I think he was probably right and said that.
Except you didn't actually say that. You said "Yes it does add up that the charger could be using 3 amps to deliver 2 amps to the battery, making it 66% efficient" which you maybe meant as agreement but is actually just a comment on the machine. Remember on the 'net there is no tone of voice or body language.
But you then went on to say "But as Harry says what is the reason to show this ?" which is clearly a question aimed at me.
If you meant that as a comment on the maker / designer then it would have been better if you had said that, e.g. 'Why would the make it like that?'.
I have went back and given him a "Like" hope that helps with his mental state.
My mental state is fine. When someone helps me I say thank you, I think that is only common courtesy. And, especially on the 'net, I try and make it clear what I am say and to whom.
A depressingly large %age of people on the 'net lack any manners and also take what is written to mean other than what it says. Which is what you, unintentionally, did.
That sad trait is present, thankfully to a lesser degree, on DIYNOT. But it is sufficiently common that I have stopped reading some sections because of the casual abuse that is given out.
No, it is assumed to be a guess at the ac current flow out of the low voltage side of the transformer, into the rectifier - though why anyone might need to know that, is anyone's guess. The meter measures and indicates the raw dc fed to battery, but for some really strange reason they have seen fit to additionally indicate the likely current flow in the stage before.
Well a very likely answer to that is obvious but when I pointed out that the questions from you, and
@Munroast, were not very helpful you said "Your help wasn't invited".
Was that really a helpful addition?