May I say conspiranoid and even more crazy than usual if I think about the following?
Yes, you sound like a 'conspiranoid'. This is why I've been keeping out of this whole thing.
What it shouldn't be: a witch-hunt against Batteroo, with people leaping on every new statement, tearing it apart, looking for the tiniest apparent inconsistency (even when there isn't one) and crying victory. It makes you look petty, like you have some agenda that you haven't declared, and (when you see supposed failings that have other explanations) like you don't know what you're talking about.
What it should be: taking testable claims, and testing them. That's what Dave has been doing, and that's what whoever it is doing the GPS tests is doing.
"That UL logo looks photoshopped", "his background is in digital design, so he can't have the skills to design a power supply", "I don't think he has a real degree at all" are opinions. All they do is make their holders look like people with a grudge against Batteroo, desperate to score whatever points they can, without anything solid to back them up. It makes things turn ugly.
"Devices only use 20% of the power in a battery" is a claim that can be tested. Dave's shown that to be false (and taught a lot of people a lot about how batteries behave in the process). "This model of GPS lasts less than 2 hours unmodified" is easily shown to be false as well. That's all that's necessary.