The trail will cut through the FUD, On Fri, May 20, 2016 at 11:18 PM, Jed Rothwell <[email protected]> wrote:
> a.ashfield <[email protected]> wrote: > > Jed "As I said, there is clear evidence of that: Rossi refused to let >> anyone see the customer site. You have that from Rossi himself." >> >> AA. It seems this was the agreement written by IH before the test began. >> > > 1. Rossi himself in the interview said that the I.H. expert insisted upon > seeing the customer side. Surely you realize that this is a reasonable > request, and that any expert would insist on it. Agreement or no agreement, > Rossi should have acquiesced. It would have instantly proven his case. It > would instantly resolve all doubts. There is no rational reason to deny > this request. > > 2. Whatever they agreed to, it is common sense to alter an agreement in > response to a reasonable request. I cannot imagine a more reasonable > request than this, or one that would better serve Rossi's own purposes -- > assuming he is honest and he actually has 1 MW. Opening the customer site > would have as many advantages to Rossi as to I.H. It makes no sense to > enslave yourself to an agreement when it can be improved to everyone's > benefit. > > 3. Rossi is not a reliable source of information. You should not believe > his blog or his assertions about agreements. He often lies. He lied about > me, blatantly, years before I said anything particularly bad about him in > public, other than the fact that he refused to let me visit and measure the > temperature and flow rate. > > 4. Apply some common sense. Ask yourself: what other reason would Rossi > have to refuse admittance, other than the fact that there is no 1 MW > machine, and no ventilation system or other means of getting rid of the > waste heat? Can you propose ANY reason why an honest person would hesitate > to open the door? > > - Jed > >
