-----Original Message----- From: a.ashfield > It doesn't matter what test is performed, the pseudo skeptics will find some > reason why it might be wrong.
Rubbish. You demean the intellect of the Rossi faithful with such tripe. The reverse is as likely to be true - that no matter how inadequate the report, Rossi's flock of gullible idealists will say it is proof-positive of his inflated claims. Forget those extremes. Both are tripe. Let's assume that we are all intelligent people who cherish the scientific method and who can discern the truth when it is openly presented. All that needs to happen as the first order of proof - and it will convince many skeptics - is to compare electrical usage day-by-day hour-by-hour with thermal power delivered. Raw data must be available to test any summaries which are provided by the "expert". How hard is that? The "customer" assuming that there was a bona fide customer, since even that point is in doubt - supposedly received hot water as their heat source, and there should be data of that usage hourly - over the ~8000 hours of operation (if it was 24/7) or at least over 2000 hours. If there is less than 2000 hours of raw data, then it will probably mean that some data has been purged to make the results look better. This would be flow-rate of water and temperature. If they are an independent customer - then of course they kept records of thermal usage. How else would they know if they could afford to buy the thing without it? Ask yourself this: How hard is it to compare heat delivered against the corresponding power bill from Florida Power and Light? Rossi should have had his own power meter installed. That is step one. Step two is to verify the official data has not been altered. The power bill is based on kW-hrs of usage and the customer knows how much hot water they used, anything less is suspicious. If Rossi claims not to have had a power meter from Florida Power installed then YES the stink is starting to rise. Of course, having real raw data to share is painfully obvious, and if Rossi should have some flimsy excuse why this cannot be done - to justify why there is no real raw data, then Yes - that is where the problem will center. This is what IH already knows and it would explain why they are distancing themselves from Rossi (if they are). If the expert - and it does not matter who paid him - cannot provide testable data for heat delivered, to compare against a bona-fide power bill form the power company, knowing that that obvious and simple step presents the prima facie case, then yes all the skeptics and even some of the flock that drank the Kool-Aid, will be put on alert that the con game is afoot. Bottom line, if there is good raw data to compare, then the truth will out. IH already knows this - so we will look to them for guidance. But let's be clear from the start - this is science - not politics. If believable real raw data is not available initially - then certainly everyone including IH will know that the report is a sham. No one gives away a trade secret by sharing that kind of raw data.
