Alternative energy researchers threatened?

Moderators: Elvis, DrVolin, Jeff

Re: Harassment.

Postby Hugh Manatee Wins » Thu Jun 08, 2006 7:28 pm

<!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>Re:Harassment<br>Then the thing to do Hugh, is for such people to go underground. Reasonable security can be achieved even on the internet... or not, just mail a thumbdrive chock full of documents to someone you are working with.<hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END--><br><br>I'm told by this eminently trustworthy person, who wishes I didn't stir up so much shit due to their experiences, that the economic harassment FORCED some 'underground.' <br><br>As in, living out of their car. Ouch.<br><br>Chomsky likes to point out that power is not immoral, it is amoral.<br>It protects itself like any other living organism.<br><br>This academic view is probably what makes him the 'liberal' power loves to hate because this justifies using their power. <p></p><i></i>
User avatar
Hugh Manatee Wins
Posts: 9869
Joined: Wed Nov 23, 2005 6:51 pm
Location: in context
Blog: View Blog (0)

electrolysis is endothermic - end of story.

Postby wintler » Thu Jun 08, 2006 7:41 pm

Well thats convincing Hugh, just keep abusing people and avoid talking about the ENDOTHERMIC (energy in) electrolysis reaction. <br><br>Water a fuel? then how come huge volumes of the stuff have accumulated on the surface of the solar EMR bombarded earth? Why hasn't it burnt before? Bingo, it already has, thats where water comes from.<br><br>Do you get a bang (energy output) when you put a flame (energy input) to water/ice/steam? No. Yet putting a flame to oil/gas/wood/K/Na and alot of other materials and you do get net heat produced, because those materials burn - they combine with oxygen/oxidise. Water is hydrogen that has already burnt, has already combined with oxygen. You can reverse the reaction with enough energy (e.g. via electrolysis) but YOU DONOT GET SOMETHING FOR NOTHING - THERE IS NO FREE LUNCH. <br><br>I pray 'free energy' reearchers find something, but they've transperantly found bugger all so far. Defenders of FE continually blame the 'black helicopters' (metaphorically speaking) for their failure/obscurity, but they cannot explain why other forces dependant upon fossil fuels don't bring in ther own forces to save the FE folk, which is surely even more in their interests than blocking FE is for Exxon etc. Logic seems to be just one of FE's archilles heels, right after chemistry and math.<br> <p></p><i></i>
Posts: 258
Joined: Thu Jun 09, 2005 5:28 am
Blog: View Blog (0)


Postby wintler » Thu Jun 08, 2006 7:47 pm

Sorry Hugh, it was slimmouse making free with the abuse, not you, I shoulda proofed my post. <br><br>But 'free energy' is still about as free as that 'free airconditioning' with a new car. <p></p><i></i>
Posts: 258
Joined: Thu Jun 09, 2005 5:28 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

50 posts.

Postby slimmouse » Thu Jun 08, 2006 8:00 pm

<br> 50 posts wintler.<br><br> at least half of which chase the "free energy" notion.<br><br> A notion that is crap at the very best in terms of the subject addressed.<br><br> But , respect to ya.<br><br> Judas took the silver too. And if it wasnt for him, no-one would truly appreciate the difference between right and wrong.<br><br> Like I said, respect to you man. Life is meant to be a struggle. <p></p><i></i>
Posts: 6129
Joined: Fri May 20, 2005 7:41 am
Location: Just outside of you.
Blog: View Blog (3)

Re: water is a fuel

Postby DireStrike » Thu Jun 08, 2006 8:21 pm

<!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr> Have you ever actually heard such a pile of shit in your entire life ?<hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END--><br><br>Many times, from a lot of independent sources. But I guess they were all put there by the oil companies to test our faith - err, I mean, maintain profits.<br><br><!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr> This is known as baffling one with science.<hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END--><br><br>I don't see how it's baffling. Care to explain?<br><br><!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr> Water is the FUEL. all this first and second laws of thermodynamics is toss.<br><br>How do you know how complicated it is to separate the oxygen and hydrogen unless youve tried it ?<br><hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END--><br><br>I have tried it in chemistry class in 10th grade. It's pretty easy, provided you have an external energy source to force the water particles to separate.<br><br>Your comments about water being the fuel, and the laws of thermodynamics being "toss"... you say that because you've tried it right? You have a working alternate theory that explains everything? Please share it.<br><br><!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>Listen buddy, you do the maths. If you have big oil, making billions of dollars per year out of virtually every last soul, do you seriously believe that these fucking interests wouldnt do ANYTHING<hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END--><br><br>When police look for a criminal suspect, they try to find a person with three separate things. means, motive, and opportunity. These are three separate things. In your quote above, you are convicting on one: motive. The oil companies didn't have the means or opportunity to influence science for as long as anyone can remember. What exactly are you suggesting they did, anyway?<br><br>Let's go back to "water is the fuel." Where are you getting this from? Can you prove it? I looked over Kanarev's site. If anyone is baffling people with "science", it's him... or else I just don't understand. Perhaps it's the lousy translation, or maybe his theatrical style that bounces from topic to topic without ever fully explaining anything is exactly what is needed to understand these concepts. In any case, I have no idea what he's talking about.<br><br>Anyway, I figured I would skip all the theory and go straight to the proposed device. Despite holding the patent, Kanarev still doesn't give out the information on how to make it. The section titled "instructions for building Kanarev electrolysis cell" is a transcript of an email... or something... anyway, what I saw next set off some alarms for me:<br><br>"If you wish to reproduce quickly my experiment on lowcurrent electrolysis of water I am ready to consult you. Cost of videofilm and the information necessary for manufacturing of labo-ratory model electrolyser, its start in work and reception of necessary results - $2000.<br><br>"If you agree, transfer on my account in the beginning $1000 and I send to you videofilm by duration one minute. If after viewing film you decide will make and to test laboratory model electrolyser after transfer still $1000 I send to you parameters of cells and other information. After manufacturing model and the beginning of tests I shall give you recommendations on structure of a solution and modes of start electrolyser. The duration of the video is one minute. "<br><br>I wish I had $2000 dollars to throw to Mr. Kanarev. One working model, and the knowledge to build it, would spread like wildfire. If it works, which I doubt very much.<br><br>But do you know how much money could be made off such a device. You believe it works, slimmouse? If I believed that, I would certainly pay the $2000. It's a low price to get in on the ground floor of this.<br><br>I'd appreciate it if, in your response, you could avoid ad hominem attacks. Assume that us skeptics are just stupid. Explain everything slowly. I realize I took some cheap shots here, but they were too good to pass up. <!--EZCODE EMOTICON START :p --><img src= ALT=":p"><!--EZCODE EMOTICON END--> I'm sorry. Points made calmly and logically are much more persuasive than rhetorical beatings, however much fun those are. <p></p><i>Edited by: <A HREF=>DireStrike</A> at: 6/8/06 6:25 pm<br></i>
Posts: 167
Joined: Tue Jul 12, 2005 2:42 pm
Location: NYC
Blog: View Blog (0)


Return to Energy Issues

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest