As I stated, I have many concerns about his system. On the other hand, I have
a much more positive belief that some form of nickel, hydrogen, lithium gas
system might generate additional heat. As long as that possibility exists
within my mind I fail to see how Rossi's experiment would be completely
invalid.
Are you convinced that LENR is not a real phenomena? If so, I will understand
why you are taking the position that Rossi absolutely can not be believed.
That is OK, everyone is entitled to their beliefs.
If it becomes clear to me that my attempts to uncover a scientific explanation
of how someone might be scamming an experiment is wasting time for 'everyone'
on this list, I will refrain from that effort.
You may not remember that I have contributed to the resolution of many
important issues in the past. Also, I have constructed thermal system models
that yield quite interesting results that you can find in the list archives if
interested.
Dave
-----Original Message-----
From: Stephen A. Lawrence <sa...@pobox.com>
To: vortex-l <vortex-l@eskimo.com>
Sent: Mon, Aug 8, 2016 11:49 pm
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Problems with Rossi's flow meter described in court document
On 08/08/2016 11:39 PM, David Roberson wrote:
I would hope that you could be convinced that Rossi is telling the
truth if he were to present a solid scientific proof to that fact. Is
that not giving him the benefit of the doubt? Can anyone be 100%
confident that he is completely lying?
As long as there is any question about the facts,
No. Wrong criterion. There will always be some questions about the
facts.
The courts do not require guilt to be proved "beyond a shadow of a
doubt" or "beyond any question" or "beyond any possibility of error" because
it is almost never possible to prove anything that definitely.
On the other hand, Rossi has been proved to be a liar and a scammer
beyond a reasonable doubt which is the criterion jurors are generally asked
to apply. The number of unlikely assumptions which must hold in order for
him to be an honest researcher is vastly larger than the number of
assumptions which must hold if he is what he appears to be, which is a
greedy sleazebucket who's stealing money and wasting everybody's time.
Concluding in the face of the evidence that you must give him another
chance is flat-out irrational -- i.e., it's an emotional decision, not a
reasoned one, because there is no reasonable ground for concluding that.
If you want to waste time giving him endless chances to try yet again
and maybe this time produce an honest result that shows his equipment really
does work, feel free, but you are seriously wasting everybody else's time by
doing it here. At this time it appears that there's a larger chance that
you'll hit Megabucks than that you'll wake up and find out Rossi was
vindicated. (And that goes double if you actually buy a lottery ticket.)
