a.ashfield <[email protected]> wrote:
> Jed. Since all other methods showed no excess heat, it was necessary to > measure the dissipation. > > AA. That would be all that's need if it were true. > I think you mean if the other methods show no excess heat, it would be needed. Yes. If you will look at it from the expert's point of view, since he saw no evidence of excess heat, surely you understand that he needed to access the customer site. It was the last chance to confirm Rossi's claim. Also, you should appreciate that before people pay $89 million, they will take every reasonable step to confirm the heat is real. You have no proof of that, that you are willing to share, and the report of > the independent ERV disagrees with that. > Yes, of course it disagrees with it. Clearly, Rossi and Penon say there is heat, and I.H. says there isn't. I have seen Rossi's data and his analysis, which must be the same as the ERV reports. It is cockamamie nonsense. That is why the court case is necessary. > I doubt there will be a court case. If there is, any expert witness HVAC engineer who testifies in favor of Rossi will be committing perjury, and will deserve to lose his license. - Jed
