- Do you think that that document is still important in order to evaluate the Ecat story and reality?
Yes, but the main 'proof' document only covers the 'steam' versions
- Do you still endorse the conclusions drawn in the last version
Neither proven nor disproven : yes
- Do you think that the set of the possible fakes taken into account is complete?
Yes / probably
- Are you going to issue a new updated version of that document?
No -- Though I should wrap up the front page with comments similar to these
Thank you for your answers to my questions.
You started the "Proving the Rossi eCat is Real" document a few weeks after the first Ecat tests, at the beginning of 2011 (1). This document should have examined all the possible fakes that had been suggested on the web at that time to explain the incredible results of those tests. However, it completely ignores some well-documented flaws that show that the heat data were actually fake. For example, the incredible energy performances reported by the UniBo professors after demo on January 14, 2011 can be explained by 3 evident flaws, which have been described on physisìcsforum (2) at the end of March 2011.
Now, I'd have some more questions for you.
- Did you see that comment on pysiscsforum at that time?
- If you saw it, why have you not included the discussion on those 3 flaws in your document?
- In any case, don't you think now that those flaws should also be considered?
- Do you agree that those 3 flaws provide a simple explanation of how the heat output of the first public demo on the Ecat could have been faked?