If the instrumentation was so contentious then IH should not have allowed the year long test to go forward, or at least they should have formally told Rossi that they would not respect the results of the test even if Rossi insisted on performing the test.
harry On Sat, Jun 4, 2016 at 8:19 PM, Jed Rothwell <jedrothw...@gmail.com> wrote: > a.ashfield <a.ashfi...@verizon.net> wrote: > > >> My point to Jed earlier was why "expert" IH would allow improper >> instrumentation (if that were the case) to begin with. It doesn't make >> sense. >> > > They did not want to allow this. It was a bone of contention. Rossi wanted > one set of instruments and procedures, and I.H. wanted another. They were > arguing about it for a long time. (I do not know how long, and I do not > know whether the instruments were changed out at some point, but anyway, > the dispute began early.) > > It "doesn't make sense" because what you are describing did not happen. > > - Jed > >
