On Jun 4, 2013, at 2:26 PM, Joshua Cude <joshua.c...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Mon, Jun 3, 2013 at 9:29 PM, Jed Rothwell <jedrothw...@gmail.com> wrote: >> Jouni Valkonen <jounivalko...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> Leading scam hypothesis does assume that Giuseppe Levi is a scammer and he >>> is as bad as Rossi. >> > > So you are saying Levi wants to destroy his own reputation for no reason, > > for no possible benefit. > > There may be benefit, and he has retained plausible deniability, so the risk > is small. >
That is true. The risk for Levi is negligible and he can always claim ignorance. Levi has very steady job at university and his pay roll is determined solely by his Ph.D level education and his work experience measured in years. If there are any deviations, Levi can just ask the Union lawyer to clear things up. His academic credentials are not based on how nice person he is but how peer review panels are rating his published articles: http://scholar.google.fi/citations?hl=en&user=vEZM3BQAAAAJ&view_op=list_works&pagesize=100 So If Levi is making few dozens of kiloeuros extra money with Rossi with very little efforts, his involvement is more than justified. If I were in Levi's shoes, I would without any doubt help Rossi as much I dare. After all this is not an academic scam, because academic world does not take commercial level cold fusion anyway seriously! ―Jouni
