This is just rhetorical, but who on the IH team made the evaluation that
the device did not perform? They didn't do any type of testing on their
own; and unless Rossi is mis-reporting Penon's report, then it wasn't
him. I doubt if it was Fulvio Fabiana. The only other person who may be
qualified to make that determination is Barry West, and I don't know who
he is.
The other thing that confuses me, is why did IH send out that rather
pessimistic release on Mar 10, before they had any report to view?
It's not that clear cut to me.
Craig
On 04/15/2016 03:51 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote:
a.ashfield <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
You are certain Rossi is a fraud, the ERV report is rubbish and
the E-Cat doesn't work.
Let us put aside fraud for a moment. The press releases make it clear
that Rossi says there is fifty times input, whereas I.H. says it did
not work. They were not able to "substantiate" the claims. That means
they do not think there was significant excess heat.
If I.H. is right then yes, the ERV report must be rubbish and the
E-cat doesn't work.
If Rossi is right, I.H.'s conclusions are rubbish.
One of them must be drastically wrong. Based on their previous work, I
would say Rossi is wrong.
(I hope no one quibbles about the word "substantiate." Whatever it
means, it rules out 50 times input.)
- Jed
