I now read that all the ERV's equipment was connected to his computer
and recorded the readings electronically. It will be interesting to
compare the data logged with what Jed is claiming
Engineer48, who has direct contacy with Rossi, writes:
"Rossi told me this meter registers zero for backflow.
The flow is very constant as the big prime and multiple smaller top up
pumps all have multiple 1 way valves and micro computer controlled flow
regulation against varying pressure.
The engineers basically dial in / program the pumps for 1,500kg/hr and
that is what the condensate circulation system pumps deliver, 24/7/365."
Weaver told Engineer48 that they had lost tract of the reactors IH
shipped to Lugano. - Unbelievable.
Remember the E-Cat underwent trials at IH before commuting to the 1 MW
plant and it was Rossi, not IH who filed the suit in court. If the
E-Cats never worked why would Rosssi shut down some to repair them?
What with IH claiming Vaughn was not a manager at Cherokee and the
mistake riddled Exhibit 5 no wonder Cherokee has spent big bucks to
retain APCO and Jones-Day... In essence, Ih have not provide any hard
evidence to show the 1 MW plant didn't work and that should have been
easy if it didn't without taking 66 pages.of legalese, speculating on
possibilities and ad hominems.
On 8/9/2016 1:57 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote:
a.ashfield <a.ashfi...@verizon.net <mailto:a.ashfi...@verizon.net>> wrote:
You keep repeating that what you say is absolutely true despite
the errors I pointed out in Exhibit 5.
There are no errors in Exhibit 5. If there were, Rossi and Penon would
have pointed them out. They were contractually obligated to point out
such errors and if they had done so to everyone's satisfaction they
would have been paid $89 million.
Contrary to what you write, it would be to Rossi's advantage for
IH to summit errors of fact. It would not be in Penon's interest
to correct them with a court case pending, without legal guidance.
This letter was mailed before Rossi filed suit. These same questions
were being asked long before that. Asked, but not answered. Many other
concerns were raised, but not answered.
Short of reading the contract, you don't know if Penon was
obligated to talk to an outside consultant.
I repeat: Murray was _not_ an outside consultant. Furthermore, people
within I.H. asked these same questions. Rossi and Penon refused to answer.
You need to stop making up stuff like this.
Murray has never claimed he was employed directly by IH.
How the hell would you know that?
- Jed
