by 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=http://www.ezboard.com/images/emoticons/tongue.gif 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=http://p216.ezboard.com/brigorousintuition.showUserPublicProfile?gid=direstrike>DireStrike</A> at: 6/8/06 6:25 pm<br></i>