a.ashfield <[email protected]> wrote: > > You keep repeating this Jed, but you never provide any proof to back it up.
And Rossi has never provided any proof of what he says. Why doesn't he publish the ERV report? Why doesn't he at least tell you what instruments he used, and how they were arranged? You have NOTHING from him, yet you believe his story. Why do you consider him a more reliable source than I.H. or me? Why didn't Cherokee take Rossi's offer to return the $11.5 million and > cancel their license? Because he never made that offer. That was a lie. > I suppose you will say that is rubbish too, but we'll have to wait for > more hard facts to prove it one way or the other. > You need to wait. I already have the facts. You can believe me, or you can believe Rossi. Ask yourself who has more credibility. IH not only built the Lugano reactors they built the 1 MW plant too, > including the fuel. Where did you hear that? As far as I know, Rossi built the 1 MW plant. > Rossi is on record saying he never provided any part of it. I should have known it was Rossi! He is on record saying he is on the verge of mass production, and that he sold units, and that in January and February he would release the ERV, and that the pretend customer was paying thousands of dollars for the process heat. The customer who does no business, pays no taxes, and has no employees. He is on record lying through his teeth on countless occasions. Why do you believe anything he says? How gullible are you? So it is difficult for IH to claim Rossi never gave then the technology. > There is no technology. The gadget does not work. > What IH seem unable to do do is operate an E-Cat with anything like as > high a COP as Rossi can. Rossi's COP is ~0.8. > They seem to have been careful not to go on record saying that the 1 MW > plant has a COP~1 . . . They have said quite clearly that the "reactors" do not work. Plus, I told you that, based on the same data they are using. If you do not believe me, fine, but do not claim that no one has told you what I have told you time after time after time. If the ERV's report is so damning why haven't IH released it? If it is so good why has not Rossi released it? He is the one who filed the lawsuit. He is the one who needs to show evidence if he wants the $89 million. Why didn't he file it with court papers? (I don't know why I.H. has not, but let me speculate. Perhaps it is part of their legal strategy.) > Until it is released it is grossly unfair to say it is rubbish. I have seen the data in it so it is not grossly unfair for *me* to say it is rubbish. It is my considered judgment based on a careful analysis. It is grossly unfair for *you* to take sides in this, or for *you* to declare that I am wrong. Because you have no information. > From what you say you haven't seen it. > I have seen data from the test, and the configuration. It is the data Rossi quoted to Lewan. I am sure it is the same data shown in the report, and the same configuration. It was a mess early on, and it was still a mess when the test ended. - Jed
