I think that claiming Rossi is lying or scamming could be extrapolating his behavior akin to "reductio ad absurdum". The truth is seldom so black and white. Rossi is known to shrewdly lead people on wild goose chases to obfuscate what he does know. He may well exaggerate the performance of his technology. So far, evidence suggests that Rossi does have some working LENR technology, but perhaps not the COP>50 technology being presently claimed.
Look at the hotCat for example. Rossi taught IH how to build the Lugano device. The Lugano researchers measured it as having excess heat. We all know at this point that the Lugano measurements and subsequent analysis were flawed; however, from my analysis I never believed the device produced zero XH. In subsequent analysis by A. Parkhomov, the fuel was deduced and tested. Parkhomov makes a good case for this LENR fuel system having measurable XH. Other researchers, including S. Jiang and Zhanghang have also reported XH from this same system. So, where did this LENR fuel formulation come from? Well, it came from Rossi. So, it is certainly an imaginative extrapolation to imply that Rossi has no LENR technology. The question really boils down to whether he has met the terms of his license agreement with IH to receive his next round of funding. As the technology license recipient, IH genuinely believes that the technology has not been transferred, because they cannot use what they have been given to produce high COP, high power heating promised by Rossi. Taken with what IH knows about the 1 year testing, they do not believe that he met *that* contract milestone either. Rossi could well have failed to meet the contractual milestones required to receive the next round money under the contract, may have exaggerated the results of the 1 year test, but that doesn't mean that he did not produce any XH. Jed is logically extending the possibility for large scale statistical errors into the conclusion that there was no XH. While I don't have the data, that is not necessarily the most probable conclusion from those results. This is the same for the Lugano test - the data taken and errors made in analysis provided no *proof* of XH or COP>2, but that doesn't mean that the most probable conclusion from the data was that there was zero XH. Parkhomov believed there was enough probability of XH from the Lugano experiment that he was motivated to invest his time and try it for himself. In the end, his experiments support existence of at least some XH in that system. Analysis of the Lugano results benefited the greater LENR community and opened the possibility for a new line of LENR research because sufficient details were released about the experiment to permit some level of back engineering. Community analysis made that possible. That same benefit does not seem to be forthcoming in this case - we are all just pundits in a private legal matter between IH and Rossi. None of this Vortex dialog will not bring out details of the reaction useful to extend the science. We are all wasting our time commenting on the case (I have been sucked in just like everyone else).
