So, a former local Wilmington weatherman is their top guy on this project? I hope he didn't talk like this when he was giving the weather forecastI am happy to report as chief meteorologist for the consulting team engaged to develop a computer model solution to accurately and consistently predict the potential power generation of the “downdraft wind tower” capable for world-wide use, on behalf of our group of esteemed scientists that data testing in the modeled and “real-world” environment has proven proficient, efficient, accurate, reliable, sustainable, and durable.And, if you have to say that you've us[ed] sophisticated high-end certified meteorological instruments have you really? I also see that what the computer model had predicted for a host of meteorological parameters in fact were predicted to within 2-3% of observed values. Has to lead one to question how far off they were for the other meteorological parameters because when you say "a host of" it's less than all. And how does any of what they've allegedly done show that the model not only was proven scientifically accurate on the prototype using a range of ambient conditions, but that the same modeled process was just as accurate and consistent in any tower size for any ambient weather environment. There's just so much BS in that PR it's really hard to know where to begin.