the report is not so convincing, except it have no value, a joke for the
most kind.
what is convincing, like for Lugano and DGT Milano, is that absence of any
serious and credible answer.
For me at this stage, it is definitive.

if Rossi have something, he sure have lied and manipulated his partners
beyond what the worst startup diva can do.
Anyone who support the possibility that Rossi have a technology have to
realize what he have done to his partners.

Of course if there is nothing, except repeated ideas coming from we
community, all is more simple and logical.

2017-06-30 3:44 GMT+02:00 Jed Rothwell <jedrothw...@gmail.com>:

> Jones Beene <jone...@pacbell.net> wrote:
>
>>
>> Whoa. The ERV report is not really self-evident proof of anything to a
>> jury - other than that it supposedly provides a basis for Penon's
>> conclusion. These are average citizens who don't do data, so to speak.
>>
>
> I hope you are wrong about that, but I know nothing about trials and
> juries, so I cannot judge.
>
>
>
>> A top scientist could believe what you state, and I suspect that 95 out
>> of 100 scientists might agree with you.
>>
>
> More like 999,999 out of a million I think. As Smith showed, anyone who
> agrees the laws of thermodynamics are valid will see this is fraud.
>
> I meant that technically knowledgeable people will see that the Penon
> report describes a blatant fraud. I don't know about the man on the street.
> Obviously, as we see here and at some web sites, there are people who have
> heard of the laws of thermodynamics yet who still believe in Rossi. They
> are in thrall to him. Wishful thinking has overwhelmed their ability to
> think rationally and do junior-high-school physics.
>
> It seems that Rossi has spent his adult life cultivating such people and
> then stealing from them. Unfortunately, in the course of doing this, he may
> have destroyed the last hope of funding for cold fusion. Unless the Texas
> Tech project pans out, this time cold fusion may be gone for good. It will
> be forgotten.
>
> - Jed
>
>

Reply via email to