[Wonder Warthog]

"No, the credibility of the data recorder is more important than the data, for without credibility the data has no value. This is why it would be nice to have a customer with some stature, who would not want their company's name associated with a fiasco."

I repeat. The customer's name is irrelevant. What "is" relevant are the names and qualifications of the people doing the testing, the exact nature of the test, and the data therefrom.

And as near as I can tell from post #4, the customer's name and the location of the 1MW test will POSSIBLY be revealed on 6 October (when the single E-Cat test will be done at U. of Upsala).

This does NOT rule out the possibility that the customer's name will be revealed on the date of the test of the 1MW unit later in the month, and, in fact will almost certainly take place then. Getting the customer's name a couple of weeks early is "gravy".

[dila813]

B - A - L - O - N - E - Y

This test is supposed to be a fully running commercial plant which means it has to be hooked up as if it is going to supply power to actual customers.

This test has to have generators and actual power generation to count.

This is what happens when a product is delivered to a paying customer for evaluation, the customer actually hooks it up and simulates the use of the product in this application.

Who ever is feeding you this junk has no idea how a new product is delivered to a customer and tested .... it doesn’t matter what product is. They are all tested using the same process.