Cude, you are consistent at least. You are like a Mary Yugo on steroids. Both of you repeat your statements over and over and they have no substance. I just proved your DC cheat trick inert and the others you insist upon depend upon Rossi running a scam so you have nothing but straws.
I only believe what I have seen adequately demonstrated. You would not believe anything you see period. That is the difference between us. Dave -----Original Message----- From: Joshua Cude <joshua.c...@gmail.com> To: vortex-l <vortex-l@eskimo.com> Sent: Tue, Jun 4, 2013 7:13 am Subject: Re: [Vo]:A Couple Hundred Bucks Maybe... On Mon, Jun 3, 2013 at 4:18 PM, David Roberson <dlrober...@aol.com> wrote: The best proof is one that has the least possibility of error. Or the least possibility of error that favors the ecat, or the least possibility of tampering. An isolated ecat eliminates input tampering. A heated tank of water eliminates output tampering. Heating an isolated tank of water of sufficient volume to sufficient temperature with an isolated device is pretty much iron-clad, as long as the isolation can be transparently verified. > Every complication that is added to the setup results in many more issues to > question by the skeptics. Not true if the complications allows disconnection from the mains, or allows manifest integration of the heat. > The technique used by the testers of the ECAT is good enough for any > reasonable scientist to accept Only if you define reasonable as true believer. > You fail to realize that there is no way what so ever to meet their > requirements since they do not believe LENR is possible. An isolated device heating an isolated tank of water in an isolated location would meet all the skeptics' requirements. Anyway, as I said, you can't possibly think it will ever be practical, if you think skeptics cannot be convinced. > They have failed to prove their position entirely, Also the believers have failed to prove theirs...
