Stan Meyer Energy is Stolen from The Sun

[newbie123]

What's with the broken record syndrome Newbie? You keep repeating yourself as if no one is listening to you. You keep trying to debunk with your opinion and show no data of your own.

I do sound like a broken record, because I keep getting the same lame  arguments as to why Stan Meyer must be legitimate.

I have never encountered a person who claims that their misunderstanding is proof for debunking.

What is my misunderstanding?  Please tell me.

Are you saying "I don't understand what he said so it's wrong."

I'm just saying that you don't have a working replication, and haven't seen wide spread independent replications & verifications..  So it's wrong.

Although when it comes to Boyce, you turn into the exact opposite of what you just claimed all others are. You don't believe Stan was legit even after numerous studies and demos of working devices, but, Bob who has nothing more than stories and poor circuit diagrams along with no working demos is in your opinion the real deal...

Really?  I think Boyce is the real deal?   That's new to me..    Maybe I should repeat myself again then.....   HE'S A CRANK UNTIL PROVEN OTHERWISE!

Smoke another bowl Newbie, I think it's working!

Get your story right before attempting another snide remark.

[Farrah Day]

HB

I'd seen that article before and the most interesting thing about it was the part which stated that the unit remained cold after long periods of operation.

If Meyer was a fraud, he could easliy have modified the ammeter to show milliamps instead of amps, and remember that this was only a visual demonstration. It was not a thorough or detailed independent investigation, it was all in the control of Meyer. Gas output was not measured for example, and we all can produce what seems like litres of bubbles from ss tubes in plain tap water with relatively low current with ss tubes spaced very closely together - we can all produce the same visual effect as Meyer. Furthermore we all know that electrolyte is not needed even in standard electrolysis as the report suggests it is.

My insistence on a balanced electrochemical equation for the reaction/s taking place - that no one has yet proffered - is quite valid.  Whatever is occuring is not by magic, so there will be specific reactions taking place.

It's all very well Meyer saying he was pulling water apart using HV, but this is meaningless and quite laughable in scientific terms unless you can substantiate that statement with valid reaction processes. The claim would be well backed up if he had - or anyone else could - provide a process of reactions that leads us to the evolution of H2 and O2.

Charges must be exchanged at some point, it CANNOT simply be about pulling electrons off the water molecules by some 'Electron Extraction Unit' or whatever made up term Meyer employed, and then magically get O2 and H2 evolving. Think about it.

It's all very well conveniently overlooking these important little details, but it is in these details that the science resides. It is in these important details that the proof of concept lies... or not.

But I guess the science is completely irrelevant to folk who believe in magic.

The only thing you want is an equation? of what? A non-exothermic electrochemical reaction induced by external stimuli?  According to Dublin it's "4H3O+ +4OH- --> 2H2 + O2 + 6H2O"

Is this supposed to be an explanation that answers all the questions??

I don't know what you think this is supposed to be, but clearly you have no grasp of what I'm getting at - where are the charges exchanged in that equation?

What the hell is an equation gonna do for ya? Solve the problem of building it?

What a stupid thing to say. If you knew what the balanced equations were, if you knew what science was taking place, you could build a unit to enhance the process. Instead most people simply, blindly build units hoping they will do what they want them to do.

You know, I'm tired of talking to people who live in fantasy worlds!

[HeairBear]

And yet, you keep coming back. I have watched you pull this trollish crap many times before and it's getting old. Go build a TPU with Loner and bother those people. Maybe they will accept your condescending attitude which is so very loathed here in this section. Better yet, try a dialogue with Stiffler and see how he responds to your childish banter. Oh, and take Newbie with you...

[Farrah Day]

You know what HB, all I've ever wanted to do is to get to the science behind Meyers WFC. And it is science not magic.

I look at all the possibilities and try to fathom what I could be missing that would make it work, unlike many who simply accept it... though can never replicate it!

For all those people who believe in Meyer or profess to understand how his WFC works, no one has yet explained the electrochemistry involved which would substantiate the claims.

Meyer did himself no favours by the crap he wrote (and even that link you provided states his demonstration was more impressive than the para-scientific jargon in his technical brief).

Without people like Loner, Newbie and myself asking the right questions and looking for real answers to those questions, you and the rest of the mindless Meyer fanatics will forever be on a quest to nowhere and be getting there very, very slowly.

My so-called condescending attitude simply comes from my low tolerance for idiots and having to wade through piles of illiterate or nonsensical posts made by uneducated or ignorant wannabes such as yourself.

What have you ever proffered by way of explanation of the workings of the Meyers WFC? Nothing... like most, you're waiting for educated people to fill in the gaps and give it you on a plate.

The real problem around here is that there are only a mere handful of open-minded people with a background education in science that can actually make any progress with this... the thing is most of them spend much of that time having to do battle with retards.

Pretty pathetic really.

Ok I'll go and build a TPU with Loner... I'm sure by the time I get back you will have it all figured out.... or maybe not

[newbie123]

And yet, you keep coming back. I have watched you pull this trollish crap many times before and it's getting old.

Well shit  HB....    What do you expect?  You put words in my mouth,  say that I have a misunderstanding,  continue to defend the nonsensical,      and you still won't answer my  questions.  (like so many other around here!)


I'm not a troll..   I've been coming to this forum for the last 3 years (without commenting).   I used to think a lot of these FE technologies might be real..   But then  I learned what real is (in science):       (warning: broken record alert!)     Wide spread independent replications/verifications  of claimed phenomenas.    I think most here understand this.

But now  I'm just curious why everyone is so hell bent on Stan Meyers, when there is real progress happening in the  LENR/CF arena (which might have some real potential)?

Better yet, try a dialogue with Stiffler and see how he responds to your childish banter.

From what I've seen Dr Stiffler doesn't respond well to criticism either (big surprise on this forum), but I don't know enough about his circuits to comment.