OK - well i agree that is more difficult to explain but i still hold for mistake rather than deliberate malfeasance. Jed perhaps can work it out.
Yes, I fully agree on this. IMO, the more likely cause of the error that lead to the dramatic values of alleged excess heat was an inadvertent entry into the data system of a wrong value of shunt resistance. But let's allow JedRothwell to provide his explanation. He knows a lot about the Mizuno's sensational results that he presented at ICCF21 in June 2018. I'd just ask you to help me explain him the absolute necessity of having a plausible answer on this crucial aspect, putting aside for a while the less urgent issues.
As we know from the spreadsheets, the two 120 W tests were held on two consecutive days of May 2016 and it is very likely that the other four tests (at 80 and 248 W in input) were carried out in the same week, by alternating the active and control tests at the 3 selected power levels. So there is no apparent reason why the two published spreadsheets do not show the same type of data.