No. I meant that if the ERV's instrumentation showed no heat, if the
instrumentation was proper and in good working order, there would be no
need to look further
I note you now claim to have seen several million bits of data and
Rossi's analysis. Care to share that?
On 6/4/2016 7:41 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote:
a.ashfield <[email protected] <mailto:[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
