> > Whatever they do, you will demand more, and more, and more. You will move > the goalposts down the field, out of the stadium, out of the parking lot . > . . >
I am asking the same I always asked. They provided one tiny part of it. And a very weak one. > They announced they will soon provide more details. You will soon be even > farther out on that limb. You better start thinking up reasons to reject an > independent test, or whatever they have up their sleeve. Be prepared! > You seem to be suspicious of my motive. I will tell you again very clearly. I would be totally delighted if Defkalion provided an independent test or a government license which also spoke to the issue that it works. Same with Rossi. I WANT cold fusion to work. I just don't think these people have it. > They did not say they had a prototype lab. They said they had a factory. > > > Do you have evidence they do not? > Oh come on! YOU know better than THAT! Like it's my job to disprove their extravagant claims? OK-- you deserve this: prove I don't have a pink invisible flying unicorn in my garage and that it keeps my house warm with moving its wings all winter. You know it's up to the claimant to prove the claim in any scientific venture, and not primarily for critics to disprove it. It's hard to hide a factory these days what with all that wonderful aerial photography from Google and others -- yet Defkalion seems to have succeeded? And they'd want to for some bizarro reason? Actually, if they brought out everything exactly on schedule that might > make me suspect fraud. Real products are usually late. > So you're saying it will be "soon"? Isn't that what all the scammers say? If you doubt it, just look on some of Sterling Allan's pages. Just about everything he writes about will be available in retail establishments. SOON.
