This thread deals with the cat and the mouse. Rossi is serious about this subject.
On Sat, Jun 20, 2015 at 7:37 PM, Jed Rothwell <[email protected]> wrote: > I commend this discussion for taking Rossi seriously . . . but not too > seriously. > > I think it is a good idea to give him the benefit of the doubt. We all > know he is controversial and he sometimes contradicts himself. He says odd > things. Yet I think he is worth paying close attention to. > > Many people blame him for the poor quality of the Lugano experiment. I > doubt that he shares the blame. Both Levi et al. and Rossi insist that he > had nothing to do with the design of the experiment, and no influence over > how it was done after he assisted setting it up. I think that must be true, > because the first set of experiments were done in his lab, where I assume > he did have some influence, and those experiments were better than Lugano. > His influence was beneficial. If they had done an improved version of those > first experiments, it might have been a triumph. > > By the way, I uploaded another review of Lugano by Thomas Clarke: > > http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/ClarkeTcommentont.pdf > > - Jed > >
