Working Magnetic Motor on you tube??

[Yadaraf]

The perpetrator himself implied it's a hoax. You should ask him about the details.

Omni,

FYI.  You are now on record as acknowledging that the so-called "hoax" was merely "implied" and, thus, not a matter of fact.

Cheers

Yada..
.

[Omnibus]

The perpetrator himself implied it's a hoax. You should ask him about the details.

Omni,

FYI.  You are now on record as acknowledging that the so-called "hoax" was merely "implied" and, thus, not a matter of fact.

Cheers

Yada..
.

Well, that's the nasty essence of such type of hoax. There's no way to prove negative. You know about that logical fallacy, correct?

As for the "implied" part, the truth is that @alsetalokin never said "I committed a hoax". This doesn't mean he didn't commit a hoax. He said that, however, in a more cynical way, trying to make a fool out of everyone. On the one hand he insists the effect wasn't faked while on the other he clearly states that he has done that demonstration to show that something false is false. Go figure what this is if not implicit admission to a hoax.

[Yadaraf]

The perpetrator himself implied it's a hoax. You should ask him about the details.

Omni,

FYI.  You are now on record as acknowledging that the so-called "hoax" was merely "implied" and, thus, not a matter of fact.

Cheers

Yada..
.

Well, that's the nasty essence of such type of hoax. There's no way to prove negative. You know about that logical fallacy, correct?

As for the "implied" part, the truth is that @alsetalokin never said "I committed a hoax". This doesn't mean he didn't commit a hoax. He said that, however, in a more cynical way, trying to make a fool out of everyone. On the one hand he insists the effect wasn't faked while on the other he clearly states that he has done that demonstration to show that something false is false. Go figure what this is if not implicit admission to a hoax.

Omni,

I understand. 

My point is that in the past you have called it a "hoax" explicitly, but this time you are acknowledging that it is only an "implied hoax," which is very different in terms of legal parlance. 

Thus, instead of saying "This is a nasty hoax ... move on," you might consider constructing replies that are more accurate and less libelous like:

...  "The inventor implied it's a hoax.  Move on."

Cheers

Yada..
.

[Omnibus]

So, is this a hoax or not? Can't have it both ways.

[Thaelin]

   And we are only 4 more pages from a record setting 200 pages in one thread   

   Had this of panned out, not sure it would have had very much power to it. A good stepping stone to better things at best.

  That is why I declined to build it in the beginning.

thaelin