Piantelli Patent Revoked by European Patent Office after Leonardo Corp Opposition

Documents posted on the European Patent Office’s Patent Register show that a patent that had been previously granted of Italian inventor Francesco Piantelli has now been revoked after opposition from Andrea Rossi’s Leonardo Corporation.

The patent is titled “Method and Apparatus for Generating Energy by Nuclear Reactions of Hydrogen Adsobred by Orbital Capture on a Nanocrystalline Structure of a Metal”.

All documents connected with this patent can be found here: https://register.epo.org/application?number=EP12728780&lng=en&tab=doclist

This document contains the revocation decision: https://register.epo.org/application?documentId=E0116UAJ7368DSU&number=EP12728780&lng=en&npl=false

Leonardo Corporation opposed the patent on the grounds of: “lack of novelty, inventive step and industrial application” and “the patent does not disclose the invention in a manner sufficiently clear and complete for it to be carried out by a person skilled in the art”, both of which are required according to European patent law.

This document provides the grounds for the decision, and includes evidence from Leonardo as to why they contend the patent is invalid. https://register.epo.org/application?documentId=E0116UGI9854DSU&number=EP12728780&lng=en&npl=false

It shows that Rossi and Leonardo have been very thorough and aggressive in trying to assert supremacy in the IP field, and this would have to be considered a win for them. These documents do state however that the decision of revocation can be appealed, and it is very possible that Piantelli’s team will do that.

  • Warthog

    LOL. I think a strong argument can be made that Rossi’s patent has all the same supposed flaws as that of Piantelli.

    • Obvious

      And the declaration to the USPTO that one of the small Doral units, (rebuilt and owned by IH, barely used, and supposedly not even working properly) was a domestic boiler that was “climatizing” the warehouse/laboratory space, which was somehow also the “point of sale”, jeopardizes the Cat and Ball trademark.

  • roseland67

    Both of the above points are required by European patent law, then why was the patent granted in the first place?

  • I mean… it’s a highly evolved scam that would fight patent battles, isn’t it pathoskeps?

    • Ophelia Rump

      Why not? Patents even bad ones can be worth a fortune when someone else succeeds and your patent has priority. Most of patent law seems to be a bogus legal game of king of the hill these days. Fortunes are made and lost in that game with no technical effort at all.

      I am not saying that the E-Cat is a fraud, but your statement seems naive to me.

      • Because their patent would only be valid if they have a working device (reproducible by those with knowledge of the field…). If they are running a scam and do not have a working device it means that there is exactly zero chance that they could defend that patent against a real company with a real working device.

        They would know this, and therefore one presumes they would not bother.

        Unless like I said it’s just an uber scam that is willing to spend their hard earned scam money to bolster the tangential concern of their phony IP position in order to attract the next victims.

  • Ophelia Rump

    Somebody needs a public demonstration that their own patents work.
    And another successful one by an independent replicator.

    • Warthog

      I believe at least Brillouin has reached that status. Certainly they have independent replication by a very reputable organization and researcher (SRI/McKubre).

      • Ophelia Rump

        I don’t think that anyone has independently replicated Dottore Rossi’s work. An argument can be made that people skilled in the art have tried and that his patents have not been enough to go on.

        I think he had better rectify that situation before that stone he just threw ricochets.

        • Bob Greenyer

          Parkhomov seemingly replicated Rossi’s work – however he has not seen the Ni and Li transmutations.

          Parkhomov, as I reported in my Asti presentation, has replicated straight Ni + H and therefore, Piantellis work.

          • Ophelia Rump

            But not the device as patented.

  • Bob Greenyer

    And so it goes on. Only public release of the science will ensure wide adoption. What I realised in March was, this has already been done and THAT is why they will not grant practical patents, will cause problems for anyone involved, like divert them or make it hard to get funding or tie them up in legal knots. We have all been looking at this the wrong way.

    This effort by Tom DeLonge really cements this view I formed in March, whilst his effort seams a good one, given that he admits that all the spooks in TTS are “… quasi-retired … they are current consultants to the intelligence community” and that “The the idea is to work with the department of defence, to create a portal…” one might be forgiven for asking if TTS is a herding organisation to take peoples funds, time and attention and feed them a portion of the truth – TDL admits that he does not think that all the information should be made public.

    Joe Rogan interview with Tom DeLonge – Partial transcript

    Key comments from the interview show that Tom DeLonge does seem to know or at least is aware of some aspect of the coming revelations.

    – Antigravity
    – Conscious control of matter
    – On ElectroGravitic Propulsion
    – On origins of man
    – On why the existing technology has not seen the light of day
    – On over unity


    • Ophelia Rump

      And when you tie it all together with all the other comical fringe conspiracy science fiction technologies, you auto self discredit. The perfect circle of paranoid conspiracy theory branding.

      Don’t even go near the edge, they want you to step over it.

      • Bob Greenyer

        Erm, You speak of things of which I do not talk, saying shill-like comments that are the modern day de-facto go-tos to mock people. Where has people’s critical thinking gone?

        I have been witnessing this from the inside – I have had to fight the tactics hard from 2014 and work fast, all before I came to the conclusions I did at the end of February. It took huge mental strength to deal with the realisation, it became clear to me that most people cannot deal with it and the facts have to be dripped out. I and other active members of the MFMP are working as fast as we can as volunteers.

        When I was told late last year that the only way this technology was going to be made public was through the MFMP (implying open process) by someone that should know of its reality, I thought it a little strange. By end February, I utterly knew why.

        Now you have one of the very same people (who I rote to in early February having hit upon at least a working overview of the process and before I realised the dark reality of its former use) who has materially supported the MFMP over years, on the panel of TTS – and the specific use of the phrase ‘electrogravitic’ – that person knows they have to get back control of this.

        What I did today in my blog was to just transcribe the important phrases of what TDL said, nothing more, nothing less.

        It is SO frustrating to see people think they have discovered something new, when they haven’t, they have discovered something eternal, that actually has been discovered multiple times, even in human history – and again in the last century. It is so much EGO that is getting in the way.

        Rossi, me356, Mills, Suhas Ralkar etc.- they have to just put it out there, in its entirety, otherwise they’ll just realise they were being played (though the evidence is, one of those is sanctioned). Even Piantelli holds secrets, They are all tinkering on the edges of this – sporadically observing some of the wide and varied possible phenomena, when if they were working together, great things could be achieved for all.

        As a co-worker of Rossi once quoted Phillip K Cick – “I have seen things you people would not believe”

        • Ophelia Rump

          I only mentioned what is tied to the things you listed in the public consciousness. I am not your enemy. I am providing honest unfiltered feedback.

          You are walking too close to the edge with your statement my friend.

          • Bob Greenyer

            I, have only said what I have said, not what you want to associate with what I have said and I reserve my right to update my understanding and modify my position as new facts and evidence becomes available. When you ‘get it’ try to reflect on how you feel.

            What I said earlier this year is now being corroborated by several senior ‘quasi retired’, ‘current consultants to the [US] intelligence agencies’ at the top of the US black ops programs, that sat on the same stage as, and did not stop or contradict what TDL is and has said. I have had to face people sitting or standing in front of me and telling me, in no uncertain terms, that I need to stop what I am talking about – can you imagine what that feels like?

            I said these things in March and have been peace-meal laying out the components, as I can, of how you can know and come to terms with the truth of this reality in time. TDL said in this interview that he says there are things that he has seen that he agrees should never be made public – what, seriously? That is akin to just showing us what they want to show us – definition of a limited hang out. We, as a community, have to force them to reveal all or do it ourselves.

            I appreciate your feedback – but please, keep it to things I actually say rather than conflating things that I have not said out of miss-placed concern. Mr Abd Ul-Rahman Lomax did that earlier in the year, and I thank him for his miss-guided character assassination/hit peace, because it caused me to make important connections I would not have made otherwise.

            As I touched in ‘CAB Story’ – Piantelli knows very well what this technology can do, and it scares him – it petrified Pons and Fleischmann, TDL in this interview said of this technology “it’s extraordinarily dangerous” – I have said many times this year, you need to give and to take and to treat it with utmost respect.

          • third times the charm

            Bob, this is a quote from you, above:

            “Tom DeLonge does seem to know or at least is aware of some aspect of the coming revelations.

            – Antigravity
            – Conscious control of matter
            – On ElectroGravitic Propulsion
            – On origins of man
            – On why the existing technology has not seen the light of day
            – On over unity”

            It is very easy to interpret those remarks as you endorsing the view that the listed phenomena will in someway be publicly revealed in the near future (“coming revelations”)

            Is that in fact your view? I believe you should firmly answer that “Yes, that is my view”, or “No, my view is … (explanation)”.

            And if that is your view, you need to be really sure that you are not indulging in grasping at self-existence and self-cherishing (“I, Bob, am so insightful and have such great access to hidden knowledge and secret sources of information”) at the expense of your very good, important and merit-accumulating work of helping bring LENR into the world.

            It doesn’t matter if you are “right”. There is no inherently existent “right”. There is only functional dependent origination.

            If you discredit yourself with 99% of the people, you risk decreasing the value you think you are creating for 1%.

            Is that the equation you choose?

            In all your sacrifices, still beware of pride.

          • Bob Greenyer

            John Hutchinson, Stoyan Sarg, Roger Shawyer – all demonstrated antigravity/propulsion, however, much earlier demonstrations of related effects were achieved by Tesla and then George Piggott and Tomas Townsend Brown leading to Project Winterhaven – this is all electro-gravitics (as previously avoided but now headlined in TDL presentation on TTS and this interview), given that this can also do other weird stuff like making metal glow without change in temperature as demonstrated by me356 and Suhas Ralkar and metal softening, as reported in varied sources, and transmutation, as observed by many sources – this leads to over-unity, as detailed by TDL. It can also do disintegration.

            I have never seen TDL do an experiment, though he may have, he is relying on his support team who likely know very well this is all possible. He is specifically saying that they will reveal these technologies – and given what I have written above and what I have seen with my own eyes, I do not see this as out of the realms of possibility.

            I don’t know if I am right, I am pretty sure I am annoyed that I gave up very well paid work, only to find out after 4.5 years of volunteering that what I have been trying to uncover is already solved and known by a selection of gate-keepers in various nations. It has for sure been weaponised, so there is no harm in disclosing it, however, I have said that I don’t know if it has been tamed for practical use and TDL in this interview is also suggesting that this may be the case. If this is actually the case, given the implications, it is more important than ever that we all work together to ensure that it is not the preserve of the few.

            As we all collectively get closer to the truth, over the target, I fully expect more character attacks like the disgraceful one perpetrated by Mr Abd Ul-Rahman Lomax earlier this year. I will still keep doing what I am doing regardless, attacking a person or group ads nothing to the advancement of science or understanding, it just reflects terribly on the impotence of the attacker or, maybe, their role in covering things for those that already covet or posses this knowledge.

            If I cared what people thought of me, I certainly would not have given my life to researching LENR. I am ashamed that I cannot find the energy or time to make public this information presented in a coherent way faster. I am doing what I can, as fast as I can whilst trying to be fair and responsible to my family.

            I know and have always known that I am an insignificant blip in the totally of mortal existence, I hold no delusions of grandeur – what I have, I give – this technology is not anyone’s to own, it is a gift of nature that should not be metered out, Tesla knew this, it is and should be as freely accessible as the air we all breathe. Sure, those people that make practical devices from the knowledge for the betterment of everything should be justly rewarded, but this technology has the power to corrupt because it is so ultimate, and it has done already.

            It has to be treated with respect and not abused.

          • Warthog

            It is always easier to “weaponize” a high energy technology than use it in a fully controlled way.

          • Bob Greenyer

            Sadly, yes.

        • Toussaint françois

          The bigger picture, is very hard to crasp for some well educated people.

          But I feel that this changing now, thanks to crowd funding and brilliant minds.

          • Bob Greenyer

            Only the people can do this for the people. Any gate-keepers will gate keep as the implications are too profound and difficult to fathom.

    • georgehants

      Afternoon Bob, keep waiting with bated breath, thanks for keeping the updates coming.

      • Bob Greenyer

        Giordano Bruno was clearly able to remote view.

    • Bob, excuse my ignorance but what does “TTS” stand for?

      • Bob Greenyer

        To the Stars Academy…


        Look at the team that have educated TDL on some of what is possible with ‘electrogravitics’ and stand behind him. Note that they are all still consultants to the US intelligence community having literally been at the top of their game in black-ops for best part of the last 50 years.

        It took them 3X longer to raise 1.15million for their approach than it did this community to pledge the same level of support to enable ECCO, it is just a shame that ego got in the way of taking ECCO forward.

        • Thanks Bob,
          Actually, in the interim, I googled my way from Tom Delonge to his interview by Joe Rogan to his book “Sekret Machines” and I’ve now started to read the Kindle version. Very absorbing so far.

          • Bob Greenyer

            Hi Phillip,

            I’d be interested to hear a summary – not read it myself, only learned of TDL when he launched this initiative.

          • OK – but it will take a while.

          • Bob Greenyer

            That’s ok, I have things to do.

          • Here is that summary below – in more or less “review” form. Long story short: well worth a read:

            “”Sekret Machines” by Tom DeLonge and A J Harley

            As a note on the cover describes it, this is “A Novel Based on Actual Events” – the authors are obeying the old rule that, “If you want to tell the truth, write a novel”. The bonus for all readers is that this is an exciting, absorbing, well written thriller, for which qualities we probably need to thank best selling author A. J. Hartly but the imaginative inspiration for it is undoubtely down to Tom De Longe.

            I had never heard of De Longe, nor his website http://www.tothestars.com until less than a week ago when Bob Greenyer mentioned him, together with his interview with Joe Rogan. This was a very probing interview and it was quickly clear why Rogan is one of the leading on-line interviewers and, equally, why Tom De Longe needed to be interiewed. In fact, I’d recommemd that everyone should view the whole of the Rogan – De Longe interview before buying and reading “Sekret Machines” – as I have done (with the Kindle Version).

            The book is only the first in a series of what will apparently be a set of books, films and documentaries all with the same focus – the UFO phenomenon in its full historical, scientific and technical context. In this first book, the authors create a set of four principle characters. The present-day ones are ace pilot Alan, rich English heiress Jennifer and skeptical New Yorker Timika who (at the start) is running a website which debunks popular myths. In many ways, however, the starring character is that of Jerzy, the Jewish boy at the start of World War 2, who, with his older brother finds himself a forced laborer on the “De Glocke” (The Bell) project – what some believe was the birth of a Nazi-based UFO. Naturally, Area 51 or “Dreamland” as insiders apparently call it, also becomes center stage.

            With all four princple characters, the authors take much the same “poetic license” that the “Forrest Gump” film does – that of placing them in more key places than is credible. But I think this is fair, in that there would have been equivalent if different characters at all these events. The chapters broadly jump from one key character to the next as the story unfolds and converges on a conclusion – for this first book at least.

            That said, the chapters are occasionally interspersed with more publically reported events like the Malstrom ICBM incident, where a UFO apparently shut down all ten misiles and did similar to nearby bases. The “Betty and Barney Hill” incident is also presented – when the couple were apparently kidnapped by aliens and lost several hours of time. The book also blends in the still rather mysterious expedition of Admiral Byrd to Antartica just after the war and offers its own, specific explanation.

            Some might say that the real “stars” of the book are the UFO’s or “Locusts” themselves. As to where the authors think they first originated, whether they were reverse engineered and flown by human pilots from one or more of the superpowers and similar issues are questions only partly answered in this first book of the series.

            But, again, this is not just a Sci-Fi thriller detined morph into a blockbuster movie franchise – as I’m sure it will. While Star Wars and Sci-Fi fans generaly will undoubtedly thrill to an IMAX version of test pilot Alan’s UFO dogfights with the “bad guys”, the serious and subliminal messages are clear enough: De Longe has gained the trust of insiders who were bound by official secrets acts not to reveal any of the amazing technology apparently locked away for the last 70+ years. As De Longe indicates in the Rogan interview, he has offered them a way to responsibly reveal at least some of this hidden progress in ways that the international community is now, finally, ready to receive. In this, it seems clear that what will also unfold are clear reasons why it needed to be hidden and why some of it must continue to be so for some time yet.

            But Bob, now replacing my book reviewer’s hat with my (ancient) physicist’s hat, I’d say that, if the TDL “revelations” are to be completely fulfilled it must mean that “they” have found a way of not just nullifying gravity but nullifying mass itself. That would have to be because the instantaneous changes in direction of Alan’s “Locust” is capable of would only be possible if there were some kind of “mass zeroing field” able to be set up around it.

          • Bob Greenyer

            Thankyou so much for both taking the time to read the book and to give such a succinct summary. All of the topics you say are included in the book I have become aware of since I gave my presentation in India. Your conclusion about negation of mass is spot on, that is to say, inertia and momentum are negated so instantaneous vector change is a reality. I have seen this as a child, but that is another story.

            Would you mind if I cross-posted this to my own blog with full credit?

          • Hi Bob,
            Thanks in turn – glad to have contributed to the open-science cause. Go right ahead and cross post it by all means.

          • Hello Again Bob (hope this reaches you). Here are some further points that have since occurred to me that might help to show that, given such a mass-nullifying field, very few other breakthroughs would be needed to explain the behavior of UFO’S:

            (To recap I am postulating that, if UFO’s do exist and do perform the way many witnesses have consistently described: hovering as if weightless but also accelerating and changing direction instantaneously – these abilities could only be due to the craft being able to sustain a field around itself which nullifies its mass. Note that a field that “only” nullifies GRAVITY would NOT be sufficient – it obviously would allow for hovering in a gravitational field but it could NOT exempt the craft from inertia itself. Only a MASS-nullifying field could enable hovering in a gravitational field AND the inertia-exempting feat of instantaneous acceleration.)

            But then we might wonder how such a craft could generate the force to make it move. Conventional propellants it might eject from a rocket nozzle run into the problem that the propellant, being initially inside the craft, would have no mass and therefore generate no Newtonian action/reaction, as rockets need to do.

            One very elegant answer might be to simply use strong light beams. Each photon has a small but non-zero momentum (equal to Planck’s constant, h, divided by the de Broglie wavelength of the light). This might help explain why UFO’s always seem to be shining light wherever they go – at least part of that light would be needed for propulsion. Of course, if the UFO wanted to “go dark” it could switch to microwaves which are invisible – and that might actually account for the way many vehicle engines stop when a UFO hovers over them. For a really rapid departure, the UFO could switch to emitting ultra-violet or higher frequency electromagnetic waves (which would have greater momentum thrust).

            I could go on: The postulated mass-nullifying field could probably be 100% applied or a little less than that. If the UFO pilot allowed his craft to retain a very small amount of mass, it could be held in a gravity-defying “float” by just an array of downward-pointing lights. And, recalling the tiny thrusters on the lunar module that Neil Armstrong had to play with so as to ease the Eagle lunar module down to the Moons’ surface, so the UFO pilot would need to “play” with his light “thrusters” in order to actually land and really scare the heck out of the witnesses!

            In any case, I submit that, while the generation of a total (or perhaps 99%) mass-nullifying field around a substantial object would quite obviously be a major break-though, VERY LITTLE ELSE in the way of break-through technology would be needed to account for everything that so many witnesses have reported over the decades.

          • Bob Greenyer

            Thankyou for your extended thoughts

            IMPO, they distort the structure of the physical vacuum as needed and control is will-driven, by consciousness. Just as you walk, run or drive a car – when you are doing these things, you don’t think about each muscle movement, the mode of translation is driven by intent.

          • Well, that’s what the book (which I’m guessing you have now read) indicates. But another point to ponder is that allowing a pilot to control a (conventional) aircraft with his mind is almost current technology. Yes, current models would require him to wear a series of neural sensors in a mesh over his head but thought-to-action technology is virtually here now. Certainly it is now possible for jet fighter pilots to point armaments just by looking in that direction and eye-tracking is in routine commercial use to log what products of interest consumers are looking at.

            So, I’d say that an intermediate step between the idea you express above and the use of the mind or eye to point “light thrusters” in the precise opposite direction to where the pilot’s eyes indicate he wants to go would be entirely feasible.

            How might that match what “Sekret Machines” has started to tell us? Let’s say (as the book virtually does) that either 1) the German scientists behind Die Glock who were transferred to the USA via Operation Paperclip did manage to construct a Mark 1 Locust and/or that 2) They and the Americans reversed engineered a crashed UFO (whether from Roswell or other less publicised events).

            That Mark 1 would have needed direct manual control of the light thrusters by perhaps many individual crew members. Later models would have placed all the thrusters into a central joystick control and, by the time we get to the Mark 70 (assuming one per year), then, yes, the type of control you cite would be feasible.

            Frank: Sorry for “gate-crashing” your party here but Bob’s bottom line, seems now to be that all this “UFO” technology AND LENR AND a lot of other breakthroughs have long since been made but that they are still being suppressed.

            Oh, and one more thing implied in the book – that the Soviets and now the Russians also have this technology. They might have followed their own “Paperclip-ski” path with their own captured Germans and maybe even their own “Roswell-ski”. But, remembering how good Stalin’s spy network was at stealing the Los Alamos secrets, I’d guess they would have used that much more direct path to their own “Locust-ski”.

          • Bob Greenyer

            Comment to follow.

          • Bruce__H

            Haven’t read the book. But as to aliens and alien controlled UFOs, a persuasive line of argument against their reality is that the number of convincing pictures showing them doing their thing has not recently skyrocketed.

            Smartphones with integrated cameras came on the market about a decade ago and are now massively popular. In addition, over the past decade, other type of inexpensive video equipment have become ubiquitous … security cameras, car dashcams, video recorders that cyclists wear on their helmets, bodycams worn by police … they are everywhere. We are now surrounded and saturated with video capture devices. So much so that I find it hard to estimate how many more videos device there are not than a decade age. If I say there are 10,000 times as many video devices in society now as opposed to 10 years ago would you think me wrong? Would you think I am on the low side.

            The huge proliferation of video devices has resulted in it being common for us to see formerly rare sights. Crashes, tragedies, earthquakes, comets, unusual cloud formations are now all available to us. I write this 2 days after baseball star Roy Halladay died while piloting his personal plane. Today we find posted on the internet a video taken by eyewitnesses who saw the crash and arrived on site almost right away. More may turn up. You can see the wreckage floating in the water. Exactly the sort of convincing photographic evidence that people have always desired to prove the true existence of alien UFOs!

            So my question is this. If the ubiquity of video coverage has intensified by thousands (or millions!) of times over the past decade then why has the convincing evidence of UFO activity not also risen accordingly? Video capture of rare real events like crashes and natural disasters has increased in pace with the rise of video coverage so why hasn’t UFO coverage? I submit that this is pretty persuasive evidence that UFOs and aliens are not real after all. I’d be interested to hear your viewpoint. .

          • Well, in no particular order:

            1) I just googled “ufo footage 2017” and got 16,400,000 results.

            2) Phone cameras and other consumer grade devices are optimized for taking selfies and other touristy stuff, not for the high quality capture and tracking of lights and objects in the night sky. The resolving power of their tiny lenses is low, the dynamic range for light is seldom on the right setting, the focus often fails to adjust to the near infinity required and the image stabilization is not designed for following high contrast lights in the sky which rapidly shift their bearings.

            3) When my friends do get excited about apparently snapping or filming a “UFO”, I bring out my tripod mounted binoculars and am invariably able to identify the helicopter, plane, chinese lantern, bird with white underbelly, Venus, you name it. The port and starboard lights give away most aircraft, although one coming straight into land with its forward facing light on can fool some. So, yes, 95% of sightings can be explained but that still leaves 5% or 820,000 this year so far.

            4) This (first) book seems to be suggesting that, whatever their original evolution, today’s craft have been designed and flown by human pilots (both US and Russian) – but they are not doing joy-rides – or not anymore. No more than SR 71’s or any of the hi-tech aircraft they having contantly testing and refining at Area 51. BTW, how many clear, mobile phone snaps of an SR 71 have you seen?

            5) If today’s model is something like the Mark 70 (reflecting 70+ years of development), it would obviously be much more reliable and much harder to detect than the Mark 1 and the earlier ones were.

            6) Don’t presume what the book says. You should take the time to read it and precede that with a look at the Rogan-De Longe interview – and then re-read my posts above.

            7) I repeat the central point I am making (versus your mostly statistical, circumstantial argument) – that “while the generation of a total (or perhaps 99%) mass-nullifying field around a substantial object would quite obviously be a major break-though, VERY LITTLE ELSE in the way of break-through technology would be needed to account for everything that so many witnesses have reported over the decades”.

          • Bruce__H

            The number of Google hits isn’t a good measure of the reality of something. Here are some Google results from searches I just did

            ufo footage 2017 – 8,130,000 results
            bigfoot footage 2017 – 6,290,000 results
            ghosts footage 2017 – 8,100,000 results
            meteorite footage 2017 – 4,2980,000 results
            airplane crash footage 2017 – 950,000 results

            If anything, this shows that undoubtedly real but rare events attract fewer hits than more dubious events.

            I agree that my argument is “mostly statistical, circumstantial”. But this is a virtue, not a weakness. I think you could this phrase by the word “empirical”. Like much of the activity surrounding the LENR field, your arguments are logical deductions extending from speculation. Although this is fine by itself, such arguments must either acquire empirical support at some point or be dropped. I have suggested a way to introduce an empirical dimension to your arguments. You would be foolish to ignore it.

          • Hmm, I’m not sure whether you regard eyewitnesses as contributors to the empirical evidence but here are some witnesses you might have heard of:


            – and are some pilots who were eyewitnesses:


            I’ve heard it said that most pilots have seen UFO’s but only some have braved the serious sanctions – like dismissal, demotion or derision – that usually follow reporting them. That may include the radar operators who have also detected them at the same time.

            Anyway, let’s see who else might want to comment.

          • Eyedoc

            Hmmmmm….like your last thought.

          • – Assuming you are referring to how a mass-nullifying field could allow the apparently inertialess motion of UFO’s to be explained, yes. And it could also explain the how the ancient megaliths could have been constructed by the “Ancient Aliens”: if the giant stones’ masses could be neutralised, so could their weights.

            – Not sure whether the King of Sweden would be up to presenting the Nobel Prize to descendents of said Aliens, but there you go!

    • HAL9000

      Tom Delonge has a crowd funding effort to: “build this ElectroMagnetic Vehicle to travel instantaneously through space, air and water by engineering the fabric of Space-Time.” The critical piece missing is basic research, and a lot of it. There is a line between science fiction and science fact. It’s called a timeline, along which a lot of research is needed to get from one to the other. But, no, let’s just fire up the welding torch and build this sucker. Bob, come on man…

      • Bob Greenyer

        Electro Gravitic

        I think you know I know this takes a lot of work.

        What he is suggesting is that some of the people on his team have done a lot of this work already during their black-ops days (which he implies they are still attached to), the suggestion is that this will be a controlled partial transfer of technology with industry partners (he mentions aerospace top end being in the loop).

        • Toussaint françois

          And if he demonstrate the propreties of the “metal” he talks about, it would be absolutely huge !

        • HAL9000

          OK, you know, got it. Bob, if they had the claimed technology, Jeff Bezos has the resources to make Tom’s Wondercraft available through Amazon next Christmas. Crowd funding? It wouldn’t pay for the Electro Gravitic floor mats. The unique navigational system alone for such a craft would cost several Kuwati Princes’ ransoms (“sorry captain, we are stuck in the middle of a planet!”).

          • Bob Greenyer

            You miss the point, this is a funding round that is pricing a small proportion of the shares at $5 a peace, that establishes a value on the company. The next tranche of shares could be priced at $20 a share.

    • LT


      Did you see the Finite element thermal simulation of the dogbone in the following thread ?


      The thermal simulation confirms my earlier analysis that the MFMP dogbone thermal test must have been wrong.

      I would appreciate your comment.

      • Bob Greenyer

        What you are suggesting is this, Simulation is better than temperatures physically derived from

        1. K-Type Thermocouple physically connected
        2. B-Type Thermocouple physically connected
        3. Correctly chosen Williamson IR dual band spot pyrometer, a $11,000 instrument recognised by the heat treatment industry as the only trustworthy way to determine the temperature of Alumina
        4. Correctly calibrated (unlike Lugano authors who did not refer to manual for correct emissivity) Optris PI-160 with same lens as used in Lugano report set at same distance

        Is simulation better than empirical evidence?

        If the simulation supports temperatures derived from manufacturer confirmed wrong choices for emissivity, is the simulation right?

        Our data, fully rationalised by Bob Higgins, points to at best low to mid teens excess, which incidentally is the same level of peak excess that the MFMP and others appeared to see in Rossi patent fuel mixture. Something that is inconclusive, but certainly way below the apparently erroneously derived data given in the Lugano report.

        I think the most interesting thing in the Lugano report is the change in resistance and the claimed transmutation, both of which I have seen other, unrelated data supporting.

        • LT

          Is simulation better than empirical evidence?

          No, simulation is not better, we both agree on that
          And my believe is that the MFMP did an excellent job on their temperature measurement during the dogbone thermal test.

          But while FEM analyses is certainly less accurate then a real measurement, it is widely used in the industry (We used it at the company I worked for). It gives temperatures close enough to the temperatures found in practice. If not, FEM thermal simulation would not be used in the industry.

          The large difference between the MFMP data and the FEM analysis can not be explained merely by the greater accuracy of the real measurements and the less accuracy of the FEM simulation. The differences are too large.

          If you have read my post accurate, you would have noticed that my explanation for the differences is that most likely the power measurements of the MFMP test where wrong, not the temperature measurements. In an earlier post based on radiated and convected power calculations I came to the same conclusion.
          And think about it, could a wrong power measurement have caused the fuse to blow due to an over-current situation and damaging the Optris as a result ?

          Concerning the choices for emissivity : I used in the FEM simulation the emissivity values in the simulation used by the MFMP in their spreadsheet where the results where analyzed. If those where not the correct ones we both have a problem. And in an FEM simulation you define the physical properties of the materials yourself. They are not defined by the program. As an example I used the Durapot 810 spec and not the standard AL2O3 data.

          The data is indeed fully rationalized by Bob Higgings, but his reasoning is based upon the assumption that the MFMP measurement data was correct. If not his conclusions have no value.

          Concerning the change in resistance. There have been two explanations been given for that change. The first one that between the dummy run and the actual run the heater configuration was changed between Delta and Wye, the second that there was a change from Delta to single phase with two of the three heaters working.

          I end with a question. Is the MFMP going to live up to their promise to redo the dogbone thermal test ?


          • Bob Greenyer

            It was done, Due to my not being willing to risk going to the states, Alan had to do it off-line. The data has been published, but for your convenience I have copied the links below.

            About 10-12 minutes each, after settling:


            I also posted the Labjack .csv data files there:

            It does not matter if we did or did not get the power measurement right (which we did), if you used the correct Optris recommended emissivity, you had Optris temperatures broadly matching 2 physical and 1 other non-contact sensors. If you changed the emissivity to that used by Lugano report, the ‘temperature’ broadly matched their claimed temperatures.

          • LT

            Thank’s Bob

            For some reason it seems that a lot of people did not know the retest was done.
            I hope I will have soon some time to look at the data and maybe I have to adjust the conclusions I arrived to.
            Note that I am not attacking the MFMP (I am a major donor) but sincerely want to find out the truth.

          • Bob Greenyer

            Your work and your support are both important. This is not easy when we have to guess and derive claims and the original makers of the Lugano reactor distance themselves from the reports validity.

            We are impartial, we are show what happens, even when it is not going to make anyone happy. This year we have seen some amazing things and there is more to come. With my recently published Asti presentation, you can see that our MALDI TOF-MS observation of Gallium in Parkhomov ash from Ni+H – supports Piantelli theory and previously dismissed SOF-SIMS data from Lugano.

            Right now I have so much to get out, it is not even funny – I think Alan published these links on LENR forum, I was meant to widely publicise them but, you might understand, got a little sidetracked.

  • NCY

    ironic considering that Rossi’s patents have similar issues.

    • Omega Z

      Rossi can now make claims that people skilled in the art have replicated his results. You would have to disprove those claims before attacking Rossi’s patent.

      Those who claim to have replicated Rossi’s work only need prove that they achieved excess heat beyond error based on Rossi’s IP. They do not need to achieve a high COP.

      • Dr. Mike

        However, if someone discovers a way improve upon Rossi’s patent, they very well could be granted patent rights to that improvement, even if Rossi already knows about that improvement, but has been keeping it as a trade secret. I hope Rossi is filing patents on all of his improvements so this does not happen.

        • Rene

          Rossi’s patent does not claim LENR. It claims a heater made out of some novel components. Go read the claims.

          • Dr. Mike

            You are correct that Rossi’s issued patent does not describe the mechanism for producing heat (a description of the mechanism is not required for a patent to be issued, but is often helpful in showing how the device works). However, someone else could patent an improvement to Rossi’s patent as long as the improvement was novel and not obvious from the issued patent. Rossi may be applying for additional patents as he discovers improvements to his E-Cat technology, but we won’t know until the patents are issued. It is possible that once the LENR process is better understood, someone could patent a key element of a better device that would make Rossi’s technology obsolete.

  • Dr. Mike

    It is good to see that Rossi is defending his own patents by going challenging patents that he believes infringe on his patents (lack of novelty). It will be interesting to see his issued patents can stand up to disclosure requirements.

  • Bob Greenyer

    The only company he mentions is SAIC – look at my blog for where they appear.


    Steven Greer eventually admitted he worked for the the CIA. I know there are frustrated people that want to get this information out, some have spoken to me.

    Ugh, this is so annoying.

    • georgehants

      Morning Bob, chin-up, just look at the reaction of the vast majority of our scientific establishment and others to any suggestion that Cold Fusion could be a reality.
      When you have taken the Flak that I have for even suggesting that people matter more than riches for a few, you either develop a steel outer shell or give it up.
      If mankind is to profit freely from the small and sporadic crop of the
      heroically gifted it produces, it will have to cultivate the delicate
      art of handling ideas. Psychology is now able to tell us with reasonable
      assurance that the most influential obstacle to freedom of thought and
      to new ideas is fear; and fear which can with inimitable art disguise
      itself as caution, or sanity, or reasoned skepticism, or on occasion
      even as courage.
      Wilfred Trotter

      • Bob Greenyer

        Good quote. Tnx

  • georgehants

    Morning interstellar hobo, looks interesting, could be added to the coverage on ECW, if not I am afraid I will not be following it regularly until some clear demonstration of success is announced.
    Seven years here waiting for the Wizard of OZ to demonstrate a COP above one has been bad enough.

  • Dr. Mike

    Patent #9,115,913 mentions Li.

    • Zephir

      Yep but it was filled year later..

  • Dr. Mike

    My “guess” as to what was wrong with the Piantelli patent: perhaps Piantelli patent is missing a key element that Rossi through his research sees as a required feature to make the Piantelli device work. If Rossi can show that Piantelli left out a necessary component of the invention (probably because the knowledge did not exist at the time the patent was filed), then Piantelli’s patent would be revoked for incomplete disclosure.

    • Axil Axil

      Could that key feature be the application of the high tension electrostatic field?

      • Bob Greenyer

        Absolutely, George Piggot (GP) did it first in 1903, having been inspired by Tesla (T)- then Thomas Townsend Brown in 1920s and based on studying T and GP, John Hutchinson did it in 1970s leading to some of the exact same observed phenomena we see in LENR now. I don’t mean approximately close, or similar, I mean exactly the same.

        • Axil Axil

          John Hutchinson has shown that properly formatted EMF fields can affect the stability of matter at the Quark and color gluon level.

          Both John Hutchinson’s technology and LENR revolves around the solution to the “Strong CP problem”


          • Bob Greenyer

            I am talking about specific effects and outcomes seen by LENR researchers were seen a long time ago by John Hutchinson, just most people don’t know – so they think they are discovering something.

  • Axil Axil


    The Subatomic Discovery That Physicists Considered Keeping Secret

    The manipulation of quarks to produce energy is what LENR is all about. Holmlid has shown that Ultra dense hydrogen can produce energy far in excess of what fusion can generate based on the speed of neutral fragments leaving UDH based reactions. SO never say never.

    Could the govenment be hiding the quark bomb?

  • mathis

    Good quote. Tnx

  • Great! Now I hope the same happens to Andrea Rossi. This might offend some people here but if you know how to solve humanities biggest problems and you hold that notion to yourself, you are a bit of a sociopath.

    • Alan DeAngelis

      Don’t forget the drive by shooting of Fleischmann and Pons when they told the world.

      • Alan DeAngelis


        Once again for the new people. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=htgV7fNO-2k

        • artefact
        • Bob Greenyer

          The most important part of this video comes at 11:34, when Steven E. Jones (SEJ), a man that claims to have contracted for LANL and DOE and who coined the derogatory phrase “Cold Fusion” and was a leading promoter of Muon Catalysed Fusion, crushed the science of P&F by leading a committee vote.

          This is the same SEJ that appears in a video where the narrator says LANL is one of the only US labs that could make nano thermite, and, SEJ jokes in that same video, that it had been suggested that he spiked samples of dust with nano thermite in a real conspiracy theory of which he is the sanctioned lead promoter.

          • Alan DeAngelis

            also:From page 49 of Frank Close’s 1991 book Too Hot to Handle. http://www.amazon.com/Too-Hot-
            is an essential fuel in thermonuclear weapons; it is also a product of
            dd fusion – the very process that the Utah chemists claimed to be able
            to make happen inexpensively in a test tube. The US military were
            already spending vast sums on making tritium for warheads and the
            reactors that were used for this process had been closed, pending
            repairs, in 1988 as a result of nervousness about reactor safety
            following the Chernobyl accident. The repair and building new reactors
            would cost billions of dollars, so when test-tube fusion entered the
            scene the military took note at once, recognizing the potential of
            test-tube fusion as a source of much-needed tritium. This sort of
            application of test-tube fusion also impressed Indian Government
            scientists who decided that western nations would soon classify
            test-tube fusion as a secret; thus India mounted an immediate test-tube
            fusion research effort so as to ‘get in on the ground floor’….”

          • Bob Greenyer

            Interesting – Tritium is the one low mass number radioactive element isotop that LENR produces as Tom Claytor of LANL proved and that earning him his preparata award in Asti on June 8th.

            It is not the only radioactive element that can be produced, but if you do not push it too far, it is the only one you will see – this is why I say you have to respect this technology and not push it too hard. IMPO Tritium is just an accident of a half finished event, but at the low end, this is always going to be there to some degree when ‘the music stops’.

    • Bob Greenyer

      Hey DB, I know how you feel, but I only wish Rossi success, to achieve that, at some point, he will have to do a credible test – so more than anything, I hope he will be able to show something of real value this month.

      If we are to accept what Rossi has previously said, he has seen a range of particle radiation, heat, light, electricity, transmutation, over-unity, ‘propulsion’, disintegration in a range of ways and likely a lot more – People can’t handle that this technology can do all this even when they are being told it can. I have only seen a subset of theses things in experiments I have been involved with, but I have seen how people will attack and ridicule you for trying to speak about it.

      No mainstream physics accepts strange radiation or transmutation or direct electrical production or even nuclear reactions in these experiments. The MFMP has seen all of these things. We could not avoid talking about gamma, x-rays and neutrons after we had shown production of these things live – we took a lot of flack about neutrons – yet others had it in their papers for decades. I have seen strange radiation now in photographic film, in Poly Ethylene, beautifully frozen in to a glass like compound (in LION) and captured live on a webcam – these things have been in other peoples work for most of the past decade. I have personally seen what strange radiation can do a wide range of materials – to survive it structurally, you need not only new kinds of material, you need adjacent material to be configured favourably.

      Piantelli told us he did not think humans could be responsible with this technology, Rossi has said things not too far removed and constantly called on need for safety, TDL said in his recent interview “it’s extraordinarily dangerous” – it is, and it needs to be treated with respect.

      I fully understand these, and other peoples fears and cautions, however, to act as a guardian of the ‘knowledge’ for fear that will get into the wrong hands is futile, because it already has, what needs to happen now is for it to get in to the right hands, be accepted and respected for what it is – and the ONLY way to achieve that is to have believable demonstrations. That is a challenge, since, for most, even the basic over unity aspect is unbelievable.

      • Axil Axil

        Eric Weinstein fears that science has been stuck in a deep rut for half a century and counting and need a “Rogue Genius” to shake things up. Science has been put to the test and found wanting with no relief in sight.

        Personality wise, I don’t beleive that Rossi is the guy to do it. But Dear bob, are you up for it.


        • Bob Greenyer

          I don’t know Axil if I have the acumen, intellect, financial tolerance or pysical stamina, I will do my best to play my role as best I can. As I adjust my understanding to incorporate new empirically observed phenomena, my position will iterate I hope to something closer to the truth – which you know I will share regardless of the consequences or personal attacks.

          What is certain is that no great change comes without a collective consciousness change.

          With regards to the title of the video, I think the Russians at some levels, started to establish a theory of everything by the mid 1950s, Some Israelis by the 1970s, and some people living in America by late 1980s. This is not a complete list. More specifically, and without reference to anything other than the work of Bolotov, I ‘intuited’ that it was 1954 in Russia, subsequently I found out that Kapitsa (the Nobel Laureate who went on to run the soviet energetics programs) started publishing his work on ‘Microwave Fire’ in 1953. I believe that the deliberate simplification of Maxwells equations in the late 1800s/early 1900s, leading to a commercially functional but incomplete electrodynamics theory, was in direct response to the work of George Piggot which led ElectroGravitics – WHICH HAD TO BE SUPPRESSED.

          It is a frustrating realisation to come to, getting Tom Bearden’s books on 5th August and reading him saying, effectively, that those in the US that sit on this knowledge, deem it too psychologically difficult to deal with by the generatl population, to ever make it public. Whilst my talking about just some of it confirms this position, I feel that to take this approach is arrogant and conceited in my opinion, those that have the knowledge have dealt with it, people accept things their peers accept – it just needs demonstrations and critical mass that is needed. TDL is saying the very same thing about the extremely disruptive and difficult to handle nature of this knowledge in his recent communications on TTS. Earlier in the year, I wrote this:


          NOTE: Some one is systematically taking down websites, videos, images I link to, particularly relating to Kenneth Shoulders – this is why I am doing partial transcripts of key points. YouTube cannot be trusted, See here:


          In future, I would recommend people use https://hooktube.com to download any reference video I post and even any ones, including our own, that they feel is useful. Because of this pattern of taking down images and videos I link to, I will be proceeding with far more caution. It is why I only publish into the steemit block chain – whilst they have deleted images from my articles that are hosted on Amazon servers they can’t yet delete the text without blocking all of steemit.

          I welcome TDLs team, even if they look like they will be a mental and physical capital herding organisation / limited hangout, however, it is a start and the masses recognising the truth that will force this into the open when more get the courage to break out of their mainstream chains and do hard research into this field we here, are passionate about.

          • georgehants

            Morning Bob, all agreed as I have been saying for seven years on this Website.
            In my view it is now about 70 years that science has been dumbed down in modern terms and 350 years since, Materialism is a form of philosophical monism which holds that matter is the fundamental …. The French cleric Pierre Gassendi (1592–1665), started the closed-minded religion that has continued to today in most areas, completely removing vast areas of science from the curriculum, thankfully the release of Quantum Research connected to the military secret coding etc of a Quantum computer is after so many wasted years, allowing some progress.
            Just as an experiment it could be worth putting some of the links that are being removed under your comments elsewhere here on ECW, to see if they stay.
            Plus well worth reading here

          • Bob Greenyer

            I have had a development on the taken down video..

          • Eyedoc

            Please relate ….

          • Bob Greenyer

            Working on it.

          • Electrogravitics wasn’t suppressed, the entire field was classified in the1950’s. You don’t classify failed experiments.

            So now that the military is 60 years ahead of everyone else, they can control the release of this technology.

          • Bob Greenyer

            I guess I consider that classifying is suppression, but your conclusion is spot on.

          • Omega Z

            Most technology of a certain type is suppressed with good intent. A couple years ago, a team of scientists turned all their research over to the government. They stumbled upon a gene editing technique that makes the crispr genome editing technology look like stone age technology.

            They were concerned that someone even a kid in mom & pops basement and a couple $1000 dollars could create a virus accidentally or on purpose that could wipe out half the worlds population. You don’t let this kind of technology into the wild until you have achieved some kind of mastery over it.

            Other technology requires a managed roll out because it may be to disruptive. How would you feel if LENR caused a world wide economic collapse. Soon followed by local, then regional and eventually a world wide conflict. Something that needs consideration.

            I don’t see happening. LENR will be self managed due to the scale and economic realities. The support system and much R&D for adaption will take decades for the various uses. Economic realty is most people don’t just run out and buy economy cars just because of better mileage. Most buy new cars when it’s within their economic means or necessity. LENR will be a gradual transition under the same constraints and new jobs will replace old with little disruption. Technology even the so called robot revolution(actually started in the 80’s) still creates more jobs then they replace.

            A well kept secret. While national and economic security play a roll in suppressing certain technology, the U.S. actually has a policy of moving technology to the private sector. Both the DOD and NASA have small teams of people who review suppressed technology that is low risk(high risk tech eventually become low risk) that can be transitioned to the public sector. (They weigh the benefits and economic impacts verses risk) Most would be shocked at the the source of much of our technology.

            GPS is a good example, tho with mixed results. Most people can no longer find their way out of a paper bag given only a map and compass. They stare at the map waiting for it to draw a red line to get from point to point.

            Note there is some technology that society is just not ready for. People would use it in a way that is very detrimental to society. We must grow up first.

          • Eyedoc

            And so WHO determines when we’re “grown up” ????

          • Bob Greenyer

            When as many cows have been milked to within an inch of their lives and products have lost their lustre or novelty, they will drip out the next, slightly better thing to charm us and keep us using our one lives to labour for their crumbs.

            Why? because human lifetimes are irrelevant.

          • Omega Z

            ME, I will determine when we have “grown up”

            Kidding. Circumstances will determine that. When the world can put away most of our military toys and work closer to gather for mutual benefit and interests. We have made some gains. Note that even with current public displayed tensions, the U.S. and Russia are still collaborating in certain areas of like interest. The situation is similar with China.

            We have also lost ground when it comes to N. Korea and Iran. Either of which could cause a big proliferation in the number of Nuclear powers. S. Korea, Japan, Australia, Egypt, Saudi Arabia just to name a few. The U.S., Russia and China need to come together as one to have any chance of preventing this. If they can succeed at this, then maybe by the beginning of the 22nd century we can proclaim we’ve matured. When military conflict is all but gone and we are in joint ventures in space travel.

          • Bob Greenyer

            When you understand that LENR is part of a family of related technologies that make ALL kinetic and traditional nuclear weapons and ALL forms of defence impotent, then you will see the futility of war.

            Within the capabilities of this technology is the solutions to all the problems that cause war – and it is the avarice of those that hold or control the knowledge that is preventing its release because they leverage war and the tools of war and scarcity to elevate themselves at the expense of all and the biosphere. If you want to know who they are, follow the money.

            If nations knew the utterly pointless nature of making Nuclear and other weapons, would they spend so much effort making them?

          • Omega Z

            It’s strategy. If I have more devastating weaponry in the wings, I will still continue with the current weapons at hand. One does this from the point of I want any potential enemy to prepare in that manor not suspecting what I may have waiting in the wings. If they were aware they would prepare for that nullifying my strategic advantage. Thus, you have countries working on nuclear weapons that may already be totally obsolete.

            While LENR may alleviate some of what causes wars, it would be naive to think it will eliminate all causes of war. Such as the Iranian old guard wants to resurrect the Persian Empire. It is also a fact that scarcity of certain things exist. LENR will not cure all the ills of the world. It is just cheaper energy.

          • Bob Greenyer

            Old kinetic and nuclear weapons are obsolete… those that know it and make them are selling them to anyone that will buy.

          • georgehants

            Wonderful, ECW is becoming a vanguard of good common sense, I think.
            Will add that while the US was rattling sabres re. North Korea etc. Russia and China where trying to calm the situation.

          • TomR

            Thank you Bob, for your courage and integrity. I think Axil Axil is trying to encourage you in his own way.

          • Bob Greenyer

            I have a lot of respect for Axil, I can’t say everything he draws attention to is on target, by I for one have been, and continue to be inspired by a good number of his postings, he provides valuable input into the community and I hope he maintains his desire to search out the truth. Thankyou Axil, I appreciate your confidence.

            Thankyou also TomR, your unwavering support has often given me strength to continue when I have been fighting those that want to put a stop to this work due to their knowledge or ignorance, or when I have been struggling economically.

        • Omega Z

          Axil Axil

          ->”Eric Weinstein fears that science has been stuck in a deep rut for half a century and counting”

          The saying, Science progresses 1 death at a time.
          Historically, a Paradigm Shift takes place about every 75 years or so.

          This isn’t a coincidence. It is the the time frame(lifetime) of the Stalwart Gatekeepers of the current paradigm. A Paradigm Shift only takes place once there are too few of the current Gatekeepers to protect the current paradigm.

          Most of your skeptics are just Parrots, especially in the age of blogs. However, once the number of Gatekeepers dwindles below a certain threshold, the parrots die off as there is no one left to feed them.

          In essence, the world is due a Paradigm Shift about NOW.
          And then, we fall back into another Paradigm rut for about 75 years.

        • sam

          What about Randell Mills?

  • Axil Axil

    There might be a connection between LENR and gravity. The Axion is holding up well in the latest dark matter research. And axion generation may be at the bottom of LENR. The issue is that axions as dark matter increases gravity, not reduce it.

  • Bob Greenyer

    Hello ‘Sumdum’

    Er, no. I am reporting on the words of Tom Delonge (TDL), former front man of Blink182, given in an interview on one of the worlds biggest podcasts – in one month alone this year, Joe Rogan had 90,000,000 downloads. I did a straight partial transcript – you think your armchair opinion about me is going to stop that reach??

    At the bottom are some partial resumes of people in Tom Delonge’s venture, you can read more about them and other people on his team here: https://dpo.tothestarsacademy.com/

    What you are saying is that all these people, who are sanctioning TDL to say these things, who are at the top of their respective fields, and are still paid to consult at the highest levels, are all having a ‘manic episode’ and talking “pure, steaming horsepucky”. Yes, I said these things first, I said they are all connected, and they are, but I am not controlling what these people say or what they get involved in, how could I? Don’t you think it a little odd that they are saying all these things (except the obvious exception).

    I do not have the reach of TDL or Joe Rogan show, I do not have the credentials of any of the people standing behind him – just because you (whoever your are, shamelessly taking pot-shots whilst hiding behind the ‘Sumdum’ handle) can’t handle the coming truths, doesn’t mean they are not true or that I am having any kind of state of mind that you feel is a suitable put down.

    Perhaps you would like to share your psychological credentials that puts you in the position to judge my and all of these other peoples state of mind having never met me or them (unless of course you have!). You are behaving in the same appalling way Mr Abd Ul-Rahman Lomax did when he summarily judged me and doxxed my family earlier in the year. What value or narrative are you creating or preserving here?

    TDL suggests strongly that the technology has been weaponised and that is why it has not been made public, he also says there are things he says that he agrees should never be made public, but then he is in bed with a raft of ‘quasi retired’ intelligence and MIC assets. I am not scared to say what I see. Perhaps you need to start a discredit campaign against all the people in TDLs team, good luck with that!

    Rather than using standard CIA put downs like ‘Conspiracy’ ‘Manic’ ‘tinfoil hat’ (like either a paid operative or one of the useful programmed masses), to try to discredit me, why don’t you go and watch the interview, learn who the people are that are promoting and supporting what TDL is saying , learn about Electrogravitics, George Piggot, Thomas Townsend Brown and then come back with something more than a fact-free, personal attack, devoid of any critical or original thought.

    Good luck in your personal journey.

    Jim Semivan – Vice President Operations
Senior intelligence service member of the Central Intelligence Agency

    Dr. Hal Puthoff – Vice President Science & Technology

    Dr. Puthoff has served as President and CEO of EarthTech International (which has helped fund/materially support MFMP from time to time), worked for years with Kenneth Shoulders, It was his quote I gave in ASTI presentation – the list of his connections is way to long. He developed and ran the ESP program for the CIA which is still operational. National Security Agency, Stanford University and SRI International. Dr. Puthoff regularly advises NASA , the Department of Defense and intelligence communities

    Steve Justice – Aerospace Division Director

    After 31 years, Stephen is the recently retired Program Director for Advanced Systems from Lockheed Martin Advanced Development Programs – better known as the “Skunk Works”

    Luis Elizondo – Director of Global Security & Special Programs

    Luis Elizondo is a career intelligence officer whose experience includes working with the U.S. Army, the Department of Defense, the National Counterintelligence Executive, and the Director of National Intelligence. Luis also ran a sensitive aerospace threat identification program focusing on unidentified aerial technologies.

    Chris Mellon – National Security Affairs Advisor

    Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Intelligence in the Clinton and Bush Administrations. In addition, he’s worked many years on Capitol Hill including as the Minority Staff Director of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence. As an aide to Senator William S. Cohen, he drafted the legislation that established the US Special Operations Command.

    Dr. Paul Rapp – Brain Function & Consciousness Consultant

He is a past editor of Physica, and served on the editorial boards of the International Journal of Bifurcation and Chaos, Chaos and Complexity Letters, and Cognitive Neurodynamics. His past honors include a Certificate of Commendation from the Central Intelligence Agency for “significant contributions to the mission of the Office of Research and Development.”

    • Toussaint françois

      Very nice reply! some people are just lazy and sould do there homework.

      • Bob Greenyer

        Perhaps he is lazy, if he does not do at least a basic bit of homework and come back with reasoned arguments and debate them one might draw one of two conclusions

        – he is wilfully ignorant and can be ignored
        – he knows that what TDLs team is allowing him to say is true, and he is a paid troll, in which case, he can be ignored

        I actually really appreciate this type of ‘concerned’ parties comments, because they don’t present any valid arguments, but give myself and others an opportunity to present hard facts and areas for research into, which can enable people such as him, who are suffering their own self imposed safe spaces, the opportunity to break out.

        Even spelling concepts out one letter at a time will never be enough for some humans, since we often find it very hard to accept challenging new interpretations of things we have already accepted – I know how it felt for me, so I do empathise – it really is easier for people to transfer their cognitive adjustment trauma, onto those that are just sharing the message that challenges their accepted fallacy.

  • Bob Greenyer

    The things Piantelli has left out have no bearing on his patent working or not, Parkhomov proved Piantelli with the pure Ni+H reactor producing 400MJ that I reported our SIMS data from at ASTI – though, since Parkhomov’s reactor ran at 1700ºC, he showed that once running it is not necessary to keep below the sintering/melting point of Nickel.

  • Yup, this whole field is headed for a gigantic patent war. Countries with the cheapest labor will build their own LENR generators for an entire generation before the legal claims are settled. China has the advantage here.

    • Omega Z

      China is losing it’s edge. Jobs are being moved to where labor is cheaper. Even at $2 an hour, the U.S. is able to compete in many areas. Robotic manufacturing has similar cost regardless where used and transporting great distance is actually a disadvantage.

      Since WW II, the U.S. policy(mostly by tax policy) has been to move manufacturing off shore to help other nations build their economies. The ultimate goal is for countries like China to develop their own domestic economy to be self-sustaining.

      China has pushed back on this for years, but are finally starting in that direction. The writing is on the wall. Economies can not be sustained by export alone. Import/Export of the future should only be for source materials that are in short supply in different regions.

      Global warming isn’t about Global warming. It’s about wealth redistribution to poor countries to build their economies. The intent is for them to become self sustaining and the eventual elimination of world poverty. You wont read this in the mainstream as it requires sacrifice by some who will push back vigorously. No one likes their livelihood restrained. Also, a room of 100 people will have 100 different views on how to achieve this and few will be willing to make a personal sacrifice. Thus this is all done behind closed doors like G7 and The Bilderberg Group.

    • georgehants

      Kevmo, regarding Cold Fusion one certainly hopes that China totally disregards any waste of time patents and steamrollers ahead with production.

  • Eyedoc

    “they” ?

  • Alan DeAngelis
  • – see my point 2) above about the way most consumer devices are not well suited to provide definitive proof one way or the other. Typical videos or stills end up with only a handful of pixels of interest and they are typically motion blurred, out-of-focus and/or chromatically aberrated. Yes, you could constantly carry around a tripod and a high quality video camera especially optimized to capture aircraft or rapidly moving objects or lights in the sky but most people didn’t do that back then and still don’t do it today.

    Another point may be that there may well be fewer craft being flown in publicly accessible areas, either because the aliens have now come to an agreement with the US and Russian authorities not to joyride anymore and/or that those same superpowers have now developed their own reverse engineered UFO’s (or “Locusts” as the book calls them) – which was point 4) – and that, just as with all experimental aircraft, the test pilots are under strict orders not to show them off, either.

    Then we come to point 5) – that such man-made aircraft would obviously include all the stealth technology possible and be no longer prone to crashes as the earlier models are.

    Aside from all that, there is the fact that almost day of the week, astronomers are discovering more and more planets that could support intelligent life. Add to that the fact the we on Earth are very, very “late to the party”. We could be at least a billion years behind some of our near astral neighbors. But they’d really only need to be a thousand or fewer years ahead of us in order to have mastered every aspect of science and technology and so be routinely exploring their local star systems, including ours.

    How about not replying until you have read that book and watched the Rogan – De Longe interview?

    • Bruce__H

      The Rogan-DeLonge interview addresses the continued lack of convincing videos despite the recent thousands-to-millions fold increase in coverage? I’ll listen if it does. If it doesn’t … well I am familiar with the other arguments already.

      I have no objection to the proposition that life is common in the universe — even intelligent life. But I am surprised that you think this means that alien life or its material manifestations (spacecraft) are likely to appear on earth. The spaces between the stars are not “local”, they are immense. The likelihood of intelligent life being somewhere in the universe is at least ponderable but the likelihood of it occurring more than once in a locally travelable neighbourhood becomes very small again.

      Do you have a technical background?

      • Yes, I do have a technical and scientific background. I have a masters degree in Physics for a start and worked in Applied Physics and Computing for 30+ years. I made my own telescope when I was 13 (in 1959) and have studied astronomy since before then. I was around when Sputnik was launched and remained thoroughly conversant with the whole space-race that followed. That and all the Astro-Physics before and since.

        So yes, I have long since known that interstellar distances are immense but, if velocities close to the speed of light can be achieved, we’d be talking about a decade for a robot craft to reach Proxima Centauri. There is already talk of that – by using the Sun’s rays to propel a tiny craft containing cameras and electronics.

        You say: “The likelihood of intelligent life being somewhere in the universe is at least ponderable but the likelihood of it occurring more than once in a locally travelable neighbourhood becomes very small again.”

        – I think you’ll find that a re-evaluation of the Drake Equation in the light of the way each and every star seems to have at least one planet will negate what you say. That likelihood is increasing with every day that Astronomers are getting better and better at detecting all those extra-solar planets.

        Anyway, there is one more thing that has occurred to me regarding why there might have been a reduction in the number of UFO flights (yes – I know – assuming there were/are any all all – check) and that would be because the aliens would not need to be extensively exploring and mapping the Earth the way they were 70 years ago. All they’d need to do nowadays is tap into the Internet. That done, they’d be able to use Google Earth and all the footage from all around the planet (yes, including all that footage taken by all the camera-toting masses on Facebook.

        Again, all that is predicated on the idea that travel close to the speed of light by substantial craft is possible and, as I said, all that and more would become possible it a mass-nullifying field could be generated by a substantial craft. Yes, my old Physics lecturers would deny that possibility outright but most of them also doubted whether Cold Fusion was possible.

        – which brings us back to what this web-site is all about. Between now and the great “Rossi Revelation” in two weeks, you’ll have time to read that book (and, actually the next one, which is also now on Amazon). The Kindle version will save you a few dollars. Happy reading!

  • – first things first: what is that huge peak for 2012 all about?

    • – and while you are pondering that – and with Frank’s continuing indulgence:

      So as not to confuse our large audience (both of them!), let’s stick to light years. A parsec is approximately 3,26 light years. Proxima Centauri – the nearest star to the Sun – is approximately 1.3 parsecs or 4.24 light years away. The Drake equation contains a mixture of reasonably rigorous parameters (like that very number of planets per star that Astronomers are refining as we speak) and much more speculative ones – like how many years a potentially space-faring civilization will last before blowing itself up. Man is a very agressive animal indeed. Other intelligent beings may be much less so and may be much more able to survive the deeper time that would enable them to first launch millions of robot craft in all directions, wait patiently for them to report back and then follow up on that – perhaps with their own “manned” craft. In any case, that time may not need to be so deep – maybe no more than a decade or so if, they were, however improbably, ensconsed on Proxima Centauri. Improbable events can and do happen.

      OK, so there has been a steady rise in the number of UFO reports but not in the amount of footage. Part of my theory is that actual UFO flight numbers would have declined partly because Google Earth and the rest of the Internet could fill-in any remaning gaps in the alien’s (or anyone’s) information about this planet (and other reasons I provided in earlier posts).

      What we might both agree on is that at least 95% of sightings have simple physical explanations (planes, helicopters, Chinese lanterns, birds, etc, etc). I presume your figure would be 100% (once, given time, the more puzzling, long-standing ones have also been logically explained).

      Let’s now look at the graph (leaving 2012 aside, for the while). The rise in reports could just be due to the rise in the population. Let’s suppose you are right and that 100% of RECENT sightings have innocent explantions. In that case, once the footage from all the camera-phones is analysed (if “analysing” a handful of pixels is a meaningful concept) it probably became clear to most of the “witnesses” that there was nothing to it, save only the cases where the might still be some ambiguity.

      Given such retrospectively embarassing footage (consisting 100%, on your, theory of planes, helicopters, chinese lanterns, etc) no-one would bother to upload the footage. Well, no-one except your “reduced number” of several thousand, world-wide(!), that still do upload even now.

      On my hypothesis – that there are now few or no UFO flights because there don’t need to be – that all fits in nicely.

      Anyway, as I indicated at the start, our “audience” is very sparse (zero?) so let’s both save more time and agree to differ,