For All:
Don't get pulled into JC's usual methods of casting doubt. for people unfamiliar with his tactics, he seems objective and factual, however, you need to follow the threads carefully since one of the common tactics is to take something like the 3-phase power issue, and describe a reasonable manner that it could be used for fraud, and then apply that same issue to other tests; tests where that issue no longer exists and is thus irrelevant. For casual readers, he then appears to have used this one issue to cast doubt on all the tests, when in fact he has not. The first test used 3-phase power, the second DID NOT. And JC is WELL aware of this, yet asks the question as to why they used 3-phase power in their tests. the second test was SINGLE phase power, so JC is misleading people. but he has a very long history of taking some questionable issue in one test, and making statements that imply that that same issue was present in other tests. for newbies here, this will become very obvious after reading carefully a few of the threads where JC is posting. -Mark From: David Roberson [mailto:dlrober...@aol.com] Sent: Tuesday, May 28, 2013 10:32 AM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:new hypothesis to confute regarding input energy in Ecat test There is no way to know why 3 phase power is being used in this situation. Perhaps the latest design for the complete system that has many units associated has that requirement. The assumption that this is done to trick the scientists is laughable. You would think that a good power meter would maintain accuracy if it is designed for 3 phase operation and the question is moot. I hope that there is better evidence for fraud than pure speculation which is all that we have seen thus far. Show us some real evidence instead of BS. Dave -----Original Message----- From: Joshua Cude <joshua.c...@gmail.com> To: vortex-l <vortex-l@eskimo.com> Sent: Tue, May 28, 2013 12:13 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:new hypothesis to confute regarding input energy in Ecat test On Tue, May 28, 2013 at 8:56 AM, Jed Rothwell <jedrothw...@gmail.com> wrote: Andrew <andrew...@att.net> wrote: I said The measurement task has been made unnecessarily difficult by specifying 3-phase input to the control box. Normal single-phase input would suffice here, given the power levels. There is nothing "difficult" about measuring 3-phase power. It's far less common, and completely unnecessary, especially if the output is single-phase. It's suspicious because it forces the experimenters to use a specific line in the room. It's also suspicious because it supplies a much higher power, and that may have been necessary in the run where the ceramic melted. And regardless of how long it's been around, it is more difficult to measure power than from a simple single-stage ac input. Why complicate things unnecessarily, if not to slip a little deception past some credulous scientists?
