>From the top of the Ny Teknik feb. 23rd article: ”You just have to embrace a >new technology that might solve the energy problems of mankind, at least until >it can be rejected,” Swedish professor Sven Kullander said in a scientific >discussion on the Italian ‘energy catalyzer’. Wouldn't you call that an endorsement? Still, it is not unreasonable for Uppsala university to *officially* deny any discussion of a possible argreement with Rossi, given the climate of academic antagonism towards cold fusion research. Harry
From: Jed Rothwell <jedrothw...@gmail.com> >To: vortex-l@eskimo.com >Sent: Tuesday, July 12, 2011 6:26:17 PM >Subject: Re: [Vo]:Uppsala University Denies Rossi Research Agreement > >Alan J Fletcher wrote: > >>> [KRIVIT] Professors Sven Kullander, retired from Uppsala University, and >>> Hanno Essén, with the Royal Institute of Technology, endorsed Rossi’s >>> claimed technology in a news story on Feb. 23, 2011, before they had seen >>> or inspected the device. Essén is the chairman of the Swedish Skeptics >>> Association, a nonprofit education group well-known in academic circles. >> >> Krivit is seriously departing from being an impartial observer. >> >>> K&E ... endorsed .... before they had seen or inspected the device. >> http://www.nyteknik.se/nyheter/energi_miljo/energi/article3111124.ece >> >> Hardly "endorsed" : chock-a-block full of ifs and buts and speculation. >> >> Why not mention that they evaluated the eCat and reported on it? > >Alan understates the situation. "Seriously departing" is not strong enough. In >case there are readers here who have not followed events: > >E&K first tested the machine, THEN they endorsed it. > >Krivit's statement is astounding. It is either terribly confused or an >outrageous lie. What could he be thinking?!? > >Some people might claim that E&K did not do adequate testing, or that their >methods were not good enough to support their conclusions. That is a >legitimate difference of opinion. But it is clear that they themselves think >these tests are sufficient to support the level of endorsement they made in >NyTeknik. It is 100% clear that they did the tests first, then endorsed. Their >endorsement was not unconditional. They left plenty of wiggle room for >themselves in case Rossi turns out to be wrong. As they should; as any >academic scientist would. > >- Jed > > > >
