Ed Pope's Forewarning

By: David Zweig

September 13, 2012 (Updates at end of article)

There are many interesting people related to the NanoSpire story, but today I’ll focus on just one: Edmond D. Pope, advisor to NanoSpire. He was present at one of the three times we know of when Mark LeClair’s cavitation device was turned on (the other two times were when Mark Leclair and Sergio Lebid got radiation poisoning in August of 2009 at LeClair’s lab, and the April 2010 demonstration at the Naval Research Lab).

Ed Pope talks about his witnessing a demonstration of the device at Penn State: “I have known Serge and Mark for about ten years now. Most interest[ing], I have seen a demonstration. I actually set one up here... remind me guys... about three years or so ago. And in state university campus which is located right here. We saw something very interesting that none of us can still fully explain. But I will tell you right now I was not able to get connected with the right people to understand what they are doing or the concept of LENR or cold fusion. The people that were here were duly impressed, but I would much rather have gotten more of the materials, physics, and the nuclear research people to come into it.” (from PESN transcript)

Then there is this quote from Ed Pope (from the fusion section of NanoSpire’s website): “I have spent 3 years in the past working at the Office of Naval Research. While I am not an expert in the phenomena behind what Mark and Serge are working in, I do know for a fact that it is real and very complex. I have seen these guys demonstrate their abilities and talked to several former colleagues from NRL and academia who also know and respect their work. They are opening doors that are on the cutting edge.”

In the main PESN article, he is quoted: “I am eager to engage with Mark and Serge in a fully open, properly instrumented (to all) demonstration. There are many questions remaining to be answered but I am convinced they are on to something that offers great potential.”

Ed Pope has an impressive background. He is best known for the events covered in his 2001 book entitled Torpedoed. Ed wrote (in the main PESN article, comments): "My story is extremely complex but the simple truth is: I was arrested in Moscow by FSB/KGB (Russian secret police) in 2000 and held in prison for 9 months. The event was strictly related to Vladimir Putin's first election as president; i.e. going back to many of the old Soviet ways. Truth is, they didn't know and didn't really care about anything specific other than to make me look like a western spy. They initially had hoped to charge me with stealing diplomatic secrets related to technology transfer to Iran but, not finding anything related to that (no surprise to me!) they eventually decided to charge me with stealing secrets related to a very high speed underwater torpedo; whence the name of my book. This torpedo, the SHKVAL, uses supercavitation to achieve submerged speeds in excess of 200 mph. As part of my work in this field with many different Russians, I was exposed to many peripheral aspects of caviation/supercavitation, which included even back then bubble collapse and early work in what today is known as LENR. The work the Russians used is not secret; fact is, it was developed here in the US, patented, and proven. The Russians merely bought copies of the college level engineering book (let me know if you want detail) Underwater Missile Propulsion published in the US, stole US Navy documents, etc. and then called it 'their secrets.' Again, I will defend my story anywhere/anytime against anyone but I DO NOT want my story in any way to confuse the technical issues here of what Mark and Serge are attempting to validate."

The main part of the book, which covers the events leading up to his arrest, his imprisonment, trial and pardon, reads like an exciting novel and I can recommend the book based on that alone. There is much more, however, to the book:

(1) Ed is correct that his book does not directly cover the technical issues related to NanoSpire's cavitation device. It does, however, cover his extraordinary background: access to cutting edge (including classified) technology (including cavitation), and experience dealing with small start-up technology companies.

(2) Perhaps Ed didn't realize when he wrote the book in 2001, just how relevant his forewarning would become, about what can happen to governments.

Regarding these two topics, here are some notable quotes from the book :

p. 22: “There were reasons why the Russians might consider me a spy. Chief among them, I had done intelligence work for over twenty years in the United States Navy.”

p. 23: “In high school I was a middling student who enjoyed mathematics... and had a moderate talent for tinkering that echoed my father's greater ability to manipulate and fix all sorts of mechanical devices. Oregon State, 150 miles away, had a good math department... As a student I did well only in courses that interested me, principally those dealing with computers...”

p. 24: “My NROTC classes- and friends who served in Vietnam- taught me about the many restraints placed on the troops by politicians. I graduated in 1969... That fall I joined the Navy as a reserve officer, an ensign... I was sent to San Diego for specialized training- in computers and as an air-traffic controller for shipboard-based aircraft, specialties that combined my skills of mathematics and mechanical prowess.”

p. 25:  “In 1971, I went behind the green door- intelligence spaces in the Navy all have green doors and no windows- to join a group of two dozen, which grew eventually to fifty or sixty, handling a new worldwide, automated, computerized, information processing system.”

p. 26: “From collecting and carrying information, after a year I stepped up to the more difficult task of analyzing it.”

p. 28: “My job had only one drawback: I couldn't go home and tell Cheri much about it. I might say to her I'd had a good or bad day, an exciting or a dull one, but not much else. Occasionally I'd be able to advise her to watch for something special to show up on the evening television news broadcast... Captain Inman gave me a few special projects to do; he was testing me, though at the time I didn't know what for. Six months later I found out, when my detailer in Washington told me that Inman, who had preceded me there to become Rear Admiral Inman, Director of Naval Intelligence (DNI), wanted me to join the Naval Intelligence staff in the Capitol... After I'd spent a few months in an outlying office, he assigned me directly to the Pentagon.”

p. 29: “I was to become a briefer, working under Commander Tom Brooks... For our briefings, we'd have to ask certain people to leave the room, since they weren't cleared for the information we would present.”

p.30: “We also prepared a daily magazine, highly classified, called the CNO Intelligence Briefing Notes, for distribution to a short list of people in the Pentagon, other government organizations, and in key naval units around the world.”

p. 31: “In 1978, Inman decided that I needed a two-year, seagoing, operational tour of duty to continue to be a "hot-runner" marked for continued promotion and challenging tasks. I reported to the Sixth Fleet, aboard the U.S.S. Albany, a medium guided missile cruiser.”

p. 32: “On the Albany, I continued to brief every morning... One of the tasks of the Albany staff was to be ambassadors; one month the ship would visit Israel, the next, for political balance, Egypt. This was pleasant duty...”

p. 34: “In early 1980 we went back to the United States for a year, in preparation for my going to Sweden as assistant naval attache... Wives were excluded from several weeks of training given to us at a secret facility by the Department of Defense, the CIA, and FBI, and other government agencies. We learned to resist interrogation, avoid hostile encounters, evaluate potential terrorist threats, drive defensively, and the like.”

p. 39 “I learned that the embassy's State Department personnel viewed themselves more as advocates within the American government for the point of view of the country in which they were serving than as employees of our government whose job was to advocate the American point of view to the host county... At the Pentagon, to which I returned as a commander, I was given an unusual one-year assignment as executive assistant to Rich Haver, a senior civilian analyst in the office of the DNI... In this new position I received so many clearances, for our various ultra sensitive projects, that it was difficult to keep track of them. Some projects were so secret that fewer than twenty people inside the Beltway were cleared for them. The projects included supervision of ultra sensitive intelligence gathering and research and development of weapons and other devices. Even today I am not permitted to discuss the details of these programs, or even to offer an opinion as to whether what is printed about them is true or false.”

p. 40: “At times we participated in actual war game exercises at the Naval  War College and other places; we'd have to carefully sanitize our information even for people with advanced clearances, because often we know of things that those playing the games did not even dream were on the drawing boards and might be available in a future war... There was so much secret information in my head just then that I was not permitted to leave the country without written permission... A member of the working group, Mel Paisley, then the assistant secretary of the Navy for research, engineering and systems, requested that I next work directly for him. It was to be a short assignment, after which I had lined up a two year sea tour that would help me keep in the running to have a shot at making admiral... Paisley's office controlled an R&D budget of $12-$15 billion and involved the research of more than forty thousand people across the country, inside the military and in contractors.”

p.41: “I had been in the job about six months, well before Paisley's departure, when a routine medical examination revealed a tumor on the ribs on my left side.”

p. 42: “...diagnosed at age thirty-nine... it was a career ending illness... I still stood a chance of making captain... My background... lifelong appetite for R&D... and moving within the spooky world of intelligence... I remained in the assistant secretary's office four years, and the cancer did not recur." "... in 1989... (p. 43) ...I agreed to become commander of the Navy's Pentagon intelligence briefers... Once more I would be in the CNO Operations Command Center, this time not as a lieutenant but in charge of the Intelligence Plot and Briefing Theater.”

p. 46: “I now sought a less physically demanding berth, a place where I could put in three years as a captain before retiring... by moving to the Office of Naval Research... in the spring of 1991... ONR was receiving faxes and letters from individuals and institutes in the USSR, offering to do R&D work for the United States... Soviet scientists and technologists knew that ONR underwrote not only military projects but also technologies having civilian and commercial potential, and that the ONR annual budget was in the billions of dollars. Since I was the intelligence and security officer at ONR, their offers were routed to me for investigation.”

p. 47: “we found jobs for some of them in private industry; this activity eventually evolved into the Science Opportunities Program, which I created and headed for ONR.”

p. 50: “I retired as captain in 1994... Penn State's Applied Research Laboratory, a facility we at ONR had chosen because ARL had many of its own experts in advanced materials. In addition, ARL received the vast majority of its other funding from the Navy, who it was a place we were comfortable with. During my final months at ONR, ARL director Ray Hettche asked me to come to work with him when I retired... I still had in my brain the details of secrets that I had been cleared for over the years I had spent in Naval Intelligence-- 126 special clearances on matters of high importance to the security of the United States.”

p. 66: “Supercavitation can reduce drag by creating a bubble of air or gas in which an object-- in this case, a torpedo-- can ride, and thus travel much faster than it otherwise could in water... a portion of that gas is funneled back up to the nose of the torpedo and used to create the supercavitation bubble, while the majority of the gas goes out the back end of the torpedo, rocketing the missile through the water. We wanted to adapt the supercavitation principle, and the HRG propulsion system, for use on a surface vessel.”

p. 77: “I was mindful of the Russian proverb ‘There is no such thing as a former spy’".

p. 79: “Putin... If the reactionaries in the KGB, the military, and the Russian Mafia had searched far and wide to find a figurehead behind whom to take back power from the pro-democracy forces, they could not have dreamed up a better candidate.”

p. 86: “Two days after Putin's electoral victory, my arrest was authorized for the FSB by the general prosecutor's office.”

p. 100: “Never completely trust a Russian. The former Soviet people are very much unlike us, and it's not just a matter of style... In many ways Russia today resembles the American Wild West of the nineteenth century: a lawless, every man for himself, continually perilous arena. In Russia there are no assurances about quality of merchandise (unless the product has been produced for the military), delivery dates, or reliability; no guarantees of origin of materials; and no conception of property rights, valid contracts, proper pricing or commitment to a partnership... Russians actually came to believe that Wild West capitalism-- a crooked, entrepreneurial, dog eat dog form-- was the norm for a capitalist society...  Russians regularly lie, cheat, and steal in business-- all Russians, including heads of prestigious scientific institutes, world renowned scholars, and my friends and business partners. Bolslhov recognized that I wasn't a millionaire. But many Russians acted as though I were-- as Soviet propaganda insisted that all American businessmen were.”

p. 104: “The second rule of doing business in Russia is not to restrict yourself to interacting with one individual or institute.”

p. 105: “Shakedowns were routine operating procedure all the way to the top.”

p. 106: “In Russia all information must be bought, and you can trust only the information that you have properly paid for.”

p. 110: “Many observers likened the opening of Russia to the discovery of gold, but I preferred to think of Russia as a gigantic flea market in which everything was for sale, but to obtain the best quality merchandise, you had to search for the real treasures, cut through the chaos, deal with all the cheating, and bargain adroitly.”

p. 245: “Elena Bonner... finds the whole of the new Putin regime ‘permeated with lies’ and characterizes my trial... state control over mass media... lies put out about the sinking of the Kursk,.. conduct of the war in Chechnya... The common thread of all these cases, adds another √©migr√©, chess champion Gary Kasparov, is fear-- fear among ordinary Russians that ‘their country is under attack from hostile forces... Instead of beating the real hostile forces in Russia-- corruption, ignorance and a bloated state’".

p. 247: “Putin administration has been and will continue to be under the thumb of hard liners who will not stop until they achieve full dictatorial, Soviet style control over the populace of the Russian Federation. These hard liners consist of reactionaries in the military, people from the FSB and other police and intelligence services, and the Mafia. In combination, they run the government. Fomenting exaggerated suspicion of the West through spy mania is a featured aspect of their attempt to reassert total dominance of the population.”

p. 248: “If only the focus of these institutes, and of Russia's scientists and technologists, could be redirected toward nonmilitary technologies, their achievements would positively further the world. That goal may take a long time to achieve, because the key watch-word of Russian life is still ‘survival’, and it is very difficult to change for the better when you are worried about how you will earn enough money to pay for your next meal.”

p. 249: “The Putin administration is racing Russia back to its totalitarian past at tremendous speed, embracing the tactics the Communist governments used to control the populace, but with a new twist. Since many of the ruling oligarchs are making lots of money from the new, supposedly capitalist and free market economy, the rulers are opposed to the central economic control that was a feature of Communist governments; so Putin and his minions are combining the worst aspects of Communism with the worst aspects of Fascism.”

p. 250: “In my recent travels around the U.S., I have frequently met people I had not known before, and have been told by them that during my imprisonment they had been praying for me regularly in their church groups or veterans' groups. Such actions reflect a great strength of our society that Russians do not understand and that astounds them: that in the United States, ordinary people do things that contribute to the well being of their fellow man on their own, without being directed or compelled to do so by the government. My experience has shown me, and I hope that it helps others understand, three things of absolute importance to our way of life: freedom of the press; the basic idea that in the eyes of the law we are all innocent until proven guilty; and the recognition by the government of the need to constantly uphold the rights of individual citizens while considering the needs, roles, procedures, and foreign policy of our nation.”

(from: Torpedoed, Edmond D. Pope and Tom Shachtman, 2001, Little, Brown and Company.)

--------


From the above quotes we know that Ed attended and was instrumental in setting up the demonstration of NanoSpire's device that occurred around 2009 at Penn State, most likely at the university's Applied Research Laboratory. Here are some questions:

(1) When Ed stated that "we saw something very interesting that none of us can still fully explain," why didn't he give a physical description of what they saw, even if he couldn't explain how it happened or what it meant? Did they see elements (even if they could not identify which elements) that were not there before the demonstration began? Were measurements made of energy in and/or energy out, even if over-unity could not be determined? Was radiation measured, even if only using simple measuring devices? Since there was no mention of radiation poisoning (unlike for the other two demonstrations), does this mean shielding was used?

(2) Is there any written record of the demonstration? I was told that for the demonstration that was done at the Naval Research Lab, there is no written record. Is it common for there to be no written record, regarding demonstrations of this kind?

(3) State College, Pennsylvania, where Ed Pope resides, and where Penn State and its Applied Research Lab are located, is also the home of Quantum Potential Corporation, which is conducting research into Cavitation-Induced Fusion. Here is a posting regarding a recent paper they wrote. That paper includes a history of cavitation fusion research, but makes no mention of NanoSpire. Has Quantum Potential Corporation consulted with Ed Pope about cavitation (they are located within walking distance of each other)? Another interesting connection: Dr. Max I. Fomitchev-Zamilov, President of Quantum Potential Corporation, was working and training in Russia from 1992 to 1997, and Sergio Lebid, an associate of Mark Leclair at NanoSpire, was a scientist in Russia working with cavitation. Did their professional paths cross in Russia, or since?

(4) The fact that Ed Pope is an advisor to and advocate for NanoSpire, means we have to look at this technology very seriously. How can we reconcile the fact that Ed was connected to some of the highest levels within government, with LeClair's claim that his technology is being suppressed? If suppression is taking place, wouldn't Ed know about it?

...and, perhaps not unrelated to all of this, there's much to think about in Ed's forewarning about oligarchy.

--------

Updates:

 9/13/12:  Response by Dr. Max I. Fomitchev-Zamilov, regarding NanoSpire, by email:


"I am quite interested in reading their scientific papers and reproducing and validating their results. Will they allow for such an independent inquiry?

Max I. Fomitchev-Zamilov
Asstn. Prof. CS&E, Penn State
President, Quantum Potential Corporation
http://www.quantum-potential.com/"

9/24/12: Mark LeClair was a guest on the Smart Scarecrow Show twice recently, and I have highlighted this quote from LeClair (linked at end of main article):

"I've built half a dozen of these devices and tested them over a course of a dozen experiments with 100% repeatability, and as far as replication goes we tried to do a replication experiment at the Naval Research Laboratory. David Nagel was supposed to be my PhD advisor at Worcester Polytech back in 2007. So he managed to get me into the Naval Research Lab along with the help of Ed Pope, whose on our board of advisers, both are former navy. That experiment, unfortunately, appears to have been rigged, and I have already made public accusations of that, and I know for a fact it has to be, because subsequent experiments have produced immense radiation, and so even if the pump is running at only a fraction of its output, we should have seen something on the neutron detector, but I never even saw a power light indicator on that thing go off. They promised us a gamma ray spectrometer as well, and I would not have flown from Maine down to Washington, DC for that experiment if I had known they weren't going to have that gamma ray spectrometer on hand. They claimed it was being cooled down over the weekend with cryogenic fluids so that it would be ready when we got there and when we got there they had never done that. Partway through the experiment the pump shut down accidently and they had a horrified look on their face and they ran into a room where the extension cord went where we weren't allowed to go, and they claimed that the cord fell out, but it looked to me like they were using a motor speed control, because the thing was running at such a low RPM that it was hardly even moving, and ordinarily it would be dancing all over the table if you did not anchor the thing down, so it was obvious that it was running at an abnormally low RPM, but none the less it was cavitating, and you could see the reflection of the neutron output reflected right off the drill plate itself and you could see the image of that burned right into the PVC tube, and like I say, subsequent experiments produced pretty scary amounts of radiation, so there isn't any doubt the NRL experiment was designed to look as though it wasn't running, and they can say whatever they want but I know that it was real."

Observations:

(1) We learn that LeClair already knew David Nagel, who together with Ed Pope helped in getting into the NRL for a demonstration. It appears that Pope and Nagel have a slightly different spin about the radiation:

Pope said: "I did speak with Dave Nagel, an old and highly regarded friend, who is now with George Washington University and is closely associated with the international LENR activities. I haven't spoken with Dave recently and do not recall precisely what he told me after the NRL experiment, but, if I recall the general description, he indicated that the NRL people did not detect radiation but that there were questions regarding the set up and instrumentation. With this in mind, Dave did not take a skeptical position of what he knows of Mark and Serge's work but more of an "as yet to be determined" view of what Mark and Serge are doing."

Nagel said (as quoted by Mark Albertson): "It (the radiation sickness) almost broke my BS meter."

(2) We learn that LeClair ran his device at least twice since the NRL demonstration, and there were "immense" and "scary" amounts of radiation.

That is significant. A press release on 2/22/12, stated: "Nanospire has announced that its investigative study on fusion created by cavitation in water has come to an end." The next step was to arrange for proper shielding, for which LeClair wrote on 5/8/12: "All of our future tests will be in a hot cell." Back in February, LeClair told me he had not yet "calculated the additional incremental cost, but it should be low and comparable to other LENR systems producing the same level of output." But a later 5/11/12 post by Serge Lebid stated: "You do realize that in order to reach a thorough level of validation, in a hot cell, that financial resources are required. That is our Catch 22."

Well, we know that the device has since ran at least twice, so either proper shielding (such as a hot cell) was installed, or a testing facility was secured which was able to provide the needed shielding. So, why weren't those events set up as validating demonstrations?

There is nothing more holding back validation...

Ed, we need you to weigh in, here.

10/18/12: Has Steve Krivit, of New Energy Times, recently changed his opinion regarding NanoSpire? See today's update at the end of my article: Cold Fusion, Comedy.

11/9/12: Mark LeClair was interviewed for a third time by Gary Hendershot (the SmartScarecrow). Sergio Lebid, Mark's associate, was also interviewed, and I have tried to include most of his comments in the excerpt below:

Lebid: What we've concluded from all this wonderful exercise is, because it's been nothing but fun, but to say the least on that subject on how to engage very serious and very sound, let's say, ethical, potential partners, if you will, because our business model is to establish joint ventures. We would spin off companies based on the [intellectual property]... Our business model is in fact that we are an [intellectual property] holding company, and we are striving to engage in potential joint ventures with serious, with qualified potential partners that have the vision, and of course the passion for our type of research, and our type of results. We do have the evidence proving what type of results we've just discussed, as Mark had pointed out... The one factor that we've noticed all along: Mark, and even others have noted on some of the blogs we've read, is the fact that number one, we are very critical of ourselves and our discoveries, and we are probably our most critical skeptics. It took us many iterations over and over in different parameters, different designs, etc., to finally determine that we do have a major discovery on our hands, and we took the benefit of the time of addressing this and actually employing four independent laboratories to do EDAX analysis, SEM analysis, and we do have hard evidence to support our results.

LeClair: Serge is right. We made sure we had our ducks in a row. We did redundant analysis before we came forward, so that we wouldn't end up sounding stupid, because I think that alot of these companies were premature in terms of making some of their proclamations, and then all that does is just raise the bar in terms of anticipation, and then when they don't deliver, there's disappointment. You're never going to hear that out of NanoSpire. We're only in it to tell you about what we have done, not what we think we're going to do. You're only going to hear about it after it has already been accomplished and you are going to see the data.

Lebid: We do welcome an opportunity with an academic institution, or even a government institution to conduct a hot cell experiment, repeating what we have done before. We did almost engage one particular institution... for some reason at the nth hour they backed out engaging us in this contract.

LeClair: We've been trying to line ourselves up with the most prestigious institutions we can, and like Serge pointed out... McMaster University, and also Penn State, but for some odd reason they all seem to back out with no explanation at the tail end of it. Once they lost interest, we lost interest in them. We want to work with someone who really wants to do this, who wants to do their historical contribution, because whichever team manages to do the replication of our experiment, that's guaranteed fame for them because I'll tell you right now it's going to work. Every time we've run this experiment, twelve times we hit the switch, we get instant power out of this thing, we get 33 degree temperature rise. As fast as that water can go through the reactor we are seeing fifteen degree Fahrenheit temperature spikes going through the thing, so there isn't any question, this thing is heating water... it's not something you need delicate calorimetry to see; it's in your face fusion, and there is no doubt this is hot fusion. I hate the expression cold fusion; we just call it cavitation fusion...

LENR [scientists]-- they have to cook up all these new physical concepts to make their explanations work. We had a theory that led us through three separate scale-ups that in the end produced intense fusion and transmutation. So how can you argue with a theory that works... With Pons and Fleischman the electricity flow is so strong they can see a plasma discharge on the electrode, and these are forming cavitation bubbles in close proximity to that electrode, and that's what is required to form those re-entry jets that are crystallized. So there isn't any doubt we see craters on those electrodes filled with transmuted material. They tried to argue it happened from the inside out; I say it happened from the outside in...


The ideal business partner is someone who has a strong energy generation background, also, someone that's familiar with cavitation would be nice, but there aren't too many people who have a background in cavitation so I can't really consider that to be a requirement. There's got to be someone, too, that has more than just the capital in their hands. We're looking for someone who's got the progressive forward looking vision that can see where this is actually going to go, and that isn't afraid to make the moves it's going to take because, I'll tell you what, the number one requirement for being in the fusion field is you got to have guts.

[Executive Summary:]

Lebid: Essentially what we have been able to develop, and again, this is based on our knowledge, very detailed knowledge of other processing methods. We could lump them into conventional methods, reaction systems, homogenization systems, emulsification systems, and the like. What we have developed, we feel, is a truly smart tool for various reactions that require a high degree of precision, and capability into even, let's say, working at the level of stoichiometry. And that means using the least amount of ingredients in the formulation, but using the mechanical force provided by the tool. That's what we have discovered and that is what we feel is critically required in industries today. And it's far more cost effective and less maintenance and longer lasting than any other conventional method.


There was also some joking about black suburbans:

Gary: What's annoying as xxx is the guys in the black suburbans who park out in front of my house every night. I took them my xxx dough-nuts and they should be leaving me alone tonight.

LeClair: You should see what happens when Serge and I hit the key words; that's when the phone call cuts out...

Gary: I would have to imagine that every major manufacturer in the world is beating on your door, every rich guy in the universe is bringing wheelbarrows full of money to your door trying to buy this process off of you. Academia is probably just absolutely going wild with replications. Correct me where I'm wrong.

LeClair: Um, wrong on all counts. [Everyone laughs.] I'm waiting for that boatload of money to pull up front but that hasn't happened yet.

Gary: Boatloads of money, huh?

...

LeClair: No black van that time.

Gary: No, the black suburban has not knocked me off line so far, so I think we are still good to go...


[Perhaps LeClair doesn't think this exchange is all just humor. He wrote recently: "As far as the info being out for years, we are still convinced we are being screened as to what we see. There have been over 300,000 hits to the NanoSpireinc.com website since February, but we only see responses from the stooges we know work for the dark side. No mail, no email or phone calls for the past three years that were relevant." But on 11/1/12 Mark commented: "I'm a trusted member of the defense community."]

LeClair: The cold fusion elite has known about our discovery since probably 2006. 

Gary: But academia was aware of it.

Lebid: A few.

LeClair: A few. I was going to do my Ph.d with [Worcester Technical Institute] on the LeClair effect.

Lebid: We could tell you things off the record, that will astound you, to say the least...

Gary: Well, I don't want to get you guys in trouble, that's for sure. And right now we are talking to the universe.


Now, that's an interesting topic for humor. Ed Pope, NanoSpire's adivser, had worked in Naval Intelligence, as discussed above. Would it surprise the reader to learn that Sergio Lebid, LeClair's associate, appears to have worked in top-secret operations for the government? Consider this quote by LeClair, writing on the CMNS forum (as reported on the Vortex forum), 10/26/10: 

“I intend this material to be public. This is too important and I feel the public has a right to know. Our motivation is not as commercially motivated as you might think. At this point, Serge [Lebid] and I have probably sustained permanent injuries, and both feel we have an uncertain future health-wise. We have literally risked our lives for the betterment of mankind. Serge and I have always been altruistic and are two of the most honest people you or anyone else will ever know. We both worked in some of the most critical programs in the US government. I was the expert in hydrodynamics on the underwater launch of the Trident I & II missiles at Lockheed in the Fluid Mechanics Group 81-11, that had a reputation rivaling Skunkworks. Serge has served this country in many ways that can't be discussed. His nephew, Phillip Lebid, was a Secret Service agent and sacrificed himself at age 30 to save a bus load of kids. Phillip was very behind what we are doing and we miss him greatly.”

With that type of backgound for both LeClair's adviser and LeClair's associate, and LeClair characterizing himself as a trusted member of the defense community, perhaps the fusion and transmutation part of NanoSpire's discovery is classified. That is suggested in Lebid's concluding remarks (Gary had asked for an executive summary) which only mentioned the discovery in terms of tools for industry.

If something is classified, I do not think the details can be revealed to investors, and certainly not to the public. This may account for why there has not been (and there may never be) a validating demonstration. Consider this 7/1/12 statement by LeClair:

"I have already disclosed so much to the world in my previous releases that the cat is out of the bag and can't be stopped, even if they manage to stop us. Even if it takes fifty years I will rest well knowing that the baby has been delivered. The world's problems are political, not technological."

Also, NanoSpire has not been discussing any details about the recent runs of their device. At least with the earlier demonstrations at their lab, at the Naval Research Lab, and to a small extent about Penn State, we got some feedback.  How about the recent tests that again produced "immense" and "scary" radiation (this time shielded)? When, where and with whom were these tests performed? Can they post data? Pictures/ video? Why wasn't there open validation?

10/25/13: Mark LeClair presented via skype at the Global Breakthrough Energy Movement Conference, Day 1, 10/10/13, at 4:45 PM, and at the end of the day during the panel discussion/ Q&A. Watch the archives here (scroll down to the 17th video) with the accompanying slides [slide download requires free registration at http://open-source-energy.org/], and the Q&A here (1st video). Moray B. King attended the conference in person, and assisted in Mark's skype presentation. On last night's SmartScarecrow show, Moray said: "Most exciting was meeting Garret Moddel, who is a professor at the University of Colorado at Boulder. He's very interested in doing replication work on various projects, and he's very impressed with Mark LeClair's presentation. They are in contact with each other now, and I believe Garret will take a look at it. Mark really needs rigorous replication to get any traction at all with his claims."

11/9/13: Next, read my new article: Cavitation Radiation Replication? Future updates will be posted there.

No comments:

Post a Comment