OK, I have to repeat myself: Rossi was found wholly not guilty (no crime
was committed, is the sentence) by not one but three courts in Italy for
trafficking in toxic waste, with the last sentence in November 2004. The
more I look into it, the more it seems that somebody with good connections
had
This is a good example of why circumstantial evidence should be the last
resort. Who can deny that Rossi was indicted and tried? Who can deny that
the Italian government is corrrupt? Most importantly, how do you weigh the
virtually unlimited bits and pieces of circumstantial evidence against
If you don't think that Rossi's past has any bearing on the E-Cat, or if you
think the October 6th test showed conclusive, first-principle, irrefutable
proof, you probably can just skip this E-Mail. For the rest:
PETROLDRAGON
I really didn't want to get into the Petroldragon stuff, but I
3 matches
Mail list logo
