Arguments against Muller design

[i_ron]

Just pictures is not enough because they are tricking you.

The short videos do a better job showing that.

Fausto.

That is quite humorous... a video to prove or disprove a video! Is that not an oxymoron?

Nope, afraid wattsup's technique in capturing these JPGs using Naevious, virtual dud and then Snaggle is about as good as one can get. And this jpg evidence is collaborated by the running behavior and measurements of the machine, running on 3 volts, no RPM change when a load is applied, not the slightest change when loaded or unloaded, beyond belief, as NO vehicle has been put forward to explain this anomalous behavior.

Now try this on for size Do you believe a liar?  Romero stated quite clearly that the device is a fake. But then various people put forward the claim that this was a lie, in reality the machine is working as originally claimed!

But you can't have it both ways... either he lied that the device worked or he lied that it didn't work. All this establishes is that he is a liar.

Ron

[plengo]

That is quite humorous... a video to prove or disprove a video! Is that not an oxymoron?

Nope, afraid wattsup's technique in capturing these JPGs using Naevious, virtual dud and then Snaggle is about as good as one can get. And this jpg evidence is collaborated by the running behavior and measurements of the machine, running on 3 volts, no RPM change when a load is applied, not the slightest change when loaded or unloaded, beyond belief, as NO vehicle has been put forward to explain this anomalous behavior.

Now try this on for size Do you believe a liar?  Romero stated quite clearly that the device is a fake. But then various people put forward the claim that this was a lie, in reality the machine is working as originally claimed!

But you can't have it both ways... either he lied that the device worked or he lied that it didn't work. All this establishes is that he is a liar.

Ron

That's a great argument. First you destroy the possibility of being true, second you give more value to the "previous" picture than if the picture is indeed the true.

Look, on my short video (or series of pictures) one can see that there is no hidden wire. That by itself is enough evidence that there is no hidden wire. This is not a question IF Romero's machine is true or not. It is quiet irrelevant.

It is about if "this evidence" can be used as the proposed argument: there is or not hidden wires ON THOSE PICTURES.

If you search for OU like you just described you arguments against mine, oh boy, you will never find it. It is missing a lot more in you than you think.

Evidences are only good to their truthfulness. They do not speak of the whole but only of itself. If the pictures shown are in a aggregation not being consistent so it may be because they are, guess what, inconsistent. One picture only will not demonstrate the hidden wires. It can be many 3D view tricks of the mind here. You must look at them all so that you can really see it.

Now, the question is: Are you willing to really invest your time into this matter or just take the easy "sitting in my chair" and lets other decide for you?

At least I did my diligent work in demonstrating that in that second video there are no hidden "visible" wires anywhere.

Fausto.

[i_ron]

snip

Look, on my short video (or series of pictures) one can see that there is no hidden wire. That by itself is enough evidence that there is no hidden wire. This is not a question IF Romero's machine is true or not. It is quiet irrelevant.

snip
Now, the question is: Are you willing to really invest your time into this matter or just take the easy "sitting in my chair" and lets other decide for you?

At least I did my diligent work in demonstrating that in that second video there are no hidden "visible" wires anywhere.

Fausto.

Fausto,

No, it does not "prove" any such thing. It merely means the segments you have chosen do not show hidden wires.

I have built at least two different versions of this dynamo and have tried nearly all the hair brained schemes presented on the list. The simple answer is none preformed in a manner shown in romereo's videos.

Ergo... it is either a hoax or romero is hiding the invention of the century.
Neither scenario would endear romero to me.

Ron

[plengo]

Fausto,

No, it does not "prove" any such thing. It merely means the segments you have chosen do not show hidden wires.

I have built at least two different versions of this dynamo and have tried nearly all the hair brained schemes presented on the list. The simple answer is none preformed in a manner shown in romereo's videos.

Ergo... it is either a hoax or romero is hiding the invention of the century.
Neither scenario would endear romero to me.

Ron

Oh good we are getting somewhere. Did you see my short videos? they show the cap clearly with no wires. How can the wires be there on the same video on a different segment of the video?

This is called: text out of context. 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. It is the same as saying that ONLY ONE PICTURE with lots of photoshop filter to make it look like something else. I am not saying anyone manufactured anything, but I am saying those pictures are very misleading when looking at the WHOLE group of evidences. 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.

Now, if Romero's motor is fake or not is another question. People not being able to replicate does not help either in disproving validity. Not everyone can play soccer like "Pele" or "Ronaldinho" or "Massias", although many watch soccer and even play.

If this was in a court room this evidence would be full of doubt and the jury would not vote for it as more than circumstantial evidence, if not invalid.

I think I AM a real critic here. I have my belief system BUT I am only allowing evidence (including the ones I find on my experiments) be the judge of the reality I perceive.

Fausto.

[Artist_Guy]

Oh good we are getting somewhere. Did you see my short videos? they show the cap clearly with no wires. How can the wires be there on the same video on a different segment of the video?

This is called: text out of context. 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. It is the same as saying that ONLY ONE PICTURE with lots of photoshop filter to make it look like something else. I am not saying anyone manufactured anything, but I am saying those pictures are very misleading when looking at the WHOLE group of evidences. 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.

Now, if Romero's motor is fake or not is another question. People not being able to replicate does not help either in disproving validity. Not everyone can play soccer like "Pele" or "Ronaldinho" or "Massias", although many watch soccer and even play.

If this was in a court room this evidence would be full of doubt and the jury would not vote for it as more than circumstantial evidence, if not invalid.

I think I AM a real critic here. I have my belief system BUT I am only allowing evidence (including the ones I find on my experiments) be the judge of the reality I perceive.

Fausto.

@Plengo:

I've been using, and also writing graphics software for well over a decade (almost 2). Filters, gamma corrections in particular as have been used almost exclusively for any closeups, do not introduce new wires into the equation, nor create them where they are not, they only compress or expand the dynamic range that is already there.

You say there is only one image about this, but there are about 3 unique time stamps (not the same angle) that I can find that show the same Wire X's in question there in umbrella plug territory.

If Mylow's thin lines, barely visible, were conclusive...how can wires going into the table be fiction? They are demonstrably not coil wires. You maintain they are coil wires?

It would be good to get on the same page about what you are maintaing are the facts with your short videos...

Tell me if I am correct in my interpretation here:

You are supposing that the two (black) wires leading in from lower leftscreen into the right and going near what looks like the cap, near the support rod are the same Wire X's in question, shown in the image you contest, which you can see for yourself in video #2, at 8m41s - Yes - No -

And...you are supposing those two wires which your short clip shows, -are the coil wires for the drive coil, next to the Wire X's in question, seen at the same time stamp, 8m41s?  - Yes - No -

You are supposing that they are not coil wires for the drive coil, but for the gen coil - Yes - No - yet, they are the ones we keep saying are Wires X? Yes - No ?

Thanks for additional information.

EDIT: Is your lone supposition with this short video only that no wires are seen going to the cap, which is something which ignores that the very placement of the rod (and also terminal block of a coil) obscure the view where they would -be seen- if not behind the rod?  The angle in that short of yours would preclude seeing the wires, given they are behind the rod.

The rod sits on the edge of the cap, you can't see the part where the wires are. What you call 99 percent visible is about 95 percent as to diameter (whatever portion the rod is of that)...

NOTE: in the image, the corresponding lines to each coil pair are shown going from bottom, to top match

Artist_Guy