The Future is in Our Hands
Blog
Information, Awareness, Prevention / United to End Cancer

Data showing that funding projects and the direction of research are determined by the power of the most influential scientists and not by scientific merits

This document is available in pdf at Google Drive: goo.gl/6oCS5m

Dear Ides Debruyne, Managing Director Journalismfund.eu … Perhaps you are not aware that I have been working for over 18 years without a salary, for over 14 hours per day, including most of the weekends for your benefit, the benefit of your grandchildren, and for future generations in reducing cancer deaths by over 50% with my breakthrough technology for an effective early cancer detection, and that it damages you and more importantly all other people who rely on your responsibility if you are not reporting to journalists that you know and to the public my answers to those opposing my money- and life-saving inventions. Continue reading

Share it!Share on FacebookShare on Google+Tweet about this on TwitterShare on RedditShare on LinkedInPin on PinterestShare on TumblrEmail this to someone

This document in English is available in pdf at: goo.gl/EJpKyq 

Crosetto responds to statements made by Dr. Andrew Lankford, Chairman of HEPAP, leader of the U.S. groups working on the ATLAS Trigger and Data Acquisition Systems at CERN, former ATLAS Deputy Spokesperson, regarding my 3D-Flow OPRA and a request to follow scientific procedures complying with rules respecting science, colleagues and serving taxpayers. Continue reading

Share it!Share on FacebookShare on Google+Tweet about this on TwitterShare on RedditShare on LinkedInPin on PinterestShare on TumblrEmail this to someone

This document in English is available in pdf at: goo.gl/iEph5R

This document in Italian is available in pdf at: goo.gl/qp1RFH 

The entire list of documents is at: goo.gl/XtMkJc.

Response to statements made by Dr. Nadia Pastrone, President of the Italian National Scientific Committee 1 (CSN1) and responsible for the Italian physicists who worked at the CERN, regarding my 3D-Flow OPRA and a request to follow scientific procedures complying with rules respecting science, colleagues and serving taxpayers. Continue reading

Share it!Share on FacebookShare on Google+Tweet about this on TwitterShare on RedditShare on LinkedInPin on PinterestShare on TumblrEmail this to someone

This document is available in pdf at: goo.gl/H4Q7Hs

Concerned Citizen: Why do you state that the Large Hadron Collider (LHC) in Geneva costs over $50 billion yet using a search engine like google, the official cost states only $13.25 Billion? Who should I believe? 

CROSETTO: The official cost of $13.25 Billion does not account for all expenses. You don’t have to believe me, there is evidence from data reported by CERN (see CERN annual report). A few additions, subtractions and divisions on data reported by CERN will convince you that the cost of the LHC is way over $13.25 Billion (Forbes states $13.25 Billion, Wikipedia states $9 Billion, CERN’s official website states $4.1 Billion for the accelerators and $1.4 Billion for the detectors). Continue reading

Share it!Share on FacebookShare on Google+Tweet about this on TwitterShare on RedditShare on LinkedInPin on PinterestShare on TumblrEmail this to someone

This document in English is available in pdf at: goo.gl/dYGusD

My 3D-Flow OPRA (Object Pattern real-time Recognition Algorithms) invention could have already saved hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars and my 3D-CBS (3-D Complete Body Screening) invention which makes use of the 3D-Flow OPRA, could have already saved millions of lives with an effective early cancer detection (See below supported claims). Continue reading

Share it!Share on FacebookShare on Google+Tweet about this on TwitterShare on RedditShare on LinkedInPin on PinterestShare on TumblrEmail this to someone

This document is available in pdf at: goo.gl/R9eUZh

QUESTION FROM CERN & PAVIA’s SCIENTISTS: How can your invention with thousands of parallel-processing 3D-Flow OPRA processors in a cube of 16 cm or 36 cm of electronics compete with the major supercomputer projects such as APE of INFN and others, although none of them claim to be able to save millions of human lives from cancer or be the most powerful tool in the world to discover subatomic particles? Continue reading

Share it!Share on FacebookShare on Google+Tweet about this on TwitterShare on RedditShare on LinkedInPin on PinterestShare on TumblrEmail this to someone

This document in English is available in pdf at: goo.gl/sqcqod

CONCERNED CITIZENS: How can you claim that your 3D-Flow invention can meet the needs of the four major experiments at CERN and PET? Some physicists argue that it is impossible because the problems and the triggering needs of each experiment are very different.

CROSETTO: I’m not the only to claim this, as several scientists, senior experts in the field for over twenty years, have put this in writing (see citations at “goo.gl/GIC5aR” and a few complete letters at “goo.gl/VXBx33“).

Continue reading

Share it!Share on FacebookShare on Google+Tweet about this on TwitterShare on RedditShare on LinkedInPin on PinterestShare on TumblrEmail this to someone
[This letter is available in PDF at Google Drive “goo.gl/I8btdF

Dear Dr. Michael Corbat, CEO of Citigroup, Dear Dr. James Forese, President of Citigroup, Dear members of the Board of Directors and the Executive board of Citigroup, Dear decision makers, leaders in the field, investigative journalists and those who care to make the scientific truth for the benefit of humanity prevail, we should work together to demand and implement transparency in science (please see APPEDIX for references to information supporting these claims). What is needed is to address the real problem that influential scientists handling taxpayer money have the responsibility to make the scientific truth emerge through transparent, public, scientific reviews, rather than wasting taxpayer money. Continue reading

Share it!Share on FacebookShare on Google+Tweet about this on TwitterShare on RedditShare on LinkedInPin on PinterestShare on TumblrEmail this to someone

This document is available in PDF at Google Drive goo.gl/hea4EC

Dear Dr. Cherry Murray, Benjamin Peirce Professor of Technology and Public Policy at Harvard SEAS, former Director of the Office of Science of the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE).

                  I respectfully request you address the proof that my invention, proven feasible by 59 quotes from reputable industries, can replace 4,000 CMS electronic data processing boards (goo.gl/mPHw5Y) funded by DOE with my 9 electronic data processing boards (goo.gl/OTkH4z) while providing an enormous performance improvement at one thousandth the cost. Continue reading

Share it!Share on FacebookShare on Google+Tweet about this on TwitterShare on RedditShare on LinkedInPin on PinterestShare on TumblrEmail this to someone
Site Overview
Please visit our
Site Overview for help in navigating the site.
Subscribe to our Newsletter

Upcoming Events
September 2017
Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday Saturday Sunday
August 28, 2017 August 29, 2017 August 30, 2017 August 31, 2017 September 1, 2017 September 2, 2017 September 3, 2017
September 4, 2017 September 5, 2017 September 6, 2017 September 7, 2017 September 8, 2017 September 9, 2017 September 10, 2017
September 11, 2017 September 12, 2017 September 13, 2017 September 14, 2017 September 15, 2017 September 16, 2017 September 17, 2017
September 18, 2017 September 19, 2017 September 20, 2017 September 21, 2017 September 22, 2017 September 23, 2017 September 24, 2017
September 25, 2017 September 26, 2017 September 27, 2017 September 28, 2017 September 29, 2017 September 30, 2017 October 1, 2017
Recent Comments