Government suppression of Free Energy

[Zephir]

They're not souvereign countries, but colonies of a network socially established sociopaths, giving us hell on earth. After all it's the peoples guilt to be such cowards and not getting rid of those parasites.

It's not so simple. How could we get rid of Tinsel Koala for example? This is a model example.

[memoryman]

"How could we get rid of Tinsel Koala for example?" why would you want to? Are you afraid of the straight truth: governments do not suppress energy production from alternative sources (they often subsidize them) such as nuclear, wind, solar, wave and many more.
Of course you'll say: but FE threatens everything. FE (if it existed) would be just another business, with costs involved. If it is not competitive, it will disappear. The FREE part in FE only refers to the energy, not the infrastructure needed to make it viable in the market. The energy in oil, coal, natural gas and any other energy-medium is always FREE; it's the infrastructure needed (plus profit) that you are actually paying for.

[Zephir]

governments do not suppress energy production from alternative sources (they often subsidize them) such as nuclear, wind, solar, wave and many more

I see, just another troll, who doesn't (want to) understand the difference between free energy and nuclear, solar (check his posts history, if you're on doubts)...

How could we get rid of him too?

[memoryman]

Just ignore us, if you are afraid of what we say.
As I said, FE requires just as much infrastructure as conventional energy source.
I am personally involved in what you would call 'FE', although I give it a different name. My concern is not: will it be suppressed or will I be killed, but : can it be scaled up so that it is commercially viable.
The FE cult harms the energy community by screaming SUPPRESSION, instead of demonstration that their contraptions WORK. Maybe YOU are the real trolls...

[ramset]

Zephir
I believe the language barrier may be involved in some of this.

@ regarding TinselKoala and how you are using this "quote".

What I know to be true is the quote is being taken out of "context" ,the context being that none of the circuits presented "HERE"
utilizing Pancake or other methods ...or any methods presented "HERE" have been shown to develop anomalies of any kind ..once thoroughly examined ,

nor has anyone ever presented anything from You tube or other sources which was shown to develop OU.

and for clarity I mean a clear presentation ..not a jumpy you tube Vid or other poorly supported  claim.

At this moment Tinsel is involved in an open source replication attempt of another idea presented here which may or may not pan out.
and he is also helping members here with Their replications of various claims

instead of lighting torches and throwing stones
it would be better if you would post some circuits here which you feel have been overlooked ...

as I said before
there will be replicators lined up out the door....the thirst is great !

respectfully
Chet K