litmus test fail by milehigh

[poynt99]

The result of the critics action is clear, first people either leave the forums or do not post for fear of personal attacks next the open unhindered debate of the topic of the thread is effectively killed and finally no progress is made. While the motives of these critics may be questionable the result of their actions is not as the result is the same in every case, they effectively kill all open debate of the topic.
Regards
AC

This doesn't always apply. To me it matters not that there are some opposed to the notion that the TPU might be authentic (as an example), and their expressions of such certainly doesn't deter me from posting my comments and ideas about it. So speaking from my own direct experience, I'm confident in saying that not everyone leaves or stops posting.

Where folks can not reach agreement on a topic, they should mutually concede that their views seem hopelessly opposed, and let each go on their merry way.

It is OK to disagree. In fact it is normal and expected. So what if you do? Let it go and carry on. Consider cutting each other some slack...it won't be the end of the world.

.99

[allcanadian]

@Poynt99
I would agree completely, there will always be differences in opinions as there should be for a healthy debate. However what I saw was a little different, first posts are attacked with an endless series of critical replies, next the persons credibility is called into question and then personal attacks follow and this pattern is repeated over and over. As I said the motive may not be clear but the result certainly is in my opinion. I do not take any of this too personal but I do find it offensive when I see these personal attacks on other people who are not always present to defend themselves.
I should note that I have a pattern of behavior as well, I like to criticize people who I think criticize others without justification which tends to put me at odds with many people, the critics critic, lol. Something else I find rather odd is that most rational people will accept criticism to some extent however in most every case the critic finds it offensive, that is they will not tolerate the very thing they do to everyone else.
Regards
AC

[WilbyInebriated]

milehigh made a post i would like to respond to.

On the other hand, supposing that I stated that "transistors are voltage amplifiers" as fact.  This is a statement about transistor technology that is wrong because transistors are devices that amplify current, not voltage.  We are not talking historical trivia anymore.  That would indeed be a litmus test failure because it would demonstrate that I didn't understand how transistors work.

how can you understand how a transistor works without understanding how they are made? and don't they cover that in second year EE classes? "Introduction to Semiconductor Materials & Devices" wasn't it? from your rebut to rick frederick http://www.overunityresearch.com/index.php?topic=341.msg6511#msg6511

So, using the phraseology of inimitable Wilby Inebriated, it's a logical fallacy for Wilby to suggest that I failed the litmus test because I did not know a relatively obscure piece of historical trivia about transistors.

no, it's a logical fallacy for wilby to suggest you failed your litmus test because your litmus test is a logical fallacy in and of itself. learn what a logical fallacy is for crying out loud.

As far as apologizing to John Bedini goes, in reviewing my posting you can summarize what I said as "It makes no sense at all to think that you can grind up rocks to make transistors."  It's actually a rebuttal to a story told by Tom Bearden that I thought was a tall tale.  My comments we never addressed to John Bedini directly and I think that it's fair to say that even die-hard believers in free energy would question some of the comments of Tom Bearden.

However, I will repeat that I admitted my ignorance and in that sense I retract my statements directed at Tom Bearden about this issue, and by extension I retract my statements that were ultimately about John Bedini.

As a final thought for Bedini fans to contemplate, it's about central issue that the whole Bedini motor concept is based on.  Bedini alleges that coils discharge "radiant energy" and there is something "special" about this "form of energy."  The simple fact is that Bedini is not giving you the straight goods about what happens when an inductor discharges.  If you are really serious about your Bedini motors you should take it upon yourselves to research how an inductor works in general, and specifically how a discharging inductor works.  You can read in the Bedini threads on this web site, or open up some electronics, electrical engineering, or physics books, do research online, and so on.  Gather information from at least five "conventional" sources and work on understanding and mastering what the hell is really going on when an inductor stores energy supplied to it by an external power source and then discharges that stored energy.  Assuming that you have mastered that, then go back and read through and watch material from John Bedini himself and you just might have a much different perspective on the man and what he says.  I am not trying to tell anybody what to think, rather, I am suggesting that you do the research yourselves.

MileHigh

well i'll be a blue nosed gopher... atta boy milehigh.

@BEP try a cogent argument instead of logical fallacy.
@ION regarding my posting anything technical. try a cogent argument instead of logical fallacies.

that being said, the proof of the pudding is in the eating... right spinner? and i have offered no OU pudding to the public, just like yourselves.

edit: thanks for the heads up poynt.

[WilbyInebriated]

another epic fail by milehigh...

Einstein's theories have been proven.  They have put an atomic clock in a jet plane and found that it lost time relative to a stationary atomic clock on the Earth.  What astronomers once thought were anomalies in the observed orbits of planets and observations of other objects in the Universe turned out to not be anomalies once they factored in relativistic effects and the curvature of space due to the presence of very large masses.

einstein's theories have not been proven, there are still outstanding refutations. furthermore, such evidences (putting an atomic clock into a jet plane) do not constitute proof. even a fifth grader knows this...

now to the second part of his paragraph. ok, milehigh, i'll bite. exactly what anomalies in precisely which planet's orbit... and exactly what very large masses?

[fritznien]

another epic fail by milehigh...
einstein's theories have not been proven, there are still outstanding refutations. furthermore, such evidences (putting an atomic clock into a jet plane) do not constitute proof. even a fifth grader knows this...

now to the second part of his paragraph. ok, milehigh, i'll bite. exactly what anomalies in precisely which planet's orbit... and exactly what very large masses?

that would be mercury and the sun.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tests_of_general_relativity#Perihelion_precession_of_Mercury