Nah, Jed, you really are just spouting neurotic nonsense. We're all just discussing the report here because it's interesting to us. The ash results we're totally bizarre. Rossi is often bizarre and says random, inexplicable things. I could see him, for whatever misguided reasons, messing with the ash. He does have a history.
As for the motivations of the report, that's an interesting point. I always assumed he needs it to get a patent and if the patent agents don't see the report as being really TIP, than they may come to the same conclusions I have here, that is is involvement was very bizarre.. On Sun, Oct 12, 2014 at 7:20 AM, Jed Rothwell <jedrothw...@gmail.com> wrote: > Blaze Spinnaker <blazespinna...@gmail.com> wrote: > > They compromised the integrity of the report because they were afraid to >> handle a lab saw? >> > > They did not compromise the integrity of anything. That's silly. This test > was not intended to convince you, or the skeptics, or anyone else. It was > done to meet the stated goals of IH and Elforsk. It met those goals. That > fact that some members of the peanut gallery here, and various skeptics on > the Internet, have made half-baked critiques of the work does not change > that. > > It is easy to ensure that Rossi did not add "fake ashes." As I pointed out > earlier there is not a single reason why he would do that in the first > place, and no way it would benefit him. No rational person would worry > about that. Especially not after taking sensible precautions to prevent it. > The skeptics who keep claiming he might have added fake ashes have not > answered me because they never look at the weakness of their own arguments. > > You seem to think this test was done for your benefit, to meet your > criteria. It was not. As for the results, you can take them or leave them. > Rossi, Levi, IH and Elforsk do not care what you think, and they do not > care about accusations of fraud. I have enough contact with these people to > confirm that. > > - Jed > >
