Quote from AlanNow who is trolling- smiley face or not? Mats went to the source as I did, and got a dusty answer. As I did.
Alan, I don't want to be tiresome about this - its not worth it - but I think we must be misunderstanding each other?
My point was that Mats said he would get independent (of TC, MFMP, Lugano authors etc) expert opinion on the Lugano themography and the TC etc correction thereof to see who was right. That is a definite possible thing to do. And it has a definite black or white scientific answer. Obviously, it would not require cooperation from the Lugano authors!
I tried to find the entry in Mats blog (not a comment, but a real entry) where he stated that he did not believe TC, because he was biased, but would get independent expert views on the TC etc critiques vs the original Lugano report. It seems to have disappeared, but perhaps that is just because I can't navigate that stuff easily - it is easy to lose things!
Anyway many people were waiting with baited breath for this independent view. I'm sure there are people in the LENR area with enough knowledge of the relevant physics to reach a definite answer, and therefore agree with TC. But as I said above it is understandable if Mats now just does not want to pursue that line of investigation since the results from his POV will be negative.
Regards, THH