No one said Rossi sent the meter back. I said the ERV did. You say
that is a lie but offer no proof for your statement.
It is not in the court documents so you must have got it from IT or
Murray, or made it up.
AA
On 8/26/2016 5:27 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote:
a.ashfield <a.ashfi...@verizon.net <mailto:a.ashfi...@verizon.net>> wrote:
I was expecting you couldn't because it's secret.
A little bird is about as solid as the rest of the speculations.
You have a peculiar definition of the word "speculation." If I said,
"I suppose Rossi did not send the flow meter back for calibration,"
that would be speculation. What I said was a positive assertion, not
speculation. You seem to think you can recast sentences and their
meanings without regard to syntax.
If you do not believe me, you should say so, rather than putting words
in my mouth.
Why no piping drawing, that is key to most of it? Easier to argue
without the facts?
No, the rust is the key. A drawing might be wrong, but physical
evidence is proof. But how do you know these are not facts? For that
matter, how do you know I have not seen a piping drawing? As I have
pointed out before, you have (another!) peculiar notion which is that
information you personally have not seen does not exist.
- Jed
