Jed,
Don't you think it would be better to wait for proof? How do you know
the flow meter (and all Dr. Penon's the other instruments) were not send
back for calibration? In view of the stakes, it would seem to be a very
prudent step to take. Where does IH state that there were not returned?
On 8/7/2016 11:54 AM, Jed Rothwell wrote:
a.ashfield <a.ashfi...@verizon.net <mailto:a.ashfi...@verizon.net>> wrote:
Wasn't it claimed the meter was sent back to the manufacturer
after the test for a calibration check?
Rossi said that, but it is not true. However, I am sure the meter
would test perfectly in a calibration check. There is nothing wrong
with it. It gave the wrong answer because the flow rate was too low
and the pipe was half full. In a proper installation I am sure it
would give the right answer.
I doubt anyone specializes in reading stain marks.
Don't be ridiculous!
Without knowing the history of water levels for the whole life
of the meter what do they mean?
Are you serious? Do you think they are incapable of testing to find
this out?
. . . ie it could have just sat there for a time when the plant
was idle. It seems most unlikely that the water level in the pipe
would be constant when the pipe was not filled completely.
It seems unlikely base on WHAT?!? Were you there? Do you think for one
second this is the only evidence I.H. has? With $267 million at stake?
- Jed
