Abd has done more work than you or me: I take what he says as validation - "I cited the camera manual for the type of sensor used, and found the definition of that in the Optris literature. It is an array of microbolometers, essentially tiny resistors with well-controlled IR emissivity and set up for precise resistance measurements.")
Thanks. I cited the sources in Some Points Regarding a Recent Presentation at ICCF20 on the ‘Lugano Report’ (Rainer Rander)
and the reference there to "the Basics document" was to the Optris user guide that Wytthenbach had cited. It can be found at http://www.optris.com/infrared…ds/Zubehoer/IR-Basics.pdf
We have seen manuals quoted incorrectly or out-of-context. When continuing to assert a position contradicted by what should be an authority, it would be sanity to at least quote the manual, and then explain some possible misinterpretation. However, someone who is utterly convinced that they are right, and that anything else is FUD and arrogance, may not bother, leading to deeper and deeper entrenchment in a fundamentally embarassing position. Still, the fast track out is always the truth. Like, "Oops! Brain fault! Sorry!"
"I was wrong" actually increases reputation. Contrary to this is the training of males in the culture I was raised in. "Never give up!" Yeah. If a stand is important to you, don't give up just because you make a mistake. But denying the obvious is almost suicidal, as to reputation. This particular point (about the device actually used to measure radiation) was of little importance to the studied issue, the measurement of heat. Knowing exactly how the camera works is not necessary. Knowing how such a camera is used is important. That is also found in the manual and Basics guide.