A well-known skeptic shown up in this discussion. See: http://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=484427&page=5
He is intellectually dishonest. He described experiment 1 as follows: "Which figures are you questioning? A flow rate of 4.9 g/s water, and a temperature increase of 88 degreesC corresponds to 1.8 kW. Evidence for conversion of more than a percent or so to steam was not presented. The 1 kW average input power was quoted by Levi." He left out the heat of vaporization. He would probably claim that the water was not vaporized; i.e. it was very wet steam. The second experiment proved that was not the case. That was the whole point of the second experiment. Skeptics often use the technique of looking at each item of evidence as if the other did not exist. They dismiss the idea that there can be a totality of evidence. He also demands an "independent" test. That was an independent test. Levi had no connection to Rossi. As soon as the test was reported, Crude lumped in Prof. Levi with Rossi. If professors A, B and C conduct tests, he will say that they too are part of a conspiracy, and he will demand yet another "independent" test. It is tiresome nonsense. - Jed
