Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Francois Tremblay · 01-29-2002, 07:41 AM

Someone sent this URL on a mailing list I'm part of, as a completely serious thing. It's yet another claim of Free Energy nonsense.

<a href="http://www.msnbc.com/news/692199.asp" target="_blank">http://www.msnbc.com/news/692199.asp</a>

What's most worrying, though, is that according to the survey 23% of people think Free Energy can exist ! Hurray for public schools, I guess...

It's funny how they always need batteries, too. They can't just get the extra energy without any help. Funny, no ?

ecco · 01-29-2002, 08:25 AM

I own 20,000 shares of this company. If anyone is interested in buying NOW BEFORE THE PRICE SOARS, I will let a few go to true christians for $100 per share.

beachbum · 01-29-2002, 09:13 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by ecco:
I own 20,000 shares of this company. If anyone is interested in buying NOW BEFORE THE PRICE SOARS, I will let a few go to true christians for $100 per share.

Ecco
Send me a quarters worth. This whole thing sound like the work of the infamous Irishman DuckofDeath

Late_Cretaceous · 01-29-2002, 10:57 AM

Rmember cold fusion?
How about gravitational shielding (using a spinning superconductor in finland)?
And those two example supposedly came from genuine research labs.

How about that englishman who had supposedly invented some material that protected objects from fire and heat. I remember a demonstration where an egg was coated in a thin layer of the material, subjected to a blowtorch for a minute, then cracked open totally raw. That was back in the early 80's, obviously nothing about it was true otherwise the inventor and invention would be a big part of our history by now.

I think this is just another example. In 20 years you will hear someone say "dont you remember that irishman who invented free energy"

ecco · 01-29-2002, 11:06 AM

BeachBum,

Sorry, no partial shares. One Hundred bucks per share.

ecco

Ah, what the hell, $75 per share for you.

Tinman · 01-29-2002, 11:23 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Late_Cretaceous:
Rmember cold fusion?
How about gravitational shielding (using a spinning superconductor in finland)?
And those two example supposedly came from genuine research labs.

Cold fusion is definitely not dead. Do some research.

Francois Tremblay · 01-29-2002, 11:23 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by ecco:
I own 20,000 shares of this company. If anyone is interested in buying NOW BEFORE THE PRICE SOARS, I will let a few go to true christians for $100 per share.

What's the point ? Just ask the true christians to give you money. Their Bible forces them to (^_^)

Late_Cretaceous · 01-29-2002, 01:09 PM

RE: cold fusion

I was refering to one particular case where unverified claims were picked up by the media, not the general field of cold fusion research.

Arrowman · 01-29-2002, 04:55 PM

Ugh. Check out the poll results. 28% of respondents think that "Some free-energy devices actually work, but the technology is being suppressed."

Check out a recent Australian story (and winner of the 2001 Bent Spoon Award):

<a href="http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/orthogonal/skep/lutec1.pdf" target="_blank">http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/orthogonal/skep/lutec1.pdf</a>

Asha'man · 01-30-2002, 09:50 AM

Cold fusion never made any sense to me, at least as far as applications go. The whole point was that it was cold, meaning that very little energy was involved. You would need a power plant the size of Lake Michigan to power the average house.

As for this free energy device, I see it starts off with a set of batteries providing power. Without knowing anything more about the device, I would presume it is simply battery powered, and the guy is a fraud. If he could document exactly how much current was provided by those batteries initially, then run with them disconnected, I might be more impressed.

01-29-2002, 07:41 AM	#1
Francois Tremblay Banned Join Date: Sep 2000 Location: Montreal, QC Canada Posts: 876	Free Energy malarkey Someone sent this URL on a mailing list I'm part of, as a completely serious thing. It's yet another claim of Free Energy nonsense. <a href="http://www.msnbc.com/news/692199.asp" target="_blank">http://www.msnbc.com/news/692199.asp</a> What's most worrying, though, is that according to the survey 23% of people think Free Energy can exist ! Hurray for public schools, I guess... It's funny how they always need batteries, too. They can't just get the extra energy without any help. Funny, no ?

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

01-29-2002, 08:25 AM	#2
ecco Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2000 Location: SE Posts: 4,845	I own 20,000 shares of this company. If anyone is interested in buying NOW BEFORE THE PRICE SOARS, I will let a few go to true christians for $100 per share.

01-29-2002, 10:57 AM	#4
Late_Cretaceous Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2001 Location: Alberta Posts: 1,049	Rmember cold fusion? How about gravitational shielding (using a spinning superconductor in finland)? And those two example supposedly came from genuine research labs. How about that englishman who had supposedly invented some material that protected objects from fire and heat. I remember a demonstration where an egg was coated in a thin layer of the material, subjected to a blowtorch for a minute, then cracked open totally raw. That was back in the early 80's, obviously nothing about it was true otherwise the inventor and invention would be a big part of our history by now. I think this is just another example. In 20 years you will hear someone say "dont you remember that irishman who invented free energy"

01-29-2002, 11:06 AM	#5
ecco Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2000 Location: SE Posts: 4,845	BeachBum, Sorry, no partial shares. One Hundred bucks per share. ecco Ah, what the hell, $75 per share for you.

01-29-2002, 01:09 PM	#8
Late_Cretaceous Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2001 Location: Alberta Posts: 1,049	RE: cold fusion I was refering to one particular case where unverified claims were picked up by the media, not the general field of cold fusion research.

01-29-2002, 04:55 PM	#9
Arrowman Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: Adelaide, South Australia Posts: 1,358	Ugh. Check out the poll results. 28% of respondents think that "Some free-energy devices actually work, but the technology is being suppressed." Check out a recent Australian story (and winner of the 2001 Bent Spoon Award): <a href="http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/orthogonal/skep/lutec1.pdf" target="_blank">http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/orthogonal/skep/lutec1.pdf</a>

01-30-2002, 09:50 AM	#10
Asha'man Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: southeast Posts: 2,526	Cold fusion never made any sense to me, at least as far as applications go. The whole point was that it was cold, meaning that very little energy was involved. You would need a power plant the size of Lake Michigan to power the average house. As for this free energy device, I see it starts off with a set of batteries providing power. Without knowing anything more about the device, I would presume it is simply battery powered, and the guy is a fraud. If he could document exactly how much current was provided by those batteries initially, then run with them disconnected, I might be more impressed.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.