peatbog <peat...@teksavvy.com> wrote:
> > It is clear now that both of these tests were juvenile efforts at > > calorimetry - below high school standards... > That's not a bit clear. This is industry standard calorimetry for heating systems of this size. These procedures are done hundreds of thousands of times a day successfully. Claiming they don't work is like saying that no airline pilot ever makes a successful landing, and all commercial aircraft always crash. > If Steorn, with a bunch of engineers working for it, could make a > measurement error and not spot it for a year or more, and have to > have it pointed out to them by an outside engineer, Philip <forget > last name>, then I can believe Rossi and company are mired in > confusion as well. > A person can believe anything, but you do not have a rational reason for believing this particular assertion. You cannot show how or why they are mired in confusion, or point to any likely error in their technique. Jones Beene asserts there is problem because they used a 50 ml cell instead of a 1 liter cell. However, there is not a shred of evidence for that. You can invent some nonsensical claim the way he did in this case, but making up a fantasy and then declaring it must be true does not actually make it true. You have to have some supporting evidence, or at least a minimal reasons to suspect it is true, and you have none. - Jed
