foul the ‘g-factor’”. Start with the conclusion and go backwards you will see that he does not use any of the tricks you suggest. It is clear to me that the expert in the field are lazy and base their science on rumors or you would have found out some sane critic on that matter of the exactness of the g-factor. The accomplishment of it in QM is a poster child of how amazingly correct it is for gods sake and Mills does the same. Actually what smells like crackpot is the QM deduction of the ‘g-factor’ but that is a rumor that I heard so I would not put to much weight on it with more than it was a huge effort to deduce it in QM, not in Mills crackpot theory. You do pretty god arguments elsewhere, but do not convince me in your argument here. I am prepared to accept that Mills theory is crackpot theory if you can discuss with me how he fools me, else it is a clear cut case of insane ignorance from the people in the field.

    UNQUOTE

    • Ophelia Rump

      When will Mr. Mills be able to heat me a decent hot cup of tea with that thing?
      I do not care about his theory or video or sparkle machines.
      Be a dear and bring me a cup of tea, then we can talk.

      His brighter than the sun gibberish has already wasted my time having to explain how absolutely rubbish the claim is.

      • Stefan Israelsson Tampe

        OR,
        This is not a question of Mills hydrinos and his magic machines. This is about theory and about scientist not doing their work. Don’t do the same mistake as they to think his theory is the same as the hydrino and the magic machine.

        • Ophelia Rump

          Basic design, if it did work, then by his own numbers It requires 20% more energy to cool than it produces as working output.

          If the man cannot be trusted, then neither can his theory.

          • Stefan Israelsson Tampe

            OR, The discusison is Mills theory. Not his machine, his machine can be crap, but the theory can still have merrit. They are not tightly linked.

          • Ophelia Rump

            I cannot believe that you just said his theory and his device are not significantly linked. You said tightly. You could debate the semantics if you like.

          • Stefan Israelsson Tampe

            All physical “solutions” (sort of) of the atom could be linked to Mills theory. But I have not found any proofs that all solutions to Mills theory is a physical reality (think hydrinos), do you get that? If you haven’t seen this argument before it is in fact a a common theme in mathematical modelling. You might need to refine Mills theory to get more precise conclusions, that is science, you take something of merit, you examine it, take the good points, see the bad points refine and with hard work you will get perfection. The science of Mills theory never started, it has merit, that’s my point. O.R. learn this, the world is not black and white, people are both bad and good, don’t throw mud on one piece to show you argument somewhere else, that is what a politician do, not scientists be precise.

          • Ophelia Rump

            If there is other work in the field, you need not base anything upon the theory of someone untrustworthy. Follow someone trustworthy’s theory. Follow test results, forget Mills.

          • Stefan Israelsson Tampe

            Quantum mechanics have solutions that seams to match reality very well. It has also have hydrino solutions that have gotten a lot of thought and in the end shown to be un physical by some investigations. But you are right Mills theory is not the final step you need to merge the knowledge of Mills theory and QM. Especially Mills theory is a theory of standing waves. It is not a theory that handles transients which (this is a good guess) is the main feature you will need to decide about if the solutions are physical or not.

          • Stefan Israelsson Tampe

            O.R. people lye, not math. I did not follow Mills, I followed the math.

          • Stefan Israelsson Tampe

            O.R. You are so blinded by your sceptisism here that you can’t see that I have given you a gift. If someone says that “he can calculate the g-factor to 11 digits surely hydrinos and his magic machine is true” you can counter with what I told you. Leave it at that.

          • Billy Jackson

            On September 12, 1932, within seven months of the discovery of the
            neutron, and more than six years before the discovery of fission, Leo
            Szilard conceived of the possibility of a controlled release of atomic
            power through a multiplying neutron chain reaction, and also realized
            that if such a reaction could be found, then a bomb could be built using
            it.

            On July 4, 1934 Leo Szilard filed a patent application for the
            atomic bomb In his application, Szilard described not only the basic
            concept of using neutron induced chain reactions to create explosions,
            but also the key concept of the critical mass. The patent was awarded to
            him – making Leo Szilard the legally recognized inventor of the atomic
            bomb.

            It wasn’t till July 16th 1945 at the detonation of the trinity test that we had a working atomic bomb.

          • Ophelia Rump

            That is fascinating, I have never heard about Leo Szilard before.
            Why does society and history rob the greatest minds so frequently?

          • Billy Jackson

            Mr Mills can be a most charming individual with the honesty of a saint or a snake in the grass who is utterly reprehensible.

            If you asked Tesla, Thomas Edison and Westinghouse were not the most honest of people.. but that did not stop them from inventing usable inventions and then making them profitable. that allowed us to further our advances in science.

            we can call into question that he has a theory. or that he plans on ever releasing it.. but once released.. we will then quickly become aware whether he is correct or not.

            Fortunately for us.. you cant base a theory on a intentional scam. sooner or later you will have to produce the working device or theory.. and then .. its game over.

            Much Respect!

          • Ophelia Rump

            You have reduced this to it’s simplest form. Thank you.

      • bachcole

        Poetry!!!

      • Obvious

        At 5V 20000A, there should be a considerable EMF near the device, so put a few magnets in your tea cup (filled with water) and let the magnets stir the water to a boil!

        • jousterusa

          Why doesn’t Rossi – or Mills – run his lab off LENR?

    • georgehants

      Stefan, so you have met Popeyes, Ha, ECN is a bad place to try and talk any sense.
      What will be will be and no crackpot “opinions” will change that.

      • Stefan Israelsson Tampe

        I was not trying to talk any sence. I wanted information. If you formulate some question that they feel to have an obligation to answer, you will get excellent information back. Sure there is a lot of overreactions and use of vivid imagination to hack on people, but that can be ignored. I did really learn a lot. I’m actually really curious of why so much black paint is thrown at his theory, I’m a phd in mathematics and the deduction for the g-factor seams to be fine with no mysterious factors or tricks that muddies the water. All people who have claimed to have gone through the deduction seam to tell that it is ok e.g. that the physics used is ok, for which my background is a little weaker.

        • georgehants

          Stefan, to me his replying to your question with —–
          “No, and I don’t intend to look for it. Mills hydrino theory is a crackpot theory,”
          is not sensible or in any way science.
          ——–
          Interesting that you are a mathematician who I think would work in a much cleaner environment regarding the clear subject matter that all mathematicians can work on without many distractions.
          Clear rules that have been handed down and adhered to whereas in general science the most basic rules have been disregarded and it seems to be nothing other than who can outdo somebody else with “opinion” alone, Facts and Evidence mean almost nothing.
          It would be good if you could get more of your colleagues to cover the work you have done re. Mills and confirm your findings.
          That then feels like very good science to me.

          • Stefan Israelsson Tampe

            I quitted my academic career and headed working for a company so The work I do tend to be more dirty than the clean mathematical theories. I do have a colleague that is a Phd in physics who also speaks warmly about Mills (it’s from him I got that link)

          • georgehants

            Stefan, very good to have on page somebody who looks at the Facts
            ( math and physics) regarding Mills and not just worthless “opinions”
            Nothing is finished until the fat lady sings.

    • bachcole

      Dear Stefan, I don’t know popeye from a horse’s a$$, and I am going to go ahead and take a wild guess and say that I probably wouldn’t want to know him.

      Given that, with regard to Mills, which facts are you referring to? I haven’t seen any facts yet. I have seen mildly entertaining pops and sparks, but that was about all.

      • jousterusa

        I was really impressed with the obvious depth of Mills’ knowledge in his interview with Sterling Allan. Sterling knows every inch of the alternative energy landscape but even he was unaware that the hydrino device is a non-nuclear one. Listen to that interview and see if you don’t hear a few facts stated.

    • jousterusa

      Hows do we even know Popeye was capable of reading the theory, which is as thick as molasses in December.

      • Stefan Israelsson Tampe

        He knows QM, then he should be able to start with the conclusion and go backwards to see if there is any tricks, takes 30 minues.

    • Stefan Israelsson Tampe

      The reply was that he basically wouldn’t do it. So his bluffing, by some reason you can’t get a skep to discuss that derivation. It is bloody easy to find an error in those formulas and it would take a skep 30 minutes to see if there is one. It’s that simple math and well lay out logic. Of cause an educated scepto would not find a serious issue with it. So folks we have proven it Mills can predict the g-factor two 11 digits, just as well as QM. Mills theory is serious buisness.

  • Alain Samoun

    Once the technology of the new fire has been proved (E-Cat,BLP etc…) A Manhattan type project, involving scientists from all countries not only the US military this time, will be in order, knowing the dire state of the current world in ecology,over population,nuclear waste, fossils fuels, financial, poverty etc..etc…

    • Ophelia Rump

      Once it is on the market, the concept of a Manhattan Project becomes absurd.
      It does not look like it will get much attention until the sold units start to roll out of the factory.

      • first things is to create the market, because currently most big and small actors will be afraid to kill their economic rent, and everybody will be afraid, thus will not buy, nor sell, thus not invest nor research. however put a few companies that have money, problems, competence, imagination, clients and providers, and let them invest, buy, sell to each others, and find final clients…

        Cherokee is a good help for rossi, but more is needed…
        This way things can go, but slowly.

        anyway good surprise is for the autumn. It will start from late, but I hope will go faster.
        We don’t need a manhattan project (in a way it was more like what I promote, but it is not the image people have), but a silicon valley, and not in a valley.

        • Ophelia Rump

          The market needs only to smell blood in the water. Markets like schools of fish turn in a heartbeat motivated by survival.

          LENR will be accepted over night once the critical mass of working installations is reached, however many installations that requires will depend upon the name recognition of the early adopters.

          • some big oil like shell have smelled the blood since 25 years and turn around, and some big whales have smelled it more recently (or they lied) and now they decide that all they need to harvest the ocean of energy is a gang of whales, sharks and sardines.

            no need of a working reactor today if you can just create the market, buy, sell, fund, research, without being afraid of being alone or erased by a competitor, to have funded the bad research.
            big guys know it will work, question is when and who.

            even if he have no reactor, rossi have won. the market-builder are on the way, independently.
            no more conditional.
            Elforsk was just a pilot fish, bigger are coming.

          • Ophelia Rump

            Yes, I think you are right, they are always ahead of the game, it is their industry.

          • this is why some are… in.

            now question is making the announce, we have the food already.

      • Bernie Koppenhofer

        Much more research will be needed, huge government funding for research will be made, similar to first atomic weapon to our nuclear industry today, or from Wights first airplane and all the government research in aviation since. But, it will happen in a much shorter time frame.

        • Ophelia Rump

          Why would you start a Manhattan Project, after you already have the bomb?

          • Alain Samoun

            That’s where you have it wrong Ophelia: What has been demonstrated so far, look like to me prototypes,far from a finished product. To have the real product or, better, a line of products it will be necessary to go thru a development phase that may take a long time and capital. Because,contrary to some people say here,for an endeavor so big,development of a new fire,it will be necessary to have governments support,organization and capital. Nothing big in my generation,from the man on the moon,the microchip,the internet,the ISS to even to the medicines, has been done by not involving the government one way or another.

          • Ophelia Rump

            I agree with you that there is another hundred years of technological development in this field. But we do not require the end result now. The starting technology will be beyond our wildest dreams.

            We need one working design to market. Then we can survive long enough to perfect. If IH delivers this year, or Brillouin or any team. Then there will be a research gold rush.

            The simplest of designs would be capable if increasing the global standard of living immediately, if we made the effort to implement it. Worlds of insufficiency would become worlds of abundance.

            You did not really contradict my stance, only the belief that IH has a device which can operate in a commercial setting, so I assume you think Rossi is inflating the state of his art. You seem particularly level headed to me, I am curious what your reservations are.

  • Freethinker

    To me, science in its purest principles is the ideal way to move our knowledge forward.

    However, it requires open mindedness, but also requires a certain amount of SOUND scepticism and inertia to force new things merit itself. This has NOT been the case with cold fusion or LENR, as I believe many in this forum may agree on.

    As much as new ideas and breakthroughs are made by mavericks, shown repeatedly in history, there is certainly a need for open minded and unbiased science to excavate any or all new ideas that has merit.

    We live in a time where science is to a very high degree corporized and politicized, governed not mainly by the scientific principles, but by agendas put forth by corporations and political entities (eg. political agenda driven micromanagement on government grants, medical industry lack of drive in certain therapeutic areas because they don’t see payback quick enough, etc, etc).

    It is therefore, IMHO, very positive if taxpayer funded research, in an open and fair environment, could happen for LENR. My hope is that with a very positive report from the TPI, and any subsequent revelation of positive nature, will help push this into university curricula worldwide, and the research funding needed to build such teachings on. This is critical to ensure open research on this topic in the years ahead.

    Thus, I find myself disagreeing with Andrea Rossi.

    • Thomas Kuhn despite the legend have much respect for the conservatism that found the academic world, and the answer is given by Feyerabend who ask for “no method”.

      in fact there is no good solution… the solution is to follow all tracks at the same time.
      There is a need for “normal science” based on conservatism, opposition to anomalies, desire to solve all under current paradigm.
      there is a need of crazy irrational guys, just enough to try, not too much so they forget reality when it fails a hundred time (not before)…

      the big error today is big science, big academic consensus.
      we need biodiversity in science. hunting blackswan mean you have to play in mud with thousands of dirty white swan, and many more duck and pigs.

  • Freethinker

    To me, science in its purest principles is the ideal way to move our knowledge forward.

    However, it requires open mindedness, but also requires a certain amount of SOUND scepticism and inertia to force new things merit itself. This has NOT been the case with cold fusion or LENR, as I believe many in this forum may agree on.

    As much as new ideas and breakthroughs are made by mavericks, shown repeatedly in history, there is certainly a need for open minded and unbiased science to excavate any or all new ideas that has merit.

    We live in a time where science is to a very high degree corporized and politicized, governed not mainly by the scientific principles, but by agendas put forth by corporations and political entities (eg. political agenda driven micromanagement on government grants, medical industry lack of drive in certain therapeutic areas because they don’t see payback quick enough, etc, etc).

    It is therefore, IMHO, very positive if taxpayer funded research, in an open and fair environment, could happen for LENR. My hope is that with a very positive report from the TPI, and any subsequent revelation of positive nature, will help push this into university curricula worldwide, and the research funding needed to build such teachings on. This is critical to ensure open research on this topic in the years ahead.

    Thus, I find myself disagreeing with Andrea Rossi.

    • Thomas Kuhn despite the legend have much respect for the conservatism that found the academic world, and the answer is given by Feyerabend who ask for “no method”.

      in fact there is no good solution… the solution is to follow all tracks at the same time.
      There is a need for “normal science” based on conservatism, opposition to anomalies, desire to solve all under current paradigm.
      there is a need of crazy irrational guys, just enough to try, not too much so they forget reality when it fails a hundred time (not before)…

      the big error today is big science, big academic consensus.
      we need biodiversity in science. hunting blackswan mean you have to play in mud with thousands of dirty white swan, and many more duck and pigs.

  • Alan DeAngelis

    Have the narcissists who disparaged LENR for 25 years get funding to research it?

    • Freethinker

      If you look closely, you’ll find die hard scientists of the right stuff having going out of their way to continue LENR research. There are obviously scientists worthy the name. If you leave it all up to the corporate thinking, it will always be the bottom line, and there will be no room for basic research and excursions away from the profit line. This is why there is needed open research – but by scientists which actually has integrity, and not a22wipes who are hogging funding as a way to get a meal ticket, and are willing to lie or look the other way when the scientific principles are steam rolled.

      The scientific community is in a dire need of a make over, but it is still the only way to get to some resemblance of unbiased, open and fair science, away from political and corporate drive.

      Do note, I appreciate the need for corporate science – after all, what would we be product wise today if we did not have it. It is just that it cannot be used to replace open and publicly funded science for the bias it introduces. It is like apples and bananas.

  • Alan DeAngelis

    Have the narcissists who disparaged LENR for 25 years get funding to research it?

    • Freethinker

      If you look closely, you’ll find die hard scientists of the right stuff having going out of their way to continue LENR research. There are obviously scientists worthy the name. If you leave it all up to the corporate thinking, it will always be the bottom line, and there will be no room for basic research and excursions away from the profit line. This is why there is needed open research – but by scientists which actually has integrity, and not a22wipes who are hogging funding as a way to get a meal ticket, and are willing to lie or look the other way when the scientific principles are steam rolled.

      The scientific community is in a dire need of a make over, but it is still the only way to get to some resemblance of unbiased, open and fair science, away from political and corporate drive.

      Do note, I appreciate the need for corporate science – after all, what would we be product wise today if we did not have it. It is just that it cannot be used to replace open and publicly funded science for the bias it introduces. It is like apples and bananas.

  • John Buczek

    Absolutely no government funding, IMHO!

    Seems no one is paying much attention to the forces that would want to suppress or delay LENR and which may have done so already. Please accept that I have never been a “conspiracy theorist” but consider that practical LENR would be a crushing blow to many of the most powerful interests in world. Include the US gov itself, the Defense Dept for one, oil producing countries, major corporations and who knows who else.

    Why has the government… again mostly via the Defense Dept… sunk so many billions over the years into hot fusion research? I remember researchers in the 1960’s saying “we are 20 years away from fusion generators that will make electricity too cheap to meter”. They said exactly the same thing a while ago when it was time to renew the research budgets. Why does the government continue funding when it’s cut back or eliminated funding for research on so many alternates? Because they hope it will eventuallly produce energy weapons which answer the wet dream of every military leader the last several hundred years….. by eliminating the need to carry megatons of ammunition around. Although not impossible, LENR will probably NOT lead to weapon-able technology but the availability of vast amounts of cheap energy WILL lead to calls to gut the budget for hot fusion research. If the DOD is not enough, this also makes enemies of many major universities, the same ones that have been so successful in suppressing LENR research since 1989. In that 25 years the patent office has issued patents for many unlikely or impossible devices or for processes that have no obvious application. Remember the magnet device you could put on the fuel line of your car to increase economy by some big number? Why the continued, implacable refusal to patent anything related to LENR even when coming from major companies or respected researchers who are unlikely to participate in a scam? Mitsubishi Heavy Industries scamming the public? Excuse me?

    LENR has the potential to crush the stock value of many major corporations almost instantly. A Forbes report indicates that something like 15 of the 25 biggest corporations IN THE WORLD derive a major part of their income from some aspect of the fossil fuel industry. Add many thousands of smaller corporations as more enemies. It will take many years to build enough LENR generators to REALLY cut into fossil fuel sales but the huge compensation packages of corporate bosses are tied, directly or indirectly, to stock price and that depends on anticipated future revenue, not current revenue. What would the anticipated revenue be of a business when the world knows it’s market will shrink, year by year, forever?

    Another Forbes report indicated ~25% of the 196 countries in the world ( or 195 if you want to kiss China’s ass about Taiwan) depend on some aspect of the fossil fuel industry for a major part of their cash flow. Wikipedia shows that 129 of the 195 countries in the world are net oil exporters. Although only about half of those are significant in the market (100K barrels per day or more) the “hard” income is important to all. Then add coal and natural gas exporters that would become enemies of LENR.

    Every one of these entities are going to be very unhappy about deployment of a LENR technology.

    So unhappy that I anticipate every possible effort to slow that deployment. Expect every new LENR product to have licensing problems or environmental lawsuits. There was already one such challenge in Florida (2012) just on the rumor that Rossi’s US facility would be there. I expect attempts by LENR enemies to sabotage LENR devices to call into question their safety. If you think this is unlikely, look at the stunts that Edison and Westinghouse pulled to sabotage each other. Remember, the electric chair was invented and pushed into service by Edison’s money to scare consumers about dangers of Westinghouse’s AC electricity over Edisons DC system. Are modern billion dollar corporations that much more ethical?

    Would oil dependent countries go as far as assassination to delay deployment, as Israel is said to have done to a US engineer who was developing weapon technology for Iraq? Unlikely? Who knows when trillions are at stake. Out of those 129 oil producing countries there are many much less ethical then Israel. How scrupulous are the players in the biggest exporting countries, like Saudi “potentates” or Russian “oligarchs”?

    The US gov is VERY responsive to such power dealers so IMHO making LENR progress dependent on research controlled by government is like handing the keys of the kingdom to the barbarians.

    It may just be a fight that must be fought out and we might have to wait a long time for LENR. Either that or the technology will fall into the hands of these same groups and “cheap” will be removed from the LENR energy predictions.

    Still, IH might try to protect itself from some of it by a variation of the model used by early steam engine makers in England. Sell the output while keeping ownership and control of the device. Make multi-megawatt generators but don’t sell them. Make deals to install them at existing power generating stations in secure structures accessed ONLY by IH employees. Then IH can control security and modify or upgrade day by day as the produce develops AND still have a very nice income stream. Major electrical generating plants already have permits to cover most of the “hazards” that opponents would try to credit to LENR. It won’t stop all the attempts to delay and energy prices would not drop as fast it but I think it would help in the long run.

    Just the opinion of a guy of no particular importance.

    • Alan DeAngelis

      “Since I entered politics, I have chiefly had men’s views confided to me privately. Some of the biggest men in the United States, in the field of commerce and manufacture, are afraid of something. They know that there is a power somewhere so organized, so subtle, so watchful, so interlocked, so complete, so pervasive, that they better not speak above their
      breath when they speak in condemnation of it.”

      Woodrow Wilson

      • Singled-out

        Most likely the men in this quote were referring to their wives.

        • Alan DeAngelis

          You have a gift for logic.

    • jousterusa

      Mitsubishi Heavy Industries scamming the public? Excuse me?
      General Motors, JP Morgan, Citigroup scamming the public? Excuse me?

      Yet ,you lay out very succinctly the major problem the future deployment of LENR must face: “Every one of these entities are going to be very unhappy about deployment of a LENR technology.” How can a tiny company like Industrial Heat LLC stand up to those folks? That’s precisely the reason why we’d be happy to have the US Government on our side!

      • standing up is not enough… if they don’t have a big gang of whale with them they will die not of assassination , but simply of hunger.
        the good news is the whale will came, when they will see the other whale get fat with that new food. just need to start the harvest.

    • Ophelia Rump

      This only illustrates the importance of licensing the technology. As long as they have a seat in the game, they maintain their value into the long game. So you make them a player in your game, and they transition. As long as the money is in the air and the players are filling their hands, they are not drawing their daggers.

    • friendlyprogrammer

      Wow! That’s almost a book.

      I think that “Oil Money” is not what it once was and even Arab Sheiks likely have a zillion shares of Coca-Cola and McDonalds. This diversification will allow them to want what is best for their grandchildren.

      The writing has been on the wall and investors are watching the declines in oil stock.

      I just want to help lessen your “conspiracy” version outlook a touch.

      • Ophelia Rump

        I think back fondly to my breakfasts at the Dennys in Bahrain. As grotesque an imitation of a diner breakfast as that was.

        Arab pizza huts were the worst. The cheese did not require refrigeration, I think it was formaldehyde or iodohyde mixed with milk. The same for Indonesian beer, a hangover never to be repeated under that hot tropical sun. In Ujang Pang Dang, you take what you can get, the franchises there are British.

    • Heath

      If you look at some of the documents, patents, and interviews on LENR-CANR.org, you can easily see that the US government HAS been funding LENR research secretively for years. NASA, the DOD, the DOE and probably more departments than we will ever know. I agree with you that non-govt powerful groups would do anything to kill this if they had the chance which is why it has been so secretive. I personally believe that the govt is also involved with Industrial Heat’s development and distribution process because they know, other companies know, and we know that this reactor is a game changer.

  • jousterusa

    I think it’s important for the US government to play a partnership role in the advent of LENR because the disruption that will occur early requires an entity with broad reach to stave off any chaos in the financial markets and the massive fraud that will be attempted by people trying to pass off inferior devices as LENR. The government will also have the resources to ensure that there is no weaponization of LENR and that it is not used by terrorists.

    Just as some people like to have the most powerful rifles and biggest engines and can use those to make life awful for the rest of us, we should carefully shepherd LENR into mass commercial and residential use in a way that will prevent accidents, hinder innovations (due to bad publicity)and make the transition from contemporary power sources to LENR as easy as possible.

    Government can also fund research that brings about one of the most significant but least talked-about developments, which is a substantial miniaturization of the components and the resulting E-Cats. It may be that like the future hydrino generator, the final form will be not much larger than a cell phone and much more versatile.

    Finally, for those who fear the government, remember that ours is always subject to election, and that a dismal failure will cost many politicians their careers – a great incentive to succeed!

  • jousterusa

    I think it’s important for the US government to play a partnership role in the advent of LENR because the disruption that will occur early requires an entity with broad reach to stave off any chaos in the financial markets and the massive fraud that will be attempted by people trying to pass off inferior devices as LENR. The government will also have the resources to ensure that there is no weaponization of LENR and that it is not used by terrorists.

    Just as some people like to have the most powerful rifles and biggest engines and can use those to make life awful for the rest of us, we should carefully shepherd LENR into mass commercial and residential use in a way that will prevent accidents, hinder innovations (due to bad publicity)and make the transition from contemporary power sources to LENR as easy as possible.

    Government can also fund research that brings about one of the most significant but least talked-about developments, which is a substantial miniaturization of the components and the resulting E-Cats. It may be that like the future hydrino generator, the final form will be not much larger than a cell phone and much more versatile. Just the same, the credit for LENR/cold fusion will always have to go to Andrea Rossi and Pons & Fleischmann, along with the handful of scientists who have persisted in the research through the firestorms after the 1989 announcement. No one can ever truthfully say, “We owe the government for this.” It has come along far too late to deserve anything more than thanks for its help – when that help comes.

    Finally, for those who fear the government, remember that ours is always subject to election, and that a dismal failure will cost many politicians their careers – a great incentive to succeed!

  • jousterusa

    I was really impressed with the obvious depth of Mills’ knowledge in his interview with Sterling Allan. Sterling knows every inch of the alternative energy landscape but even he was unaware that the hydrino device is a non-nuclear one. Listen to that interview and see if you don’t hear a few facts stated.

  • fritz194

    Because of the actual nature of LENR – and thats alchemistic material science – a potential funding would have to be widespread with lots of diversification.

    Such a research approach is difficult to scale, difficult to monitor and difficult to evaluate.

    In comparison to particle physics – CERN and hot fusion – there is no magical big machine that can be financed. The driving force behind those monsterprojects is a private-public partnership between the industry and science departments. A win – win.

    This works so well – because there are lots of full-time positions busy with defining goals, project opportunities – that´s a huge and well working self-maintained apparatus.

    Funding LENR would work in the scale of LENR clusters – where multiple companies/teams share a machine park and services.
    And I´m quite sure that government would fund LENR – but in practice – they got approached by 100 other lobbyists for whatever scientific purpose – with tons of power-points and business-plans.
    Why should the only LENR lobbyist with his queer approach (cluster -no big machines) – be the right one to fund ?
    So if there is a next step – this step would be the establishment of a lobby – and the quest for scientific acceptance.

    There are enough examples – that – “funding something” might fail infinitely.

    • win-win, you got it.
      just need the proper condition to foster symbiosis.
      and… don’t worry, 😉

      • fritz194

        .. my motivation to follow this story changed dramatically over the years.
        Starting with a naive technical / altruistic interest – I realized that we have the ultimate chance to see how a disruptive dirac is applied to a huge black-box.
        Even if its still unclear how to correlate the response – thats a nice experiment on its own. In the end we will know more about the black-box than about LENR in general.
        Especially that bobcat-funding for MFMP is interesting. Lot´s of companies in the field are interested – but nobody dares to fund officially. They all have done their analysis and secret research – but nobody dares to open up the field earlier than necessary.
        You can see that very well in the automotive industry if it comes to alternate concepts. It took 100yrs from the first electric car to a tesla roadster and 20yrs for hybrid drive concepts. Why introducing something new as long as the old stuff pays off ?
        Apart from scientific acceptance there are way more other ingredients for the successful implementation of a new technology.
        It obviously took a gigantic oil spill in the gulf (drill, baby drill) to achieve enough acceptance for fracking. This leads to a reduced US demand on coal and finally renders brand new gas-fired power plants in europe useless. (because coal cheaper than expected).
        So we need LENR ready until fracking is found to be a stupid idea.
        Hopefully the collateral damage needed is something we wont regret..

    • Ophelia Rump

      They can fund the research for LENR rocket propulsion. That will take some doing.
      But a practical interplanetary fleet would be worth the effort.

      • fritz194

        Definitely, but as long as there is no serious competition for interplanetary manned space missions – the budget and progress would be unobtrusive. (and this effort is spent already)
        Maybe manned missions to space will be judged as peaceful cold-war proxy competition in the end. – who cares ?
        The actual focus of money spent is obviously to “make friends” globally and keep them under proper surveillance whether they are friendly or not. ;-))

        • Ophelia Rump

          If they want, they can use the rockets to blow each other to bits.
          That form of amusement never seems to loose it’s appeal.
          Infinite energy, infinite fun.

  • fritz194

    Because of the actual nature of LENR – and thats alchemistic material science – a potential funding would have to be widespread with lots of diversification.

    Such a research approach is difficult to scale, difficult to monitor and difficult to evaluate.

    In comparison to particle physics – CERN and hot fusion – there is no magical big machine that can be financed. The driving force behind those monsterprojects is a private-public partnership between the industry and science departments. A win – win.

    This works so well – because there are lots of full-time positions busy with defining goals, project opportunities – that´s a huge and well working self-maintained apparatus.

    Funding LENR would work in the scale of LENR clusters – where multiple companies/teams share a machine park and services.
    And I´m quite sure that government would fund LENR – but in practice – they got approached by 100 other lobbyists for whatever scientific purpose – with tons of power-points and business-plans.
    Why should the only LENR lobbyist with his queer approach (cluster -no big machines) – be the right one to fund ?
    So if there is a next step – this step would be the establishment of a lobby – and the quest for scientific acceptance.

    There are enough examples – that – “funding something” might fail infinitely.

    • win-win, you got it.
      just need the proper condition to foster symbiosis.
      and… don’t worry, 😉

      • fritz194

        .. my motivation to follow this story changed dramatically over the years.
        Starting with a naive technical / altruistic interest – I realized that we have the ultimate chance to see how a disruptive dirac is applied to a huge black-box.
        Even if its still unclear how to correlate the response – thats a nice experiment on its own. In the end we will know more about the black-box than about LENR in general.
        Especially that bobcat-funding for MFMP is interesting. Lot´s of companies in the field are interested – but nobody dares to fund officially. They all have done their analysis and secret research – but nobody dares to open up the field earlier than necessary.
        You can see that very well in the automotive industry if it comes to alternate concepts. It took 100yrs from the first electric car to a tesla roadster and 20yrs for hybrid drive concepts. Why introducing something new as long as the old stuff pays off ?
        Apart from scientific acceptance there are way more other ingredients for the successful implementation of a new technology.
        It obviously took a gigantic oil spill in the gulf (drill, baby drill) to achieve enough acceptance for fracking. This leads to a reduced US demand on coal and finally renders brand new gas-fired power plants in europe useless. (because coal cheaper than expected).
        So we need LENR ready until fracking is found to be a stupid idea.
        Hopefully the collateral damage needed is something we wont regret..

    • Ophelia Rump

      They can fund the research for LENR rocket propulsion. That will take some doing.
      But a practical interplanetary fleet would be worth the effort.

      • fritz194

        Definitely, but as long as there is no serious competition for interplanetary manned space missions – the budget and progress would be unobtrusive. (and this effort is spent already)
        Maybe manned missions to space will be judged as peaceful cold-war proxy competition in the end. – who cares ?
        The actual focus of money spent is obviously to “make friends” globally and keep them under proper surveillance whether they are friendly or not. ;-))

        • Ophelia Rump

          If they want, they can use the rockets to blow each other to bits.
          That form of amusement never seems to loose it’s appeal.
          Infinite energy, infinite fun.

  • I understand what you say, and you are right
    the detail is that in reality it is much more proven than many assumed real science and technology… not industrial, but sure real, checked, cross checked… since 1991…
    Since so long that many people when informed imagine this cannot be true, because the rational system of state intelligence and market greed cannot have missed its so long. but it did.

    cold fusion is challenging all our confidence in human system, either statist or pretended “laissez-faire”.

    in fact outr market-driven econoy is a junky of public money, of public opinion, of state funded academic opinion, of academic funded high impact journals, of high impact journal supported academics, of academic supported funding comitees… a land of consanguinity and self-enforced delusion.

    when politician who fund state research following the advice of academics who are powerful because of the high impact journal who are funded by academic money given by state grant.
    just make some noise, some fashion, some bias, some good position that finally is wrong, in the academic world, in the politician world, in the journal world, and all get locked out of reality.

  • friendlyprogrammer

    Government patents would be better for us. I’d rather LENR have the Hot Fusion budget or even 1/100th of what was spent on it.

  • Gerard McEk

    Public funding is probably the quickest way to explore the fundamentals of LENR/CF. I also agree with Joustera below that it also gives the government handles to guide the disrupting aspects and explore unknown dangerous features it may have.
    The industry will be able to do the product development like Rossi is doing.

  • Gerard McEk

    Public funding is probably the quickest way to explore the fundamentals of LENR/CF. I also agree with Joustera below that it also gives the government handles to guide the disrupting aspects and explore unknown dangerous features it may have.
    The industry will be able to do the product development like Rossi is doing.

  • georgehants

    To many good comments on page lately, ECW is becoming too popular, takes a long time to read.
    Would suggest to Admin to start banning people to bring down the number of posts.
    Could be done alphabetically, missing out the letter “g” of course.
    Even better, banning anybody who disagrees with me would cut the numbers down significantly.

    • Ophelia Rump

      Good fun!

  • georgehants

    The Conversation
    Quantum tech disappoints, but only because we don’t get it
    Machines based on these technologies are expected to dramatically
    outperform their classical counterparts in a variety of important tasks,
    including secure communication, computer simulation of atoms and
    molecules, precision measurement, code-breaking and quantitative
    analysis of “big data”.
    At some point in the near future, it is very likely that quantum machines will have significant implications for our health, privacy, defence and environment. Based on the results of the Sciencewise study, there seems to be an urgent need to improve public understanding, from the existing fascination with the basic mechanisms and phenomena of quantum theory, to ethical and sociological questions.
    http://theconversation.com/quantum-tech-disappoints-but-only-because-we-dont-get-it-29229

  • georgehants

    The Conversation
    Quantum tech disappoints, but only because we don’t get it
    Machines based on these technologies are expected to dramatically
    outperform their classical counterparts in a variety of important tasks,
    including secure communication, computer simulation of atoms and
    molecules, precision measurement, code-breaking and quantitative
    analysis of “big data”.
    At some point in the near future, it is very likely that quantum machines will have significant implications for our health, privacy, defence and environment. Based on the results of the Sciencewise study, there seems to be an urgent need to improve public understanding, from the existing fascination with the basic mechanisms and phenomena of quantum theory, to ethical and sociological questions.
    http://theconversation.com/quantum-tech-disappoints-but-only-because-we-dont-get-it-29229

  • Pietro F.

    http://www.bizjournals.com/triangle/blog/2014/07/nc-solar-center-changes-name-to-reflect-cleantech.html?iana=ind_energy

    Why???

    it is possible that they have tried the ECAT on behalf of the Cherokee.

    • Ophelia Rump

      That would be an interesting relationship, I think the name was probably too restrictive in regards to; in what technologies they are able to give internships at Triangle Park.
      Yes Industrial Heat may host some of the universities internships. How great an experience would that be for a student? I think internships with IH are probable.
      A more direct relationship would be less likely but may be possible or could grow from internships. I imagine this could be quite a boost for the engineering people over at N.C. State University’s Centennial Campus.

  • Private Citizen

    Government shouldn’t be “funding” (redistributing borrowed, printed or extorted money to favored interests) 99% of what it dies fund.

    Certainly not E-Cat. If Rossi needed more private capital, all he would have to do is show a little more skin and the $billions would pour in. The idea that there is no way to prove his technology via open disclosure and defend it via “prior art” claims or a patent which includes details for reproduction is patently (pun intended) absurd. Rossi is just playing cat and mouse with us all. Hopefully, the next report will prove me overly cynical.

    Besides, a technology amenable to a few “garage” invetors is not like a railroad (ie monopoly granted to a few industrialists) or moon shot, involving more risk or scale than the private sector can sustain.

    Virtually everything government touches turns into over-regulated, over-priced, monopoly-favoring crap. Oh, but what about the roads? Yes, endless slabs of petroleum we drive on with petroleum burning machines on temporary petroleum tires, subsided by unending mega-taxation: no veiled interest here.

    Best thing govt. can do for E-Cat is get out of the way, which of course they will not do. They must wet their beak; they must protect and enrich their cronies. If it does increase worker productivity, the Fed will spend that productivity with increased counterfeiting, as they have done for decades, devouring the fruits of most productivity gains with devalued purchasing power.

    If-and-when the dam breaks, all of the usual suspects will rush for taxpayer money to do their research and weaponization anyway.

    It will be taxed, regulated, sequestered, militarized, governmentized.

    • Bernie777

      Right, we should all find a man cave, only allow the mail man in once a month with our SS checks. (:

      • Private Citizen

        You mean the mailman who makes higher than private sector wages with generous perks and retirement for virtually unskilled labor, working for an insolvent antiquated agency delivering money extorted from you all your working life, and depending upon how long you live, you might possibly make 1% on investment? You mean that Social Security whose trust fund was looted by Greenspan and Clinton long ago and is now a cespool of unpaid iou’s? You mean that Social Security which soon will have 1 retiree for ever two working wage slaves, contributing to the over $60 trillion in unfunded liabilities the govt. has over-promised? Right.

        • Bernie777

          No, the SS trust fund which is invested in US Treasury bills and bonds, which are the highest rated financial instruments in the world. No, the USPO which sends my packages for under 5.00 while I am being charged 15.00 for the same package at Fedex, it is the same USPO that is being run out of business by Republican nuts by forcing them to pay 100% of their pension liability immediately, the same USPO being forced out of business by Republicans on the take from Fedex and UPS lobbyists. No, the SS system that I bet is keeping you or a member of your family out of poverty.

          • Private Citizen

            There is no law against you investing in US Treasuries with your own money; you would likely get a higher rate than SS will provide long before you are nearly actuarially dead, and you can withdraw the money in an emergency or pass it to your heirs. Why you prefer extortion and forced investment is your own business.

            Secondly, the safety of US treasuries can quickly prove a myth when the economic house of cards collapses on the government. Many economists are calling Treasuries the greatest bubble of all time. As the appetite for that trash on the international market has cooled, the Fed is now the largest holder of it’s own toilet paper–printing from thin air and lending to the taxpayer. Oh, they’ll pay off those bonds in fiat paper just as fast as the printing press can run, when the fit hits the shan, Zimbabwe style.

            Before 2003, the PO was actually overfunding it’s retirement program do to incompetent government accounting practices. The Reep congress saw an opportunity to steal some money as well as force the PS to pay down some of its debt. It was government robbing government. There was vassilation on who should pay pensions for military who later became PS employees. Congress “fixed” the problem several times (it remained thusly “fixed” even after Obama and the Dem near-supermajority was elected).

            2011: The GAO acknowledges that “some stakeholders have argued that prefunding is primarily responsible for USPS’s dismal financial
            condition and is unfair, arguing that no other entity is required to
            conduct such prefunding.” The GAO, however, dismisses this argument.
            It cites a 2011 OPM Inspector General report that said postponing
            prefunding would be “financially risky,” and it says that significantly
            reducing the payments now will increase the possibility that the Postal
            Service won’t be able to make the larger payments that will come due
            decades from now.

            If I steal your money, then give a little back decades later, am i really a hero for keeping you out of poverty?

          • Bernie777

            Why do you state opinions that are totally against your own economic interests? I am willing to bet you are not a millionaire and will never be millionaire, yet you parrot the Republican trickle down line of fallacious economic thought. The current Republican Party and leadership have proven time and again they represent the economic interests of the most wealthy among us. Case in point, the Republican’s creation of the “carried interest” tax loop hole (Google “carried interest Wikipedia”) and their continued support for this ridiculous tax break for the most wealthy individuals in our society. Most recently Republicans passed a bill that
            gives foreign corporations a US Federal loan guarantee to help GE sell more jet engines, and GE pays -0- US corporate income tax!!! I would love to get a 1% mortgage loan!! Fedex and UPS are lobbying Republicans hard to bankrupt the USPO, we will then start paying big time for postal services. Believe me this is only an example of
            hundreds other tax breaks and economic advantages the current Republican Party bestows on wealthy individuals and corporations. Please, vote and comment for your own economic interests.

  • Private Citizen

    Government shouldn’t be “funding” (redistributing borrowed, printed or extorted money to favored interests) 99% of what it does fund.

    Certainly not E-Cat. If Rossi needed more private capital, all he would have to do is show a little more skin and the $billions would pour in. The idea that there is no way to prove his technology via open disclosure and defend it via “prior art” claims or a patent which includes details for reproduction is patently (pun intended) absurd. Rossi is just playing cat and mouse with us all. Hopefully, the next report will prove me overly cynical.

    Besides, a technology amenable to a few “garage” invetors is not like a railroad (ie monopoly granted to a few industrialists) or moon shot, involving more risk or scale than the private sector can sustain.

    Virtually everything government touches turns into over-regulated, over-priced, monopoly-favoring crap. Oh, but what about the roads? Yes, endless slabs of petroleum we drive on with petroleum burning machines on temporary petroleum tires, subsided by unending mega-taxation: no veiled interest here.

    Best thing govt. can do for E-Cat is get out of the way, which of course they will not do. They must wet their beak; they must protect and enrich their cronies. If it does increase worker productivity, the Fed will spend that productivity with increased counterfeiting, as they have done for decades, devouring the fruits of most productivity gains with devalued purchasing power.

    If-and-when the dam breaks, all of the usual suspects will rush for taxpayer money to do their research and weaponization anyway.

    It will be taxed, regulated, sequestered, militarized, governmentized.

    • Bernie Koppenhofer

      Right, we should all find a man cave, only allow the mail man in once a month with our SS checks. (:

      • Private Citizen

        You mean the mailman who makes higher than private sector wages with generous perks and retirement for virtually unskilled labor, working for an insolvent antiquated agency delivering money extorted from you all your working life, and depending upon how long you live, you might possibly make 1% on investment? You mean that Social Security whose trust fund was looted by Greenspan, Gingrich and Clinton long ago and is now a cespool of unpaid iou’s? You mean that Social Security which soon will have 1 retiree for ever two working wage slaves, contributing to the over $60 trillion in unfunded liabilities the govt. has over-promised? Right.

        • bachcole

          I’m pretty certain that that is the Social Security that he was referring to, the one invented because FDR thought that most workers were too stupid and irresponsible to put away savings for their retirement.

          • Private Citizen

            When FDR instituted SS, the tax was a mere 1% of income on only the upper 1% bracket, and the retirement age exceeded average life expectancy.

          • Bernie Koppenhofer

            The SS system was designed as a “social security” system to insure as long as you lived you would live in dignity. In its 80 year history It has out lived at least ten assults on individual designed “retirement accounts” that have been devastated by our Wall Street friends.

          • bachcole

            That is because government dependence encourages people to vote for government largess. I would be screwed, blued, and tattooed without Social Security, but perhaps that it because I knew that I could depend upon it when I retired. If I didn’t know that it was there, then I might have worked a lot harder to save and invest more.

        • Bernie Koppenhofer

          No, the SS trust fund which is invested in US Treasury bills and bonds, which are the highest rated financial instruments in the world. No, the USPO which sends my packages for under 5.00 while I am being charged 15.00 for the same package at Fedex, it is the same USPO that is being run out of business by Republican nuts by forcing them to pay 100% of their pension liability immediately, the same USPO being forced out of business by Republicans on the take from Fedex and UPS lobbyists. No, the SS system that I bet is keeping you or a member of your family out of poverty.

          • bachcole

            I always choose UPS over USPS, not because I have an ideological ax to grind, but because they do better service for less price.

            In most of my dealings with the federal government I have been very disappointed. I “studied” COBOL with the Regional Occupational Program, or ROP. What a howler that was. I also studied electronic technology at Heald, basically a private trade school. What a difference!!!! I could go on and on. The government people want to get to work at 10:00 A.M. and leave work at 3:00 P.M. There is very little accountability.

          • Bernie Koppenhofer

            Ask UPS to deliver your next letter for under 50 cents.

          • bachcole

            I always do USPS for letters. I always to UPS or FedEx for packages, if I can.

          • Bernie Koppenhofer

            Right, FedEx and UPS have lobbied themselves into huge profits. Four of the top men at FedEx make 35 million a year!!!

          • bachcole

            I don’t give a rat’s ass how much they make. And they didn’t lobby themselves into anything; they made it delivering an excellent product; their parcel service is far superior to USPS. I am sorry for you that you are consumed by envy for rich people. There is a reason that envy is one of the seven deadly sins; see how it distorts your emotions and perspective. When Rossi becomes filthy rich, are you going to hate his guts also.

          • Private Citizen

            There is no law against you investing in US Treasuries with your own money; you would likely get a higher rate than SS will provide long before you are nearly actuarially dead, and you can withdraw the money in an emergency or pass it to your heirs. Why you prefer extortion and forced investment is your own business.

            Secondly, the safety of US treasuries can quickly prove a myth when the economic house of cards collapses on the government. Many economists are calling Treasuries the greatest bubble of all time. As the appetite for that trash on the international market has cooled, the Fed is now the largest holder of its own toilet paper–printing from thin air and lending to the taxpayer. Oh, they’ll pay off those bonds in fiat paper just as fast as the printing press can run, when the fit hits the shan, Zimbabwe style.

            Before 2003, the PO was actually overfunding its retirement program do to incompetent government accounting practices. The Reep congress saw an opportunity to steal some money as well as force the PS to pay down some of its debt. It was government robbing government. There was vassilation on who should pay pensions for military who later became PS employees. Congress “fixed” the problem several times (it remained thusly “fixed” even after Obama and the Dem near-supermajority was elected).

            Near Christmas, when the private carriers are logically adding employees and running to help you thru the door with your parcels, try the old PS (POS?) who say wait in line, sucker. Ironically, the incompetent USPS outsources to private FedEx much of its air cargo, while FexEx and UPS fob off much unprofitable ground cargo on the USPS and the taxpayer.

            2011: The GAO acknowledges that “some stakeholders have argued that prefunding is primarily responsible for USPS’s dismal financial
            condition and is unfair, arguing that no other entity is required to
            conduct such prefunding.” The GAO, however, dismisses this argument.
            It cites a 2011 OPM Inspector General report that said postponing
            prefunding would be “financially risky,” and it says that significantly
            reducing the payments now will increase the possibility that the Postal
            Service won’t be able to make the larger payments that will come due
            decades from now.

            If I steal your money, then give a little back decades later, am i really a hero for keeping you out of poverty?

          • Bernie Koppenhofer

            Why do you state opinions that are totally against your own economic interests? I am willing to bet you are not a millionaire and will never be millionaire, yet you parrot the Republican trickle down line of fallacious economic thought. The current Republican Party and leadership have proven time and again they represent the economic interests of the most wealthy among us. Case in point, the Republican’s creation of the “carried interest” tax loop hole (Google “carried interest Wikipedia”) and their continued support for this ridiculous tax break for the most wealthy individuals in our society. Most recently Republicans passed a bill that
            gives foreign corporations a US Federal loan guarantee to help GE sell more jet engines, and GE pays -0- US corporate income tax!!! I would love to get a 1% mortgage loan!! Fedex and UPS are lobbying Republicans hard to bankrupt the USPO, we will then start paying big time for postal services. Believe me this is only an example of
            hundreds other tax breaks and economic advantages the current Republican Party bestows on wealthy individuals and corporations. Please, vote and comment for your own economic interests.

          • bachcole

            So you admit that you are voting according to your perceived individual interests and not the interests of the nation as a whole. This is class warfare, not national interest. If the nation goes down because of class warfare, then I and my family also goes down. North Korea vs. South Korea. East Germany vs. West Germany. The choice is simple.

          • Bernie Koppenhofer

            You do not believe in the free market? The free market is all about voting for your own economic interests

          • bachcole

            Your comment is a non sequitor. I do believe in the free market; that was exactly my point. I vote not according to how much money I can steal from rich people via governmental power but according to what will be best for the country.

      • bachcole

        For 45 years I was going to invest a bunch of money each paycheck into the private sector but the government insisted upon taking it in the form of Social Security taxes. And my employer was going to invest another bunch of money for me into my 401k plan, but the government forced him into paying social security taxes for me. So, the bottom line is that we paid a bunch of financial retards to use our money foolishly for 45 years when I could have taken responsibility for myself and probably done a better job, all of the while helping to grease the wheels of the economy. So, I don’t feel bad about demanding that the government do what they said that they were going to do with money that they stole from me and my employer.

  • clovis ray

    hi, guys, it’s becoming a delicate situation, i understand Dr. Rossi’s points, he probably wants to make as much profit as he can, to replace all he has lost, and then some.
    i sometimes wonder if anyone understands the implication of lenr, this is a great power that the tycoons will be fighting for control, it would seem we here at ECW are the only people on earth that has any idea as to what is going to happen to this planet . can lenr even be controlled, Dr. Rossi seems to handle it well enough, for me , but now it has been handed off to IH , like the one ring of power, it exacts a stressful condition on humans, who can be trusted?, i say only god.

    • Ophelia Rump

      Not all gods are trustworthy, or even friendly. I dare say most are neither.
      If you take away the word god with all it’s cultural context and say an entity with superior abilities to your own and unpredictable wants and needs you would get an entirely different reaction from society. Gods would be considered a direct threat to most.

      Be careful what you wish for.

      • clovis ray

        O Rump.
        that’s true for the world, but i am true to only one god, and our relationship is the only thing that matters to me, all things are possible through Christ, and to me he is the way the truth and the life. he is the embodiment of love, which i believe will unite us all at the end of this old world of ignorance. and a new enlighten age is upon us, we must, try our hardest to keep this device safe for the masses.

        • Ophelia Rump

          Safe Journey. I have always found that when in a lifeboat, there are no passengers.

          Your sentiment seems driven buy Buddhist influences, I like that combination. Optimism with self reliance and an eye toward self improvement.

    • C.

      From all that I have read, I get the impression that Andrea Rossi has deep faith in God. This, to me, indicates that he is probably a Catholic as he is a native of Italy.

      In order for him to maintain his faith he must do that which his faith requires: maintain his Catholic morals along with his Christian faith.

      That means that he will help Earth’s people as best he can in the way that he believes best.

      That being said, at this time of change in the economic flux, he is going by the time-test model of starting a company that’ll him profits which he can use for himself or the betterment of others’ lives.

      I hope he succeeds in helping the third world.

  • clovis ray

    hi, guys, it’s becoming a delicate situation, i understand Dr. Rossi’s points, he probably wants to make as much profit as he can, to replace all he has lost, and then some.
    i sometimes wonder if anyone understands the implication of lenr, this is a great power that the tycoons will be fighting for control, it would seem we here at ECW are the only people on earth that has any idea as to what is going to happen to this planet . can lenr even be controlled, Dr. Rossi seems to handle it well enough, for me , but now it has been handed off to IH , like the one ring of power, it exerts a stressful condition on humans, and who can be trusted? with this all powerful energy device, i say only god.

    • Ophelia Rump

      Not all gods are trustworthy, or even friendly. I dare say most are neither.
      If you take away the word god with all it’s cultural context and say an entity with superior abilities to your own and unpredictable wants and needs you would get an entirely different reaction from society. Gods would be considered a direct threat to most.

      Be careful what you wish for.

      • clovis ray

        O Rump.
        that’s true for the world, but i am true to only one god, and our relationship is the only thing that matters to me, all things are possible through Christ, and to me he is the way the truth and the life. he is the embodiment of love, which i believe will unite us all at the end of this old world of ignorance. and a new enlighten age is upon us, we must, try our hardest to keep this device safe for the masses.

        • Ophelia Rump

          Safe Journey. I have always found that when in a lifeboat, there are no passengers.

          Your sentiment seems driven by Buddhist influences, I like that combination. Optimistic Christianity with self reliance and an eye toward self improvement. And it is one of the three paths which you referred to, The Way, The Truth and The Light, or perhaps all three. The distinctions seem completely blurred in modern times. I recall a long lost historical reference to one of those paths being Buddhism.

          All three religions focus great importance upon the The Way, The Truth and The Light. Christianity, Buddhism, and Hinduism.

          Your particular belief system seems to be a variant which says Life instead of Light. There is probably an interesting story behind that.

          • bachcole

            OR, I guarantee that you are going to get whacked by CR or others because of your spiritual/universal interpretation of CR’s beliefs. (:->) But I like it.

          • Ophelia Rump

            Their Elders will run before me shouting heretic, unable to defend themselves from an onslaught of insight and truth. There is no defense against the way of truth and light.

            The beauty of it is I do not need to speak about one single belief, I have only to point out the obvious which you were never aware of.

            I am actually not into religion. I am walking my own path. So I do not know where that road leads. There were not the resources when I was on that path, so I left it long ago. With this internet thing, it might be possible to recover the entire religion of origin if all three inner circles of the belief system have been made public. Of course you also need to be ready for that truth or you will not accept it. That is the entire purpose of all the lower levels of the three religions. You must be initiated in and elevated to the inner ring of each of the three. They reserved that honor for Jesus Christ, if my tale is to be believed. You or I would have little chance of penetrating the core of three religions.
            So it is probably a fools mission to follow this trail. I just like an interesting tale.

          • Christina

            In the temple at Jerusalem at the time of Jesus Christ were three door above one was inscribed “The Way,” above the second door, “The Truth” and above the third door, “The Life.” These inscriptions referred to God. When Jesus said this he was saying that He was God.

            I read apologetic Christian literature so while it may happen to be Buddhist, it was inscribed in the Temple at Jerusalem before Jesus Christ was born.

          • Ophelia Rump

            That is really interesting, about the doors in the temple.
            It probably signifies that either they were waiting for his arrival, or that location was a crucial hub in a global network.

            It is Christian, Buddhist and Hindu, all three. Do a web search but replace Life with Light.

            Use Google and these sets of search terms. You will find that there is some relationship here which is not described very well.

            Buddhist way truth light

            Hindu way truth light

            Christian way truth light

            Christain way truth life

            During the period of his life between being the Christ Child and returning from his education, where did he go and who did he study with?

            I have read one account of a group called the Traveler Kings, who it is said encompassed all three religions, wealthy men would give up their wealth to the organization and travel the world for the group, their needs provided for wherever they went, respected and cared for globally but without any wealth of their own.
            .
            Supposedly this was the origin of the three wise men story. I have only come across the one reference so I have no idea of it’s validity.

            Those doors would therefore have stood for the three paths to enlightenment. Which appears to have been a single belief system spread globally much along the lines of sufic wisdom where you share with people what enlightenment they are ready for. The religion would have had three distinct versions perhaps each with a portion of the entire truth. Whichever was most suitable for that society. If that were the case then only by training in all three religions could you fulfill the complete path to total enlighenment.

            Do it! The true elders of the gentle race left you a message, it is waiting.
            They embedded the same core belief system in all three religions.
            Look at the belief systems which come up for each search.
            Knowledge comes to you when you are ready for it, be there for it’s arrival.

            Oh and I sort of misstated something, the third religion was not Christian, it could not have possibly been. It was Jewish.

            You should probably search that too, and try to figure out what the origin religion was before you try to figure out how Christianity fits into the current array. It is possible that the whole Christ event was the formal insertion of their oversight into an already existing religion. Then the Jewish religion would not have those tenants.

            The fact which you revealed that the words were part of the temple, suggests that it was not the introduction of this unified religion into the Jewish faith but that they were already part.

    • Christina

      From all that I have read, I get the impression that Andrea Rossi has deep faith in God. This, to me, indicates that he is probably a Catholic as he is a native of Italy.

      In order for him to maintain his faith he must do that which his faith requires: maintain his Catholic morals along with his Christian faith.

      That means that he will help Earth’s people as best he can in the way that he believes best.

      That being said, at this time of change in the economic flux, he is going by the time-test model of starting a company that’ll him profits which he can use for himself or the betterment of others’ lives.

      I hope he succeeds in helping the third world.

      • Christina

        By the way, Frank, why does the computer now call me “C” when it has called me “Christina” for the last two years I’ve been commenting here? Go figure!

        They say women are mysterious. We have nothing on computers.

  • clovis ray

    what is it about unlimited free power, that needs funding, i don’t get it.

    • Ophelia Rump

      That is an excellent point!

      If you have it, all you have to do is sell the energy output to gain funding . It is a bottomless pit of wealth.

  • clovis ray

    what is it about unlimited free power, that needs funding, i don’t get it.

    • Ophelia Rump

      That is an excellent point!

      If you have it, all you have to do is sell the energy output to gain funding . It is a bottomless pit of wealth. That is not the most altruistic approach, and it is not the optimal approach to wealth acquisition either. But that is an excellent worst case scenario business plan.

  • Ophelia Rump

    That would be an interesting relationship, I think the name was probably too restrictive for what what technologies they are able to give internships to students for at Triangle Park.
    Yes Industrial Heat may host some of the universities internships. How great an experience would that be for a student? I think internships with IH are likely.
    A more direct relationship would be less likely but may be possible or could grow from internships.

  • georgehants

    Very little funding needed if as below you git rid of all the expensive and time wasting experts, who just try and force old outdated knowledge on the young and instead use young able people with new ideas.
    ———
    Best-ever efficiency points to clean, green gas-diesel engine
    “Putting this in the test car was a major project. It’s amazing that a bunch of students
    could do this and make it work,” says Reitz. “I worked for six years at
    GM, and hundreds of engineers would be needed for a project like this.”
    http://phys.org/news/2014-07-best-ever-efficiency-green-gas-diesel.html

    • Ophelia Rump

      Georgehants you may have the start of a strategy there. Like the dawn of the computer age. This technology will need an entire generation of engineers to bring it forward.

      The government should invest heavily in N.C. State University’s Centennial Campus, Engineering department. Maybe in all of N.C.’s Universities engineering departments.

      That would be the sound place to invest, in education, where the best minds can become associated directly with the technology through internships.

      • georgehants

        Ophelia, you would need to do the almost impossible and find some teachers, uncorrupted with the modern holy doctrine of deny and debunk everything that Newton never discovered.
        How would you find some that would teach the young to follow Evidence and not “expert bloody opinion” such as with Cold Fusion.

        • Ophelia Rump

          If I were the University I would already be looking for them. Their school could exert dominance over the entire energy industry of the future.

          There are good people out there, all to often they have no choice but to go along with party lines. When the lines move they will be standing there waiting.

          • georgehants

            Of course you are correct but these good guys must start to make a big noise for things to change.
            The young who hear a rumour about Cold Fusion cannot even go to a site like Wiki-rubbish and find uncorrupted data.
            This site is one of the few places in the World where honest information can be found.
            Is that not crazy and a horrific reflection on science.
            What a Wonderful thought, our young students going to a University and being told to let their minds run free, to question everything, to follow Evidence not “opinion”.
            What a good World that would be.
            Dreams, I think.

          • Ophelia Rump

            They have a large impact, if a small audience.

            The rest is a balance which each of us must workout for ourselves.
            It is unfortunate that the merchants of the world have their thumbs upon the scales tipping the balance in their favor.

          • Owen Geiger

            Hands-on, student-centered, project based learning has excellent potential. For instance, many schools participate in solar car competitions.

            John Taylor Gatto, three time NY City teacher of the year, explains why public schools are failing miserably. Watch his videos on YouTube. One video series is about what students learn in elite private schools. (Hint: it’s nothing like public school.)
            http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=11g9Tnmvo3Q

          • georgehants

            Thank you Owen, any news of good open-minded, honest teaching in science is welcome.
            That’s where the brainwashing starts that leads to closed-minded, incompetent scientists.

  • georgehants

    Very little funding needed if as below you git rid of all the expensive and time wasting experts, who just try and force old outdated knowledge on the young and instead use young able people with new ideas.
    ———
    Best-ever efficiency points to clean, green gas-diesel engine
    “Putting this in the test car was a major project. It’s amazing that a bunch of students
    could do this and make it work,” says Reitz. “I worked for six years at
    GM, and hundreds of engineers would be needed for a project like this.”
    http://phys.org/news/2014-07-best-ever-efficiency-green-gas-diesel.html

    • Ophelia Rump

      Georgehants you may have the start of a strategy there. Like the dawn of the computer age. This technology will need an entire generation of engineers to bring it forward.

      The government should invest heavily in N.C. State University’s Centennial Campus, Engineering department. Maybe in all of N.C.’s Universities engineering departments.

      That would be the sound place to invest, in education, where the best minds can become associated directly with the technology through internships.

      • georgehants

        Ophelia, you would need to do the almost impossible and find some teachers, uncorrupted with the modern holy doctrine of deny and debunk everything that Newton never discovered.
        How would you find some that would teach the young to follow Evidence and not “expert bloody opinion” such as with Cold Fusion.

        • Ophelia Rump

          If I were the University I would already be looking for them. Their school could exert dominance over the entire energy industry of the future.

          There are good people out there, all to often they have no choice but to go along with party lines. When the lines move they will be standing there waiting.

          • georgehants

            Of course you are correct but these good guys must start to make a big noise for things to change.
            The young who hear a rumour about Cold Fusion cannot even go to a site like Wiki-rubbish and find uncorrupted data.
            This site is one of the few places in the World where honest information can be found.
            Is that not crazy and a horrific reflection on science.
            What a Wonderful thought, our young students going to a University and being told to let their minds run free, to question everything, to follow Evidence not “opinion”.
            What a good World that would be.
            Dreams, I think.

          • Ophelia Rump

            They have a large impact, if a small audience.

            The rest is a balance which each of us must workout for ourselves.
            It is unfortunate that the merchants of the world have their thumbs upon the scales tipping the balance in their favor.

            Dreams, perhaps, but good dreams. What hope is there in a life with out hope. Dream on.

          • Owen Geiger

            Hands-on, student-centered, project based learning has excellent potential. For instance, many schools participate in solar car competitions.

            John Taylor Gatto, three time NY City teacher of the year, explains why public schools are failing miserably. Watch his videos on YouTube. One video series is about what students learn in elite private schools. (Hint: it’s nothing like public school.)
            http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=11g9Tnmvo3Q

          • georgehants

            Thank you Owen, any news of good open-minded, honest teaching in science is welcome.
            That’s where the brainwashing starts that leads to closed-minded, incompetent scientists.

        • Hector McNuget

          as non-sciencetits, I must say you’re naked hate of fields of sciences shows deeply. Why so much anger ? Is you not aware of any scinces discoveries post-Newton?

  • E-CAT suomi

    There is no reason to support LENR, many respective labs have reported positive results since 1979 and there is indeed something goin on. The problem is scientists that have lost their best learning stage have fulfilled the seats in decicion. They just say, no it’s not possible because it breaks all the physics laws without even investigating the matter.

  • malkom700

    All the breakthrough depends on when presented of a uniformly active equipment. There are obvious problems with this. Public funding LENR research also depends on, but should not be like this.

    .

  • malkom700

    All the breakthrough depends on when presented of a uniformly active equipment. There are obvious problems with this. Public funding LENR research also depends on, but should not be like this.

    .

  • Alain Samoun

    What has been demonstrated so far, look like to me prototypes,far from a
    finished product. To have the real product or, better, a line of
    products worldwide, it will be necessary to go thru a development phase that may
    take a long time,that we don’t have, and capital. Because,contrary to what some people say
    here,for an endeavor so big – the development and distribution of a new fire – it will be
    necessary to have governments’ support,organization and capital.

    Nothing big in my generation: From the man on the moon,the microchip,the
    internet,the ISS to even new medicines, has been done by not
    involving the government one way or another.

  • Ophelia Rump

    I think back fondly to my breakfasts at the Dennys in Bahrain. As grotesque an imitation of a diner breakfast as that was.

  • Alan DeAngelis

    You have a gift for logic.

  • Private Citizen

    When FDR instituted SS, the tax was a mere 1% of income on only the upper 1% bracket, and the retirement age exceeded average life expectancy.

    • Bernie777

      The SS system was designed as a “social security” system to insure as long as you lived you would live in dignity. In its 80 year history It has out lived at least ten assults on individual designed “retirement accounts” that have been devastated by our Wall Street friends.

  • Bernie777

    Ask UPS to deliver your next letter for under 50 cents.

  • Ophelia Rump

    That is really interesting, It is Christian, Buddhist and Hindu, all three. Do a web search but replace Life with Light.

    Use these sets of search terms. You will find that there is some relationship here which is not described very well.

    Buddhist way truth light

    Hindu way truth light

    Christian way truth light

    Christain way truth life

    During the period of his life between being the Christ Child and returning from his education, where did he go and who did he study with?

    I have read one account of a group called the Traveler Kings, who it is said encompassed all three religions, wealthy men would give up their wealth to the organization and travel the world for the group.

    Supposedly the origin of the three wise men story. I have only come across the one reference so I have no idea of it’s validity.

  • Ophelia Rump

    Their Elders will run before me shouting heretic, unable to defend themselves from my onslaught of insights and truths. I have been shouted at “blasphemer” before. There is no defense against the way of truth and light.

  • Bernie777

    You do not believe in the free market? The free market is all about voting for your own economic interests

  • Bernie777

    Right, FedEx and UPS have lobbied themselves into huge profits. Four of the top men at FedEx make 35 million a year!!!