Well I can see that Rothwell is in now full retreat - since he has started
to distort the facts to conform with his prior erroneous assumptions -
rather than doing the basic reality check and admitting that he could be
wrong.

 

There is no "50 CC" which is relevant. There is no factuality in the
Rothwell appraisal of what others saw, or what he has heard that they saw -
and it simply does not add up that Rossi would be hiding the insides of a
reactor that is no longer the one to be used in October. If we look at facts
only, there is no evidence of a larger device. 

 

Ockham sez: only one size E-Cat.

 

The "50 CC"  is pure BS and typical rossi-speak. The cm scale is shown in
the images, and the smallest bulge alone is at least five time more, and
there is every 'logical' reason to suspect, given Rossi's abundant history
of disinformation - that there always was only one size - and that the
reason for why the coverup remains in place is to disguise Levi's gross
measurement errors in the 'Focardi tribute' (the wet steam error) which was
compounded by a further error in February (the misplaced thermocouple
error).

 

It is clear now that both of these tests were juvenile efforts at
calorimetry - below high school standards - and thankfully the Swedes have
at least given us something closer to the truth - but as Mats admits, they
are not there yet

 

Jones

 

 

 

From: Jed Rothwell 

 

If one trusted observer (namely Levi) were to have been given a quick peek
inside the original device, back in January

 

1. It was not a "quick peek." Who told you it was quick?

 

2. Others saw it too.

 

3. What difference does it make whether it was January, February, March or
April? The size does not change with the season.

 

4. Anyone can tell at a glance the difference between an object roughly 1 L
and one that is 50 ml. Even a quick peek would be enough.

 

Look, there is not a shred of evidence for this idea of yours. Not one
person has said one thing that indicates this might be the case. I do not
know how or why this idee fixe entered your mind, but it is incorrect.

 

- Jed

 

Reply via email to