a.ashfield <[email protected]> wrote: Sorry Jed. No one would accept the situation you describe. If the > situation was unacceptable they should have hired another ERV. >
They DID hire another expert, for crying out loud! Rossi told you they did. You don't even believe him? They sent in several experts. Rossi refused to let them test the machine properly. I did not describe this situation. Rossi did! He told you plain as day that he dictated to the I.H. expert what was allowed and what wasn't. It is crazy that you don't even believe Rossi. > They should have put it i writing, at the start, that it was not > acceptable. > Of course they did! > The fact that IH have not claimed this means it is unlikely they took that > action. > The did claim that!!! It is right there in the motion to dismiss. Are you blind? > Lets see what instrumentation was used and what the ERV had to say about > it before making wild accusations. > I know what instrumentation was used. I know what Rossi and Penon said about it. I am not making wild accusations. Neither was I.H. when they said there were "flawed measurements" and "unsuitable measuring devices." They have been saying that for months. Those are not wild accusations, they are factual statements. > What I said about Rossi being a red herring is because the referee was the > ERV. What he did and said are key. > The ERV (Penon) is a nitwit and Rossi's puppet. - Jed
