John Milstone <john_sw_orla...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Regarding the wiring trick: Rothwell keeps stating that there must be a > bare conductor available to measure the voltage, and that's true. But > there is nothing in the report that indicates that the testers were the > ones who did the "surgery" to access those test points. > Anyone who glances at voltmeter probe connected to a wire will see there is one conductor only, and not a second, insulated one under it. What are you suggesting anyway? That they allowed Rossi to attach the probes and then cover up the connections with black duct tape so no one could see? Have you ever met a scientist, and engineer, or an electrician who is so stupid and so gullible he would allow that? Is that seriously what you are proposing. You are wrong. They said they brought all instruments and attached all instruments themselves. They said Rossi had no say in the mater and played no role. That is what they said in the report. They could not have said it more clearly: "All cables were checked before measurements began. The ground cable, the presence of which was necessary for safety reasons, was disconnected. The container holding the electronic control circuitry was lying on a wooden plank and was lifted off the surface it was resting on, and checked on all sides to make sure that there were no other connections. We furthermore made sure that the frame supporting the E-CAT HT2 was not fastened to the pavement and that there were no cables connected to it. The three-phase power cables were checked and connected directly to the electrical outlet. It was established and verified that no other cable was present and that all connections were normal. . . ." Either you believe them or you don't. If you don't believe them, fine. That's your prerogative. But stop asking where they said this. It is right there in the report. We know that Rossi provided the power cabling for the test (which, by > itself, should have raised a red flag for anyone who actually was looking > for fraud). > We know they took apart the power cable, checked it, put voltage probes on the exposed wire, and disconnected a wire. Please explain how that leaves any possibility of a "red flag." A wire is a wire. Anyone who has worked with wires all his professional life would see there is an extra insulated wire. > We know that the authors described each separate wire as a "cable" in > their description . . . > They are not native speakers of English. Get over it. > Of course, they had access to some point of contact with the conductor. > The question is exactly where, and who set up the bare wire. > THEY set up the bare wire. That is what THEY said, clearly, in the report and elsewhere. Exactly where is shown in the diagram: between the wall socket and the controller box. Where else? Is there a better place? > I STILL haven't seen any credible argument that the wiring trick could not > have been used in this case. > You have not proposed a credible trick. No one has. - Jed
