The Mylow story: what can be learned!
Here is a man who posted a video and made the claim of a working magnet motor based on the presentation and ideas of a known individual in the magnet motor saga.
Here is a classic example of folks believing some thing with out any proof.
Can I say he lied, and or faked such. NO. That is his problem to deal with. Even with all the proof of it can be faked and most likely was, I can not say it was.
What the point here I need to make is this:
It is not the claims, presentation of honesty and so on that could provide me with belief or disbelief.
What always works for me in such, is the how and why such can, or can not work. He and others can claim it is real all they want to. Such does not mater in the real world with out verification such is real. In Mylows case there is no verification at all. So noting to say it is real, other than his say so.
From this situation one must ask the following:
Simple questions can be asked.
1: What is being shown in relation to what is claimed?
2: Is there a realistic idea of how it works?
3: If an unknown of how it works : is there enough information to try and replicate what is shown. Always refer back to number 1 on this. If you do not have a idea of what is shown to what is claimed, what are you trying to build, or do.
4:What is the information from other replications? If such does show a pattern of the same negative or positive results, one can expect the same results with there attempts at replication.
This is where measurement and data need to be shared.
5: If other replications are in the negative results, what are you going to do different, and why.
Again refer back to number 1. Also refer to any data that others have done to see if your ideas may have a valid variation upon what has already been done.
When to decide that such is not a feasible application: Note I did not say fake. I have seen to much to go that route even though it is the normal method of such with the human mind, and is such that most are done in some form of deception. Such again goes back to verification of "Is it real". Such also goes for is it deception.
Regrettably in this case the evidence from replication says it is not reproducible. There is now reasonable evidence of fake.
The evidence of possibly being fake does not even need to be examined in this one. The situation of the replications show the un feasible realty of replication.
Such as of this point should have shown folks that to try, unless ideas or other evidence was given, to avoid replication, unless they had a new idea or information to try that others had not.
The Mylow story: even before replication was tried; I could find no reason such as shown and claimed could work. I from such information and thought; never attempted a replication. The reputable replications have shown what I expected. It does not work and the why of such.
Again the idea of is it fake, should not even have gotten into this at this point. Replication is not feasible. So what would be the next step??
Well this was done from the beginning. Folks trying to get verification of the claim and device.
Again this was and has not been able to be archived.
At this point it would not mater what the claims are, It becomes a simple problem of non verified claims and non verified reputable reproduction of said claims.
It would not mater if it was real or not. Not reproducible or verifiable. Game over. Some thing to place in the back of the pile that some day an observation might show some truth of the claims. To be honest such by non reproducible or verifiable becomes a high probability of NOT REAL.
Such as of now does not mater if it can be faked or not. Simply put the method I have described can and will save a great deal of time and money in the OU free energy game. It will also save a lot of disappointment and anger with pain.
Notes: Reputable replication again must be verifiable of the claims by peer review would have to be done, or it simply is not reputable.
Fake or not, the methods above will work for any claims and or story lines.
It is a simple method of looking and dealing with what happens in the real world.
If noting else folks should learn from the mess of the Mylow story, if believing it is fake or real,such does not mater: it is the simple methods of dealing with such claims.
So folks at what point of
No verifiable proof of claims: or no verifiable reproduction: Or no practical ideas different from reproductions already done do you say stop??
This could get to be an interesting question if folks will respond.
These are questions that have been dogging this forum for a long time.
There have been a number of proposals here lately that have generated a lot of controversy when it should have been clear from the beginning that these projects had no chance of working ever!
The Knitel infinity pump comes to mind, so does the Sjack Abeling device The Milkovic double oscillator and the Mylow motor.
In none of these projects anything was proposed that had not been tried over and over again and proved to be not feasible for very solid reasons.
Those who have said so and gave their reasons were shouted down and called all sorts of names and accused of working with suppressive forces and being in the pay of oil companies and such.
Physics as we know it is pretty good. We have an amazing technology going for us that would not be possible if it were bullshit.
That does not mean to say that there is nothing new to discover. Far from it. There is still much to be learned.
Let us be clear about one thing, saying that scientists have it all wrong and that the real workings of physics and chemistry are being suppressed is complete and utter crap. Sadly though, the attitude of some people here is exactly that.
That is not helpful.
There is no point in chasing down well worn avenues of pursuit that have never paid off just because it fits some mindset that does not believe they have to study science because it is all shit anyway and that the ideas of some uneducated idiot are somehow superior.
I know I will get flamed for this but I am saying it anyway.
Hans von Lieven
Hans, please...
Physics as we know it is pretty good. Sure, based on laws which are now centuries old...
Basically you are saying that there will be no advancement at all in this field because it is impossible because the current laws are the end all.
Reminds me of someone who was called a genius but was really only a patent clerk.
Talk about propaganda....
What really gets me going is the fact that anyone who tries is covered with a bucket of thin excrement in the form of ridicule, this goes for actual researchers too. The "field" is filled with examples. In this forum it is just the usual day-to-day as expected.
I like you Hans, but I wish you would try to think out of the box more. I saw your website and your classical education is no help.
AZ
hans, you forgot the 'pop keenie' wheel and anything keely...
well said han. and yes you will! why anyone would depend on utube videos is beyond me. as penn & teller put it doing magic tricks for the camera is bullshit.
Laws that are centuries old and continue to be updated, of course we don't know everything, but we know the realms of possibility through theory, but they are only theory until they are proven and validated.
You make an incorrect assumption by saying centuries old, this does not mean it's at a stand still, it continues, we learn new things almost daily, check out quantum science, we really are getting down into the nitty gritty of things now.
Quote from: AquariuZ on May 21, 2009, 02:59:32 AM
Hans, please...
Physics as we know it is pretty good. Sure, based on laws which are now centuries old...
Thinking outside the box is fine, but believing in a world full of Vampires, Trolls, Goblins, Wizards and so forth, while amusing, is absolute idiocy.
Water does not flow uphill in our part of the universe and wishing so because it would be soooooo convenient is sheer lunacy.
There is a point where we must accept certain realities. Denying them is of no value.
I am the first one to admit that there are large holes in our understanding of the world but we will never find them if we deny the things we already know to be facts.
Hans von Lieven
Quote from: WilbyInebriated on May 21, 2009, 03:03:42 AM
hans, you forgot the 'pop keenie' wheel and anything keely...
Touché
Hans
Edit: does prove though I am not as locked in the box as some think ;)
Quote from: hansvonlieven on May 21, 2009, 03:09:52 AM
Thinking outside the box is fine, but believing in a world full of Vampires, Trolls, Goblins, Wizards and so forth, while amusing, is absolute idiocy.
You sound like my father. (Before you say anything I am pre-1965) The younger generations are getting wise now (despite the mind numbing misdirection), and the rift between the believers that Government really only acts in your best interest and would never do anything to hurt groups & individuals is getting wider by the minute as 78.000 new internet users join on a daily basis.
Do you not think it is odd that a certain Rockefeller called the Internet the "biggest security threat of our time" & that Rupert Murdoch recently said "the current days of the Internet will soon be over." with regards to introducing pay-per-surf. (whatever).
You can bet a saturation point will be reached where the "idiots" will outnumber the "conservatives" and from that point on all hell will break loose as government will insist on defending its very existence.
Ah those silly conspiracy theorists.
I think Hans we are faced with the old problem that you can change a persons opinion but you cant change there mind.
The trouble you will always face here or in any overunuty type forum is rational thinking is thrown out of the window. Faith replaces science.
Anyway I cant be bothered arguing for scientic methodology anymore. Its easier to jump the fence.
just cant figure what fence to jump over.
Mark
Perhaps a bit rash Mark.
There are some very good and knowledgeable people here and the quest for free energy is, in my view at least, a legitimate and achievable one.
Perhaps we can make a difference. At least we should give it a try.
A few irritations along the way are of no real concern.
Bear in mind however that the true believers of this world are a far bigger hindrance to progress and prosperity than any Illuminati with their army of MIB's will ever be.
It is the true believers who burned people at the stake for saying the earth is not flat.
Just keep that in mind. ;)
Hans von Lieven
Quote from: AquariuZ on May 21, 2009, 04:34:17 AM
You sound like my father. (Before you say anything I am pre-1965) The younger generations are getting wise now (despite the mind numbing misdirection), and the rift between the believers that Government really only acts in your best interest and would never do anything to hurt groups & individuals is getting wider by the minute as 78.000 new internet users join on a daily basis.
Do you not think it is odd that a certain Rockefeller called the Internet the "biggest security threat of our time" & that Rupert Murdoch recently said "the current days of the Internet will soon be over." with regards to introducing pay-per-surf. (whatever).
You can bet a saturation point will be reached where the "idiots" will outnumber the "conservatives" and from that point on all hell will break loose as government will insist on defending its very existence.
Ah those silly conspiracy theorists.
I am sorry, I cannot go along with this.
The younger generation is far worse than we ever were. Distrusting everything is far more idiotic than to trust at least part of it.
To put politics on the same level as technology as far as manipulation is concerned is ludicrous.
I am an engineer. I have always loved engineering. Would you like to know why??
Engineering is one of those human endeavours where bullshit does not go very far. Sooner or later you will be found out. If you design and build a machine that does not work or build a bridge that collapses, every five year old in the country knows you are full of shit. There is no room for excuses.
Politics, by contrast is a vastly different thing. I leave it to you to work out why.
To put the two things on the same level is an insult to common sense.
BTW. I was born in 1939
Hans von Lieven
huh, i thought all you engineers drove trains... ;)
1939? in that day and age young people respected their elders and politicians didn't philander?
the more things change, the more things stay the same.
Quote from: WilbyInebriated on May 21, 2009, 05:34:24 AM
huh, i thought all you engineers drove trains... ;)
Only in America, the rest of the world calls them train drivers ;D
Hans
Quote from: hansvonlieven on May 21, 2009, 05:51:13 AM
Only in America, the rest of the world calls them train drivers ;D
Hans
;D
LOL, thanks for the morning laugh hans. i'm gonna go play some golf, talk to you all later.
So you want to know what we have learned. Hmmmmmmm.
Long read but after 500 pages of Mylow what's one more.
OPEN LETTER TO GUYS THAT BELIEVE IN OVERUNIT.COM
************************************************
Mylow Thread - Moderator Report - May 21st, 2009
The point is not does OU exist or not. The point is not is Mylwo fake or not. The point is not does the device work or not. The point is getting the best disclosure possible in the shortest period of time possible and this was not possible because of all this derailing activity that pushed this thing on and on.
You want to give kudos to @nyctuber 404 posts (NOW 432 - so 28 more since this morning) on this thread. That's 10% of the whole thread right there. Helloooooooo. Is that "normal". Tell me. Instead of shutting up a bit, no, he layed it on and on and on. The guy cannot be trusted in a disclosure setting involving a visitor. Same goes for many other members that just cannot contain their composure in front of a person that first we do not know, second we do not know what he has or does not have, etc. etc.
At overunity.com what don't we do? We don't spend our days posting things saying OU is not possible and we don't spend our days cursing at every new inventor on the block.
We get visitors with devices and ideas. We do not know if they are real or not. We do not know if the device is real or not. With a general idea we decide yes or no, if YES, we can then investigate and potentially learn and/or try whatever WE DECIDE. Does not matter if it is this or that. We are here to get the disclosure. We are here to be attentive, to listen, to see, to learn. But again all this derailing just created such a commotion that is was very difficult or next to impossible to develop a reasonable perspective.
Some here talk to me about bias. Yeh I have a bias against "inventor bullying" because one day I would like to be an OU inventor and if you talked to me like you did to Mylow, then I would consider hoping on a plane to punch your face out. Big men with big words. So easy.
NOW, once the disclosure is given and tight, guys are open to discuss and debate and argue with each other, BUT THEY HAVE NO BUSINESS INSULTING THE VISITOR, NO MATTER WHAT THEY THINK. EVEN IF THE VISITOR IS THE WORST PRICK ON EARTH, we should not care about this. Example:
If Darth Vader came here with his Zublatron, we should not be spending all our time yelling at him because he gives Luke a hard time. We should be concentrated on the Zublatron. Luke is not our problem. The Zublatron is.
All we should concentrate on is the device. As soon as you start getting personal, you blew it and once this happened we were flung into a "patching things up" mode and lost some major investigative mode. So these derailers are actually giving all of us a harder time to do our jobs.
REMEMBER THIS RULES BECAUSE THE BAD GUYS WILL USE IT AGAINST US???????????
As soon as you start calling someone names, you have just changed the dynamics from one of potential mutual partners to distinct adversaries. How the hell can we get to the bottom of this with such a situation.
We don't give a damn what members really think at this stage because all we really want is the disclosure.
Guys come on the thread and post "Well, I think it is not real". Duhhhhhh.
This is not a vote and we do not care if it is real or not at this stage until we have a full disclosure.
If you can't get a proper disclosure, you can't make the right assessment, so actually the derailing did not help us at OU, it made the whole job even harder, looking through the finer aspects was harder, getting a rebuttal was harder, maintaining a straight investigative orientation was more difficult because everything was based on aggression, making the whole process last longer and much more tedious and tenuous. Sometimes stomach aching.
Sorry @TK but if I was to open a web site for inventors to properly disclose their devices, it would be open source, meaning the information is open to everyone, the disclosure author is kept anonymous during the disclosure. The author should not matter to us because we want to see the device. But the venue would have to be closed or selective. Other members could ask questions via a, aaaaaaaaaaaaa.......... hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm..............a what.... .....a....................... disclosure clerk.
So just read the thread again from page 135 until I became the moderator and tell me. If you had a working wheel that you wanted to show the world and members here, MEMBERS of this forum, members that portray and "represent" supposedly the best and the brightest people involved in the OU field, also recognised by the discloser as having a pretty high level of importance, who then start shitting all over you, WHAT WOULD YOU DO?
So now............. we are stuck because we do not really know what the real motivation was for Mylow to fake the bar magnet wheel. Was it because he was so pissed off at the same forum members that should have afforded him the right time of day, or was it because he was a pure shyster, or was it some bad guy influences. We don't know because the derailers added their slant on the number of ingredients involved in the dynamics of the disclosure. Thus tainting it. Good job boys. Say hi to your boss for me. lol
We have to be spotless as to not create ANY reason for dissent, otherwise we are working against ourselves and our ability to assess the situation for what it really is.
What would you say if our treatment of Mylow, (regardless of our inner beliefs) was one of total control, total understanding, total openness. Then we have not given any reason for dissent and then we would at least know if Mylow did fake, that it was him and not because of any emotional anything we did.
So what happens to the next guy that comes here. Do we put him through the same meat grinder?
As for Sterling, yes he did jump the gun because the decision to promote Mylow was made before the disclosure was completed and investigated. But again, the derailing here did not help because Sterling was thrown into patch mode also. Plus the impending Mylow rebuttals took on an overconvincing mode because of the derailing.
Sterling then did not expect to see a second wheel with bar magnets any more then I was and many other members were. BUT AGAIN, things were so aggressive with tons of crap posts one after the other that moved so fast.
At the time he put out his second wheel, we should have advised Mylow that his first disclosure is for the channel rotors and if he wanted to make a second disclosure with the bar magnets, he can do so once the first disclosure is finished, because we only take one disclosure at a time from any one discloser. We did not even have the time to think. We should have reacted to this right away but again there was so much shit flying around that it was again very hard to get a proper perspective.
The mentality here is so simplistic it scares me. If members cannot analyze what happened here at OU dot com and go into the depths of what "really" happened, then we are doomed. This site will fall into the OU ghetto where anything goes, any time I think something is not real, I have a right to insult the inventor, anytime I feel like making sprint posts, let's go, the more the merrier. No control over ones self, ones opinions, ones every thoughts. Just a bunch of loose cannons. Very dangerous stuff in a disclosure thread.
But fortunately the marjority of members here that have some history know all this already and have a decorum that is close to impeccable. It is these other shmucks that come in here and have access to the same threads, even disclosure threads, so we are at the mercy of any Tom, Dick and Harry. How can we be sooooooo stupid to allow this, I don't know, but I can guarantee you it will not happen again.
Now for a final tally. If I took the @Humbugger Litmus Test for proper overunity.com decorum and applied this to each and every post made in the Mylow topics, many should have been automatically barred from the threads, no questions asked. Do you get the level at which we are talking here.
We all knew Mylow was reading this thread and yet we allowed members to say to other members, "hey guys, this Mylow character is a real duzzy wacko". HOW CAN YOU BE SO STUPID TO DO SUCH A THING IS JUST INCONCEIVABLE COMING FROM ANY MEMBER OF THIS FORUM.
You know the best guy to do this OU job is a Sentry at the Queens Castle.
You can spit in his face and he won't move.
This is the control we need to master.
Well maybe not to spitt'in level.
Wheel two was found, but what about one.
Did the bar really work but Mylow faked it with the motor to disguise it as a fake.
Hmmmmmmmmmmmmm.
If he did that, it could be because he knew the Bigs were checking him make a fake, but he used a working wheel and just added the motor and string on purpose to pAss it off as a fake so he won't get into more trouble.
Maybe Mylow played a game but it was on the bigs.
Maybe I should not have said what I just said.
But I believe in open source so saying it takes it off my back and throws this back into the meld.
Mylow played a game but maybe it was on the bigs.
Hmmmmmmmmmmmmm.
Did the channel really work best in threes.
We all flunked.
It is too bad because Sterling was a good ally to our forum and he gets the majority of inquires from inventors to review their work and you can rest assured he will no longer ask guys at OU.com to do the investigative work. Won't happen. Not under the current circumstances.
So yeh, I may be a prick of a moderator. Maybe I am a bit too stiff. But we are dealing with the unknown when inventors come here and we cannot afford to even miss ONE. The one we miss may be the one we should not have missed.
Imagine getting spit in the face and not reacting. Hmmmmmm. I couldn't do it. That, for me would deserve at least an upper cut.
Back to work.
wattsup
I will have my wheel this week, and I guess we will be closing the main thread because there is nothing more to say. The builders thread and others will still stay open because I will have things to show and am sure others will also.
MIB disclaimer: The above post is a pure fantasy and should not be taken at face value. Overunity does not exist and Mylow is the biggest faker the Earth has ever seen. We have been dupped by a magnet wheelin smart guy. Everyone, leave your wheels since working on ths is no longer worth the effort since we NOW KNOW IT IS FAKE. WOW Them MIB types really did a good job in bringing all the fakery to life. Thanks a lot MIB.
@Hans
you are right and I stand reprimanded. i should have qualified that the majority of people here are decent hard working enthuist, I do appologise
Mark
Could new claims of a working device perhaps get a label?
For instance. Mylow's claim is found on Youtube, and posted here by an OU.com member.
The moderator confirms that we have a claim here, which if true, would be of significance. Mylow as a person (posting elsewhere on the internet or when invited to come to OU.com) would get a special label, for every member to see. This means that every unprofessional remark (making up most of the pages) would be equal to immediate ban. A bit like making the Mylow "untouchable" for a given time he's given to earn full support for his/her invention. A debunking thread would be opened, where the same rules apply, but only constructive ideas of "how to fake" are posed, without getting personal or unfriendly, in any direction.
In short : when there is a claim of OU, we all get in "serious" mode, and live by "rules of engagement".
Furthermore, a panel could be made up to investigate the claims, and get in contact with the inventor, if he/she so accepts. Act as professional and respecting colleagues, wanting to learn, wanting to believe. When a Mylow presents itself to the world, a magnetic motor specialist could be volunteered to make some investigations, and post some considerations.
The "Serious" section of OU.com would be a wealth to read. No superfluous posts (like mine admittedly can be), all nicely moderated and overseeable. No hundreds of pages acting as a black hole for information.
Moderators could also promote ideas posed to a higher level, to be treated with similar care, for the sake of something possibly significant not to be let go of too easily. I see stickies on the forums, but they're often old. Information stored in it not really easy to access.
First posts of a threads that matter should be updated with the latest information, offering good insight in the case. Participants in the discussion, most important attachments to study, etc.
Hard work of course (I was a moderator for years on a mega busy forum, and I was considered a na zi), but well worth it. Good posts get re-read by newbies all the time. I've had posts read hundreds of thousands of times, really sending good info into the world, and saving the forum the noise of random FAQ's.
Quote from: AquariuZ on May 21, 2009, 02:59:32 AM
Hans, please...
Physics as we know it is pretty good.
No, it isn't. That's the point. The old description of magnets using the domain idea is nonsense. The Law of Conservation of Energy means nothing if your equation does not include ALL forms of energy, including those that we do not know about or do not understand.
Most of physics is pretty useful, but there inadequacies and also big holes. Remember Hal Puthoff and the Nobel Prize winners for 1957.
What is certain is that videos without technical descriptions mean nothing.
Quote from: Paul-R on May 21, 2009, 09:50:18 AM
The Law of Conservation of Energy means nothing if your equation does not include ALL forms of energy, including those that we do not know about or do not understand.
All laws are based on what we do know and not what we don't. For example when cars were first introduced in the late nineteenth century they couldn't pass a law banning cell phone use or text messaging.
And in science all laws are subject to falsification and are modified accordingly as required. Science is not monolithic immutability otherwise nothing would have progressed beyond the wheel.
Quote from: hansvonlieven on May 21, 2009, 03:09:52 AM
Thinking outside the box is fine, but believing in a world full of Vampires, Trolls, Goblins, Wizards and so forth, while amusing, is absolute idiocy.
Water does not flow uphill in our part of the universe and wishing so because it would be soooooo convenient is sheer lunacy.
There is a point where we must accept certain realities. Denying them is of no value.
I am the first one to admit that there are large holes in our understanding of the world but we will never find them if we deny the things we already know to be facts.
Hans von Lieven
Hi Hans,
For whatever it's worth (ie. rambling to follow - not necessarily/only directed at you or this post), my personal 'perspective' on the subject differs from yours, at least to the degree that I take almost the exact opposite approach to life and the quest for knowledge - I am willing / open to believe that
anything is possible and (once enough people puzzle over some observed phenomena long enough) our percieved reality is explained and/or updated with 'convienient', 'new' truths.
I think we agree to the extent that we (the human race) certainly don't know everything. The problem I have with your statement(s) above (a position I think many scientists would agree with, btw) centers around:
Quote
...we will never find them if we deny the things we already know to be facts ...
...I understand the point you're trying to make and actually agree with it to a certain extent, but at the same time, I completely disagree :) . Here's just a single example 'fact':
- Life exists on Earth and nowhere else -
anywhere, in our entire understanding or perception of reality.
...if we simply accept this as 'fact' (and therefore not worthy of challenging), we're certainly
less likely to find life elsewhere than if we 'deny' that fact... right?
What are facts anyway? Does the Eifle Tower exist? To whom? Since I have never touched it myself, do I just accept that it exists based on 'photos' I've seen? Should I take others word for it?
I have personally experienced 'precognition' on more than one occasion in my life, but science (as yet) has no explaination for it's existance (although Quantum Physics are starting to shed more light on many of these subjects). So is it a fact yet, or not? It is to me, because I've experienced it.
Imagine - people once accepted the 'fact' that the earth was flat and that the heavens revolved around Earth - until someone was willing to
deny the known facts and be open to other possibilities.
People (largely) still believe in solid/physical particles and atoms as facts. Are they? Or is it just a 'convienient' way of expressing and talking about reality (that might better be explained by a state of vibration of energy) ?
Sorry, I tend to get OT and ramble on... my point is that I agree that 'facts' are usefull to the extent that they give us some common ground and convienient means of expressing / discussing our (current) understanding of reality, but they are only 'valid' facts until usurpted (sp) with new ones that better explain the things we didn't previously fully understand.
So, do I believe in OU? Not in the strict definition of the phrase, no (and it's probably a shame that the phrase was ever coined to begin with, as well as then used as the site name). But do I believe that there may be ways to tap into and utilize the abundant energy that exists all around us in ways that will revolutionize the world? Absolutely.
Cheers.
...BTW, I don't mean to paint with such a wide brush above.... in fact (if I can use that term :) ), with perhaps a few exceptions, people who visit this site in the first place are obviously willing to be open to new ideas and Bobbotov basically says the same thing - though much less verbosely - in his post above.
Lets see the point made.
science and the rules of such.
I see them as some thing that exist with good reason. So far i have yet to see anything in violation, other than they can not come up with a unified field theory.
The ideas of science hold until shown to be other wise.
Next point seems to be the trying to get full disclose and the information to replicate.
Again a good point up to the fact that such will most likely never happen even if it is real.
Why of this is simple. If not as claimed, information will be such it will be misleading, and or just plain not given out for some reason. It broke. Some one tore it up. MIB is taking it away, etc. All them things that tend to make folks believe; are the excuses for the device never being independently verified.
Of course the point folks (due to a post on a form) also are to blame for non disclose). ROTFLMAO. Again just a different excuse to keep from having real and factual verification.
Stop blaming the people, and blaim the claimant. It is were this crap is happening. They use such as an excuse to keep the magic as magic and not reality and the trick behind it.
So again here is were it is simply a claim until such can be verified. Such would have to be done through peer review and peer reviewed replication and so on.
Sorry the idea that these folks are not disclosing information due to they are angry at some one on a board is just plain BS. It is nothing more than an excuse to keep the reality away from them being fooled.
MIB, big oil, goverment cover up: and so on is they way to divert the attention to hide old mister slide of hand. Keep the magic as magic. Do not let folks see the movement.
As for OU as most folks belive. LOL Look at our world, and the universe it is in.
Hell even life seems to be based on the act of trying for CoE and CoM.
The planets will still be spinning around, Suns will still be going: long after I am gone.
OU and Free energy is still a thing that will be looked at and looked for. Just watch out for them magicians. Most will if they can take your money and time if you let them.
The Mylow thing. He has been given a great amount of tolerance by the community.
He has been given a great many chances to have his device validated. Yet he just runs and hides when it comes to validation. Information for replication has been given, yet so far no valid replication has shown what he claims.
It is time to stop being tolerant of this guy. If it is real, he would allow verification. If it was real replication would have been done already. How many configurations has he shown now??
Validity of this device becomes zero.
The whole point in this thread is where do you draw the line of feasibility and validity of a claim and of a claimant.
Were does such a claim go from magician to being real folks???
Were do you draw the line saying it may be real, to it is just a magic show???
A Magic show, and magician doing its job.
Best example found to day.
http://pesn.com/2009/05/21/9501543_Mylow-fakery-forced/
"Did the MIB force Mylow to fake his later all-magnet motors?"
Hmm always always leave doubt of if fake or real: in the minds of the viewer.
VOTE HERE: http://www.99polls.com/poll_66061
What's Your Take on Mylow and his Magnet Motor?
- Will soon be vindicated
- Sincere inventor scared by MIB
- Psychotic faker from the beginning
- Planted to discredit FE movement
- Don't know / none of the above
This thread is now locked.
The others will also be locked in the coming days except for the Discussion thread.
Please refer to the main topic list of threads to see which ones are still open.
http://www.overunity.com/index.php?board=117.0