Ian Walker <walker...@gmail.com> wrote: "... as I said. I.H. says > they disagree with the report. They say there is no heat. That makes the > report valueless. I trust I.H.'s expertise in calorimetry more than I trust > Penon's." > > 1) Who at I.H. said this? > > The press release! That's what I said before. The press release says "Industrial Heat has worked for over three years to substantiate the results claimed by Mr. Rossi from the E-Cat technology – all without success."
In his press release, Rossi says the gadget produces 50 times input. If that is true, surely that would be substantiation. Obviously the two disagree. > Just the beginning of questioning your assertions. > > You are not questioning any my assertions. You are asking questions about things I never said, and issues I know nothing about. When did I talk about people working on nuclear reactors? How would I know how many days they spent there? Ask Rossi! You made up this long list of imaginary claims that I supposedly said, and now you want me to answer them? I repeat, EVERY DAMN THING I SAID can be confirmed in the press releases and legal filing. I pointed to these sources again, and again and again. If you are not satisfied with press releases, I cannot help you. All I said was that the the two press releases conflict, and it is my impression I.H. knows more about calorimetry than Rossi. That's all. Do you understand what "impression" means? It does not mean I have their resumes in my computer. It means I have talked to them and they seem to know what they are doing, unlike Rossi. You can read about Rossi's problems with calorimetry in the archives here, such as his problems with NASA. - Jed
