Author Topic: Attention Attention !!!!  (Read 19715 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Login to see usernames

  • 50+
  • *
  • Posts: 68
Re: Attention Attention !!!!
« Reply #32 on: March 25, 2009, 00:06:20 am »
i'll be glad if anyone informs me if he has a working zero-point energy device, as long as that is not the case i'm out.

actually he does.

listen to the tom talks tesla interview from 9:39 on.....he names people that he works with in his group and what they have invented.

your judging a person you don't know a thing about.

im not sure what's more flawed...his quantum equation or your assumptions.


I found that document of Bearden very interesting to read. However. There is not much of body in it that proves something.
I know the record of Mr Bearden and he deserves lots of respect. But if a person like Bearden is publishing such a doc, then i think its very thin.
Then please show testresults. A real sciencetist proves statements with decent testresults. Mr. Bearden was such a scientist. Not sure if he has lost it somehow. Any professor at my old university will laugh on such a paper. Even my daughter must publish here testresults as prove of here statements in scienceclass.


Seriously , when was the last time we saw clear black on white scientific results of some OU device . Such accomplishements are never out in the open for you to see , this stuff is always very obscur . They are usually described and patented by the way they operate , results are NEVER published ... What are you expecting seriously ? Him to show you his machine , Here's my OU device , pulls energy from the vacuum , 1 watt in , 10 watts out .... BINGO ... Its never like that ...The COP factors you hear from of certain devices are mostly always coming from these sites like peswiki , rumored to have been ...

I believe Stanley Meyers patents are simply a diversion , he presented this technology as if it relied on resonance and coventionnal understanding . But it relied in fact on very *obscur* science that is still not accepted by the scientific community , notice that non of his *state-space* stuff was never patented ... Conventionnal knowledge on all the patents ... Everything was made to appear to be , to mimic ...

Anything that has to do with *scalar waves* would be a BIG NO NO for the patent office , automatic refusal .

Also , we have a very BIG issue , an issue that simply cant be resolve . The water cannot hold a charge under any condition , it cant . And we know it wasnt done with a special coating .

But what if the charge is not coming from our physical dimension ( this is already accepted science )  .

My hypothesis takes this into account and connects the dots perfectly , no anomaly anywhere , connected heavily to other proven technology , universe follows this science , dna and cells follows this science .

I dont care about none of your past experiments , IN FACT , you never even posted any values for us to try to ponder on your system , you ACTED LIKE ...

« Last Edit: March 25, 2009, 01:02:45 am by Dankie »

Offline Login to see usernames

  • Hero member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1019
Re: Attention Attention !!!!
« Reply #33 on: March 25, 2009, 01:06:36 am »
Also , we have a very BIG issue , an issue that simply cant be resolve . The water cannot hold a charge under any condition , it cant . And we know it wasnt done with a special coating .

do we need the water to take on charge?  or do we need the atoms to be effected by electrical forces of opposition..
lets just say if i was a electron i would most likey want to fall to earth.. but if i were a proton i would want to fall to the sky. lighting is the transfer of electrons to ground.. but what causes this sudden burst of potential transfer??? the build up of exsessive electrons in the cloud?  until it reaches a potential high enough to jump right? does a cloud dipole orient its self to where all positive are facing up and negtive down.. just like   a cap.??? does that huge mass of evaporated water capacitace extra eletron in it because it is a positive 2 charge?