The UL "report" from butteriser is probably real....
However, I'm not sure about their test results, and.... wouldn't their test procedure have required someone to sit there, and watch the GPS screen for 10+ hours? ![Face Palm :palm:](https://www.eevblog.com/forum/Smileys/default/xfacepalm.gif.pagespeed.ic.EBDwh1hCfo.png)
I'm surprised that you folks are even remotely believing this crap! (sorry, this is not meant as a personal statement on you AmmoJammo, just the general trend the posts are taking).
You don't think that the same guy behind Batteriser Fan Page (who I think probably produced this "report") is capable of doing their own Google search to get the wording that UL uses? In fact, they probably downlaoded an actual PDF they found, converted to a Word doc and substituted their own page 2, which they had previously whipped up manually (in like a day or two after the whole "certification" issue was brought to their attention) based on what they saw. They thought we would all buy that load of garbage, and when we didn't, they went back and did a better job of it.
This is the only way I can explain things like the font changes and the 3rd "blank" page. And about that--there is no need to put an "INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK" third page. You would only do this on an actual blank page, such as between sections of a document, or on the last even page, so that when printed duplex you don't have an ACTUAL blank page. By putting a 3rd blank page, you'd end up with a 4th blank page you'd need to mark as well.
So here's what I think the timeline of events was:
1) A comment was posted asking about FCC certification
2) Bob initially claimed that FCC certification was not applicable
3) He then corrected himself and said that certification was underway (meaning they were scrambling at Batteroo on creating something they could show that would "show" certification.
4) Somewhere at Batteroo there was a miscommunication/blown assumption and the person (Batteriser Fan Page) figured it was UL certification that Bob wanted. They did a Google search and found this type of UL evaluation report. Screen grabbed the logo and created the rest of the initial report by hand, resulting in a pretty crappy "report" which is now page 2 in the "full" report. Like the initial monkey videos with the el cheapo lab equipment fresh out of the box, the amateur that did this figured it would pass muster with the critics.
5) Of course it didn't, so they set out to create a more "professional" looking report.
6) Meanwhile Bob saw that it wasn't an FCC report after all, so he just simply announced FCC certification (in record time no doubt!) without any images or actual documentation that could be criticised.
7) So the UL "report" author converted the orginal PDF they found on the web to a Word doc (that fixed the logo screen capture issue, yay!) Changed the project number slightly. Changed the inside address and salutation. Removed the signatures because obviously that would be too easy to investigate. Cut and paste their initial attempt at the report into page 2 (of course the font doesn't match, but they couldn't be bothered to actually fix this). Removed the bulk of the original report, keeping the "official looking" THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK page, even though you would never put it on an odd page. The cover letter section specifically prohibits using only a portion of the document--either the amateur didn't even read this (otherwise they probably would have deleted it), or they foolishly thought we wouldn't notice.
![Cool 8)](https://www.eevblog.com/forum/Smileys/default/xcool.gif.pagespeed.ic.cOxV6sPNRd.png)
Output their "masterpiece" to a PDF and post to their website. Voila!
BTW, I won't criticize the spelling and grammatical errors (of which there are plenty). I mean, c'mon guys, engineers are FAMOUS for having poor writing skills. I found errors in the legit report:
RESULTS
Their [was] [was not] the presence of visible smoke and grease-laden
air from the appliance during testing.
but I mean, c'mon...getting the COMPANY name wrong? That's just lame.
There is NO WAY this UL thing is real. It is a complete fabrication. Does anyone really believe that UL supplied Batteroo (or is it Batteriser, Inc. now?) with just page 2, and then it took a week or so to supply the cover letter and blank page? No, if this was real from the start, the full 3 page "report" would have been provided and Batteroo would have access to it and could have uploaded the entire PDF right from the start. Sorry, the
![Bullshit Detector :bullshit:](https://www.eevblog.com/forum/Smileys/default/BullshitDetector.gif.pagespeed.ce.ySiCs9HSXL.gif)
is off the chart on this one.