Axil, Elforsk published it's comitment in a way that is quite high for such a corporate culture organization They made a press release, allowed publication of report, and finally published an supportive article in their corp magazine http://www.elforsk.se/Global/Trycksaker%20och%20broschyrer/elforsk_perspektiv_nr2_2013.pdf#page=47
just higher than that is press conference... for Defkalion a nearly share Jed position, in last mails. The demo was done too fast, and is not a huge evidence... since there was no PhD around like Levi (not their fault, the skeptics flee as usual) it is less credible than Rossi messy demos... In fact Rossi demo were not so bad, but the level of evidence to pass the pathological skepticism of skeptics is above what industry and science requires... It is above Las Vegas show. I feel like jed that it was done too fast, too naive (less than rossi, because of the experience, but naive). The only reasonably solid evidence of defkalion is Nelson confirming to Gibbs his report, giving positive impression of cooperation (most important), and some performance (control, low COP). Only Gibbs/Nelson give me reason to trust Milan demo as not a total fake... why not errors... My guess is simply lack of rigor and clarity, letting doubt. This is probably what makes Luca Gamberale "concerned" if not (?) furious of that lack of professionalism (buzz say he is not in good relations). Note that in last announce, they say they will propose measurement based on no water. for Brillouin, tanzella and McKubre of SRI presenting a COP2at ICCF17 was good. For a skeptic however it is less than Nelson, because they are "believers" since longer. anyway reasonably I feel that there is no doubt everybody have anomalous heat, but question is performance, control, reliability... 2014/1/21 Axil Axil <janap...@gmail.com> > If the ELFORSK report was so impressive, why did we not hear about a major > commitment by ELFORSK for Rossi and his products? Words a cheap, dollars > are impressive. > > We know now the ELFORSK is not his backer. > > > On Tue, Jan 21, 2014 at 3:33 PM, Jed Rothwell <jedrothw...@gmail.com>wrote: > >> I wrote: >> >> >>> I saw the defkalion demo with my own eyes. . . . >>>> >>> >> >>> I thought the ELFORSK report was more convincing than any demo. A >>> demonstration is a good way to teach people about your experiment, but it >>> is less convincing than a paper which describes weeks of testing. >>> >> >> What I am saying is that seeing something with your own eyes is >> overrated. Ask yourself carefully: What did you see? What did you not see? >> How likely is it that what you saw was a mistake? How does that likelihood >> compare to the likelihood that the people from ELFORSK made mistakes over >> the weeks they observed experiments? Why do you think that your >> observations from a video are better than their observations in a report? >> >> To summarize in the words of the old joke: What are you going to believe, >> two weeks of data, or your own lying eyes? >> >> - Jed >> >> >
