Bob, I agree with your assessment. Rossi works in strange ways that are beyond
normal comprehension.
Dave
-----Original Message-----
From: Bob Higgins <rj.bob.higg...@gmail.com>
To: vortex-l <vortex-l@eskimo.com>
Sent: Fri, Aug 19, 2016 3:36 pm
Subject: Re: [Vo]: Jed's flowmeter comments chanllenged.
Having an independent customer use the heat and with the customer knowing how
much heat is required to keep his product line running, would have been a
wonderful confirmation that the measurements on the Rossi side of the wall were
correct. Certainly that was the spirit of the contract terms for the GPT.
Making the customer's side secret, and the customer's log of the heat coming
into his factory a secret, certainly looks bad for Rossi and makes the whole
contrived test look like a scam. If I were Rossi (and not running a scam), I
would want that independent customer's validation that I had delivered the heat
- it would make the test incontrovertible. Instead, so far the opposite has
happened - at least until the customer is subpoenaed to testify in court to the
heat consumption of his "factory".
On Fri, Aug 19, 2016 at 1:25 PM, a.ashfield <a.ashfi...@verizon.net> wrote:
What happened to the heat once it left Rossi's plant is irrelevant to
the contract. It looks like a desperate effort by IH to discover a problem
after their hired gun failed to do so.
It would be like doing a black box experiment and then saying you don't
believe the measured exit temperature so you are going to measure the main
drain to see how much it warmed.
