Eric, I had read your comment before answering.
Further to my comment about the negative things written about Rossi and
the ERV on this blog, particularly by Jed giving IH's point of view, it
might even up the score a little to show what Rossi wrote recently.
1.
Andrea Rossi
August 13, 2016 at 5:45 PM
<http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=892&cpage=151#comment-1216786>
Felix Rends:
I have dedicated to this work the second part of my life and part of
my health. I am no more the same of one year ago.
About the Lugano Report: the test has not been made by me, nor has
been the report and for the truth of it speaks the life of the
nuclear physicists that made it, their honesty, their professional
skill matured in two among the highest rated Universities and in the
CERN of Geneva where all of them have worked. About the test of one
year of the 1 MW Plant, the measurements have been made for one year
by a nuclear engineer, who got his doctorate in nuclear engineering
when he was 23 years old in the University of Bologna with 110/110
summa cum laude, then worked as a nuclear engineer in a nuclear
power plant, then, taking advantage of such experience, became a
professional specialized in certifications and validations of
industrial plants and industrial products. He has been chosen, as
proven by copious documents, in agreement between IH and us to make
the ERV and he made it with all his professional skills and with the
integrity that characterized all his life, that is immaculate under
any point of view, as I investigated when I knew him because I had
to choose a trusted professional to make the safety certification of
my products years ago; he resulted to be the best in absolute among
all his colleagues for preparation, honesty, confidentiality. This
is also the reason why he has been chosen to make the ERV, in
agreement between IH and us. By the way, IH has totally agreed upon
his report released after 3 months of test, and has cited such
report in interviews released by Tom Darden. Same thing happened
after 6 months of test, when the second quarterly report has been
released by the ERV, same thing again happened after 9 months, when
the ERV released the third quarterly report: please note that during
9 months of the test IH repeatedly accompanied to visit the test
their investors, explaining to them how the ERV was measuring the
performance, showing the seals of the flowmeter, showing the
temperature measurement system ( agreed upon directly between Mr Tom
Darden and the ERV) and IH collected many million dollars of
investments from Woodford after the officers of Woodford visited the
test twice, during the first 9 months, and repeatedly accompanied
Chinese top level investors and engineers to visit the test. The
results of the first three quarterly reports, obviously, were
substantially equal to the results of the fourth and final report,
that IH now is renegating. Eventually, IH paid the first three
quarterly reports, but did not pay the final one. The first three
reports determined the allowance to IH of enormous investments and
they loved them. The fourth report determined the obligation of IH
to pay us and they discovered the results were wrong: what a strange
coincidence.
You have my honour word that what I wrote here is the truth.
I totally sympathyze with you and with all the persons like you and
also this is why I work like a beast, even now that is Saturday, as
tomorrow Sunday, and always on this endevour..
After all these years you merit to go in a shop and buy an E-Cat, damn !
Warm Regards,
A.R.
P.S.
Let me add that both the tests of Lugano and Doral have been
performed for long timespans, respectively 1 month and 1 year, with
the obvious consequent considerations.
On 8/13/2016 8:29 PM, Eric Walker wrote:
On Aug 13, 2016, at 19:21, a.ashfield <a.ashfi...@verizon.net> wrote:
Come on Eric. The basic case is that Rossi said IH failed to pay him.
Obviously if there had not been a contract IH would have answered it that way.
Have you had a chance to read the answer yet? If not, I highly recommend you
do. The denials of allegation are for the most part extremely succinct, and
they are numerous. Despite that, IH straight up say that Rossi did not meet the
terms of the GPT. Perhaps they are lying in their Answer, presumably a very
dumb thing to do. I'm not betting on that.
Eric
