I wrote:
> I have spoken with some of the experts who went. They are under NDA so I > cannot ask any specific questions, but they seemed unimpressed. Maybe the > results have improved. > To be a little more specific, they said it was inconclusive. Most experiments are inconclusive. > Defkalion has made many claims and many promises in the past they did not > fulfill. They did not break any laws by doing this, but they did hurt their > own credibility. > I put that too strongly. I should not say "break laws." Of course they didn't. Mary Yugo said they have "a lot of explaining to do" because they made claims of 30 machines and tests by the Greek government and blah, blah. Okay, I'll say, "a lot of explaining to do. A lot to answer for." Even that is silly because a private corporation has no obligation to explain things. They do not owe Mary Yugo or me any information about anything. Period. However, if they want credibility and good public relations they should watch what they say. They should try to follow through more often. Don't cry "wolf!" Don't casually throw out the claim that you tested nickel isotopes. You have to explain how and why, because many of us know that monoisotopic samples cost fantastic sums of money and Defkalion appears to be broke, so that is kind of suspicious. Instead of throwing this out, as if anyone can buy isotopes at Wall Mart, they should publish a brief report that starts off: "In cooperation with XYZ lab we tested monoisotopic samples (Isoflex Inc.) ranging from 1 to 8 g. . . ." I tend to dismiss their claims about their business because of their track record of blathering and not following through. - Jed
