a.ashfield <a.ashfi...@verizon.net> wrote: Rossi's answer to the claim the customer was not using the heat. > Why would Rossi make a court claim unless he was confident he could prove > the plant worked? >
Why would I.H. say they measured the heat coming from the customer site and found nothing, unless they were confident they could prove there was no heat? Obviously he knows proof will be required. > Obviously they know that poof will be required. Look, this is simple. ONE OF THESE PARTIES IS LYING. I think Rossi is lying; you think I.H. is. I have seen more data than you, although you have now had the opportunity to look at some key documents. It seems you have not read them, but you could, if you wanted to make a serious evaluation. I know for a fact that Murray's account is correct. I am sure Rossi and Penon claimed the reactor was producing heat on days when it was turned off and disassembled. People I trust who were there when it was off saw the log and could see that's what it showed. So I know that Rossi is lying through his teeth about many things here. I also know that I.H. is working with many other researchers, and they all like I.H. So, in my opinion, it is far more likely that Rossi is lying. You can evaluate the facts and reach your own conclusion. Or you can believe any damn thing that Rossi says, mindlessly. - Jed
