I think the main question is why setting up (also with Levi's collaboration) such a sloppy yet precise test when there would have been much more convincing ways to describe one that produced abundant excess heat from LENR?
This is also an important question which deserves some attention, but the "why" comes after the "what". One thing at a time, please.
A few months ago I told you that this story is like a very complicate puzzle with many missing pieces and even more fake ones (1). To figure out the whole picture we have to assemble small subsets of good pieces, throwing away the bad ones. Now we have assembled two alternative subset of pieces that could be placed on the December 16, 2010 zone. One subset contains pieces like "LENR device", "fully ignition of the reactor", "self-sustaining operation". The pieces of the other subset are "water boiler", "joule effect", "flow stopped to keep boiling the water as long as possible". Before trying to enlarge it by adding more pieces on its contour, we have to place within the frame one of these two subsets. Which one do we chose?