the statement I refer to were not in the report, but were specific answer given later.
in fact teh statement in the report was ambiguous. They explain that he was just present... It seems to be said by Bo Hoistad http://www.e-catworld.com/2014/12/13/transcript-of-radio-interview-with-bo-hoistad-on-the-lugano-e-cat-test-we-want-lenr-fusione-fredda/ *Bo Höistad:* *“Of course we were very careful not to allow anything occult or hidden to happen, as a precaution. But the answer is no. We manipulated the ashes. Rossi was present, and he assisted in the operation.”* *Melis (or interviewer):* *“Did you choose the sample that was to be analyzed?”* *Bo Höistad:* *“Yes, of course. We picked the sample ourselves. But really, what can I say. In principle it is possible to fool anyone, if a person really has this gift.”.* *Melis (or interviewer):* *“In short, a magician or something.”* *Bo Höistad:* *“Exactly. But no, we don’t operate on that scale.”* note that the hypothesis of a general fraud is incoherent with the calorimetry protocol of Lugano, and despite the conspiracy theories, of Ferrara. the protocol allowed the physicist to install their own instruments, to check the wires, to touch the reactor, to instal thermocoupel, bolometers, IR cam, to calibrate at will... It is simply stupid to give so much control on the reactor if you give a faudulent device. Ithis is to oppose with the described unwillingness of DGT at Milano demo for ICCF18, to change the protocol. This is also different to the behavior of rossi in face of Steven Krivit who refused to change the protocol. I agree that unwillingness to accept change in instruments and protocol should raise doubt, but on the opposite abandoning control on a device is enough to prove honesty... this does not mean it is working, or well measured... but one can ruleout fraud. In that situation, fraud is eliminated, and only remain errors, failure, delusion & incompetence. The secret of stage magic is to control the acts of the spectators. this is incompatible with letting them bring their instruments, touch the devices, rewire all. Whatever did the testers, they were free to do things that would reveal the tricks. the hypothesis of an error on effective emissivity, on the full spectrum, or in the IR cam bandwidth, is not to be ignored. there is nothing new and Michael McKubre raised the problems since long. the one of an upfront fraud in Lugano, and to a lesser degree in Ferrara is above what I could call extraordinary absurd in the sense of game theory, and stage magic. the clear honesty of the calorimetry protocol in Ferrara and Lugano, give good reason to eliminate the stage magic hypothesis for the isotopic shift. moreover the result is so extraordinary that a fraudster would avoid that extreme result which would and have raised skepticism. If you add the fact that Rossi did not took the ashes, this closes the speculations. Until Ferrara , the secrecy around Rossi was allowing some conspiracy theory, but now the open protocols, for Ferrara calorimetry, Lugano Calorimetry, Lugano isotopic analysis, this can be ruled out. You can add that a fraud would be an Industrial Heat act, involving Tom Darden, who have too much to loose in participating a fraud, and for who dumping IH is pocket money. If we accept experiments by Piantelli, Fralick, Nagel, Miley, and the whole LENR experimental results, E-cat have nothing extraordinary... it is just to be checked like the claim of any startup. 2015-03-07 16:26 GMT+01:00 Jones Beene <[email protected]>: > *From:* *[email protected]* <[email protected]> > > Ø "Rossi had physical control of the samples which were tested." > > Ø non, the testers refuted that claim. he was watching, but did not > operate > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > No, Alain – you did not carefully read Levi’s own statement. > > Please read it for yourself: Levi stated specifically on PAGE 7 of the > Official report that Rossi emptied the reactor. > > Here is the quote from Levi: “Rossi later intervened to switch off the > dummy, and in the following subsequent operations on the E-Cat: charge > insertion, reactor startup, reactor shutdown and powder charge extraction. > “ > > That is very clear wording -directly from Levi himself. Rossi extracted > the powder. This eliminates any real scientific possibility to assert > that the powder tested was the same as the powder extracted – since pure > isotope was seen in the sample tested, and Rossi had already admitting to > having purchased pure isotope (Ni-62) – which was the major part of his > Patent Application. This Patent Claim for Ni-62 gives Rossi plenty of > motive- to alter (“salt”) the “powder charge extraction”. The claim of > isotopic shifts is even less reliable than the excess heat claim. > >
