Author Topic: Steve I got A ? for the GEET  (Read 12106 times)

0 Members and 3 Guests are viewing this topic.

Online Login to see usernames

  • Administrator
  • Hero member
  • ****
  • Posts: 4621
    • water structure and science
Re: Steve I got A ? for the GEET
« Reply #32 on: July 23, 2012, 22:26:32 pm »
no worry.. ;)

Offline Login to see usernames

  • Member
  • **
  • Posts: 241
Re: Steve I got A ? for the GEET
« Reply #33 on: July 23, 2012, 23:36:12 pm »
Hidrocars,i read a post of yours when you was labeling the items on the buggy,i saved the photo but cannot find it...you sayd about the blue motor that was an invertor.12v to 120v or more...
You dont answer my q.:the videos are faked?you say no one filmed Stans aparatus...then what is what we see?I posted the picture of blue motor and alternator extracted from the movie...

Offline Login to see usernames

  • Hero member
  • ****
  • Posts: 2388
  • Testing
Re: Steve I got A ? for the GEET
« Reply #34 on: July 24, 2012, 01:30:03 am »
No the videos are not faked, but your not seeing everything. Stan had stuff he would not allow anyone to video or photo. Also, there are all sorts of people in the videos, (Not all of them are dead.) Nobody has questioned them which I find odd. I'm not there so I cant, But I'm sure someone isn't sharing everything.

Stan also had what you called a water splitter just before the plug, Nobody has questioned that either. It is shown in 1 video online today.

The problem with not using additives, It does not bring the needed even burn rate. No additives brings a burn rate that is faster and cleaner and more volatile. Hydroxide solutions slow the rate and add too causing engines to run. A engine may run on 10 liters of hho that derived from an additive environment but 10 liters of hho from a clean environment will not match up or run the engine as the burn rate proves to fast and clean. Additives is a quick FIX for someone that does not know how to alter the burn rate of the pure clean gas. I'm sure the altered gas would be much better than using additives because you would have control over how you would want to make that mix, and I'm sure they mix would go beyound Koh etc,,.  HHO as it sits as we make it clean, it is too clean and it is too volatile. it is too pressed together and it is NOT a synthetic gas as stan was using as pointed out in the patent in my pdf! CA---


Offline Login to see usernames

  • Hero member
  • ****
  • Posts: 2388
  • Testing
Re: Steve I got A ? for the GEET
« Reply #35 on: July 24, 2012, 01:31:17 am »
No, those photo's arent even close to the moter I seen on stans bug. The Motor was big keep looking. I couldn't find it.

Offline Login to see usernames

  • Member
  • **
  • Posts: 241
Re: Steve I got A ? for the GEET
« Reply #36 on: July 24, 2012, 02:01:00 am »
when/where you saw stans buggy?at the estate?what;s up with this motor,what is used for?

Offline Login to see usernames

  • Hero member
  • ****
  • Posts: 2388
  • Testing
Re: Steve I got A ? for the GEET
« Reply #37 on: July 24, 2012, 05:16:56 am »
Here is a small clip of me playing.

What do you notice? and yes its 100% water no additives. Stevie ;) :P
« Last Edit: July 25, 2012, 09:26:32 am by Hydrocars »

Online Login to see usernames

  • Administrator
  • Hero member
  • ****
  • Posts: 4621
    • water structure and science
Re: Steve I got A ? for the GEET
« Reply #38 on: July 24, 2012, 09:20:38 am »
You done well. Thats a beautifull flame. With no additives, its even better.
But its still electrolysis and low efficient in terms of power efficiency.
Or am i wrong here, Brian?

Offline Login to see usernames

  • Hero member
  • ****
  • Posts: 2388
  • Testing
Re: Steve I got A ? for the GEET
« Reply #39 on: July 24, 2012, 23:03:57 pm »
This post need not to exist as of today. It has been removed.
« Last Edit: July 25, 2012, 09:26:00 am by Hydrocars »