Is this fact, or is your opinion, can you support it with evidence?
expect he already revealed more than he intended to. I was surprised he said that he did not allow the I.H. expert to see the pretend customer site. Anyone can look for information on that customer, put 2 + 2 together, and see that the customer is fake. The only plausible reason Rossi blocked the door was to stop the expert from confirming that the reactor is producing no excess heat. Seeing what is in the customer site would be the final nail in the coffin. But I am sure the expert saw enough in Rossi's own site to conclude that there is no heat.
Anyone can support it with evidence. Do your homework and learn about the pretend customer. Heck, just ask yourself why would a business listed as chemical distributor need 1 MW of process heat?
I am sure the expert saw enough in Rossi's own site to conclude that there is no heat because (as I have said) I have seen some of the data myself. Anyone would conclude there is no heat. As I said, the test is a farce. It is a large-scale version of Rossi's previous farcical tests, which also proved nothing.