Arguments against Muller design

[Artist_Guy]

Those single pictures "looks like" a wire. IF this is true it should have more pictures just like it on the same video, which there is none.

(Snip)

The whole group of pictures ARE NOT MATCHING, so I must allow doubt to this evidence and therefore look at it as not enough proof.
(snip)

Fausto.

@Plengo


2 more hours...later. Here are multiple views, same wires. Tracing both black, and red wire X, per your specification.

What now?

You can say that the two wires in question are not attached to anything on the one end at the table hole...to say...a battery below...but you cannot say they are not there. Only where they go into the table is 'hidden' otherwise they hide in plain sight in the confusion.

Please explain Wire X Red and Wire X Black, and their need, and connections, if you disagree. 

AG

[i_ron]

I think everyone here forgot that he ran the thing suspended in the air. That's good enough for me!

It would be good enough for me also IF he had showed all of the device.

What you have to look at is the top end of one rod that is never shown in the video. Why is it never shown?

Ron

[i_ron]

snip

You can say that the two wires in question are not attached to anything on the one end at the table hole...to say...a battery below...but you cannot say they are not there. Only where they go into the table is 'hidden' otherwise they hide in plain sight in the confusion.

Please explain Wire X Red and Wire X Black, and their need, and connections, if you disagree. 

AG

Good work Robert, thanks for your research.

Then the answer to "where do the wires go", is in the way it runs, which is contrary to all the replications to date.

Ron

[i_ron]

Over the years I have followed I_rons posts as he's involved himself in many different threads and experiments.

I maintain a high regard for I_rons attitude and aptitude in his research efforts, and know that he keeps an open mind until empirical evidence sways his opinion one way or another.

The least correct thing you could possibly infer about I_ron is that he is an armchair researcher, or that he lets the mob make his decisions for him.

He builds precision models, (which takes a lot of time, money and effort) and he willingly tries every possible experiment relating to a given subject, that others may suggest, or that he has conjured up himself.

I have always known him to share his findings, and to present his data in an open and transparent manner, whether it confims or contradicts a given expectation or theory.

Cheers

Wow, made my day, thanks HT.

Funny thing is, the way things turn out is not my choice. I would love to build a device and have it work, "as advertised".

But starting with Garry Stanley and working up to Lawrence Rayburn to Thane Heins, I have come across certain anomalies that are not explained by their hypothesis.  When I have spoken up I have been attacked and maligned, called every thing from a know nothing, to a thief.

But I did speak up.

Thanks again for your recognition, and support.

Warm Regards

Ron

PS: not trail blazing here, just offering my support to wattsup, EM, AG and others.....

[wattsup]

@All

Why is this thread entitled "Arguments against Muller design". There is no argument about the Muller design. There is an argument about Romero faking three videos, period. Actually it is no longer an argument but a fact. Why is Muller mentioned here? Even the other thread called "Muller Design". Should have been called "Romero Design". Why are you guys always confusing the two.

@Plengo

I can't believe I am reading what you are saying. You think I tricked those images. Never in a million years would I do that. Do you think I would risk my name here for a furty wheel. Wow. Why would I do that? Just think again please before you repeat such nonsense. This is not the way to fight your argument. You will need much more then that to go against so much proof. Word of advice. Don't bother and save yourself lots of unnecessary work for nothing because in the end, you will realize you are wrong and wonder why you wasted so much more time.

When @EM said about the same things you are saying, I again re-posted and re-explained to him and it is located here, and, he quickly understood where he was going wrong.
http://www.overunityresearch.com/index.php?topic=827.msg15571#msg15571

Artist-Guy has copies of images from @none here (the ones you removed) plus his own here;
http://www.overunityresearch.com/index.php?topic=827.msg15618#msg15618

Video 3 is covered here:
http://www.overunityresearch.com/index.php?topic=827.msg15479#msg15479
then a little further down here;
http://www.overunityresearch.com/index.php?topic=827.msg15491#msg15491

Please understand that if you do not have a youtube conversion program and if you are not using a software like VirtualDubMod, you are looking at the standard video. With VDM I have 30 frames per each second of Romeros' video to view. In can zooom in on one inch if needed. Those images are in about 3-4 frames, so you are talking about 1/10th of a second in youtube time. Romero must have looked at his Video 2 and 3 many times to make sure he did not show his funny X Wires but even he could not see them if he was just looking at it with the standard video players.

Go to the links above, look at the images. Each has a frame number. Just divide the frame number by 30 and you will have the youtube video seconds at which the frames were taken. Divide by 60 for minutes, etc. Maybe once you know that it will be more easy for you to see it.

When I say you cannot see it, I should specify cannot without paying extra attention to the actual small time frame. Just look at those images, then look at the video at frame/30. But first make sure you are looking at the same video. There is Video 1, 2 and 3.

wattsup