Daniel Rocha <[email protected]> wrote: There is something to steal. You insisted that the test by the colonel > yielded extra heat. >
No, I said there was no proof and I have no idea what the colonel saw or did. > There were other occasions tooSo, there is something there. > There may have been other occasions. There may have been something there at some point. The first set of tests done by Levi were pretty good. They would have to be repeated many times with better instruments before we can be sure. There may have been some excess heat at some point but there is not any excess heat with this 1 MW device in Florida. In every case that I know of, including this one, Rossi's methods have been sloppy and unconvincing. > And we don't know what he breached several times and why didn't they just > cancel the whole thing only in the end. > I do not know what "breached" means here. You do not know why they did or did not cancel. So what? That is irrelevant. It has no bearing on the calorimetry. > IH is not composed by stupid people, the technitian asked a question that > was supposedly to be asked in the beginning. > It *was* asked at the beginning of the test! > Were they being too generous after giving him 11 million? > The test in Florida was set up long after they gave him the $11 million. > This is a big amount of money for a so dubious test. > Yes, it is. Finally we agree. > So, I don't think so. > Rossi himself told you he did not allow people to look at the customer equipment! He himself told you that I.H. insisted, but he refused. On what possible basis can you "not think so"??? You have this information from Rossi himself! > I think that a discover of this magnitude could be just stolen or . . . > It is patented. If the technology works and the patent is properly written, there is no need to steal it. Anyone can have it for free. - Jed
