Energy from the Ground - Self powered generator by Barbosa and Leal

[skribat]

And I bet a lot of you that bitch and whine about me actually "secretly" want to read me, perhaps some of you are even serious and avid readers.  Part of that is because a big "let's always agree with each other" club gets boring pretty damn fast.

Endless discussions of the mechanics of how to build a hypothetical Clarence setup with not a single shred of evidence that it even works first is silly, and farking boring.  Not to mention I called you guys out because you were "skipping" trying to probe Clarence about how it actually works first.  And some of you may have been in denial, claiming that you were having a valid productive discussion when you weren't.  What's the point of talking about how to build something when you don't even know how it allegedly works. Some of you may try to claim that you were having a technical discussion with Clarence.  I call bullshit, you were having nothing more than an anecdotal technical discussion with Clarence with only skimpy, vague details. Did any of you ask him where to put a pair of multimeter probes to verify "the effect."  I am willing to bet you the answer is no.  From multiple sources now, including me, you have been told that Clarence is not capable of having a legitimate technical discussion.

When somebody disagrees for a valid reason and starts a real debate, then it gets interesting - admit it.

----------------------
You really do sound so foolish .. what do you think gives you the right to sit in judgement on others and at the same time be so blind to your own failings ...    as for ' how his device actually works'     .. he did indeed explain how it actually works, just as others have ..maybe that was your 'day off'    in fact the device is actually being analysed and explained in other places by people far more knowledgable than yourself, the conclusion .. that it is perfectly feasable and has been known about for a long time.   It does however cover subject matter about which on your own admission you have little or no knowledge.

As for getting on Clarence's case because in your opinion he doesn't speak your technical language ... the same might apply to Tesla  .. there was not the technical language in his time, no ohms law or multimeter .. and  let's not leave out Tesla's other great failing, his autism. ...   and of course he was a bum living on the streets, he didn't have a pot to P**ss in and he died in poverty.  There have been others like Tesla a more modern equivalent  Dollard,  another incompetent underdog who had everything and threw it all away I suppose ..  he also has spent much of his life not being able to hold a technical discussion with people on your level ..    maybe .. if you spent a little more time away from your cupboard and your keyboard you might be a little more successful in keeping up .. although you have toned down your language a bit you are still bad-mouthing someone because you don't understand what they are doing ..   perhaps you should sit back and reflect on the situation a little more .. you are not god's gift to humanity ..  and putting yourself on a pedestal will not gain you the adoration of the people.  you need to get out a bit and see what's going on.  just because YOU  don't see it doesn't mean it isn't there.

.

[MileHigh]

----------------------
You really do sound so foolish .. what do you think gives you the right to sit in judgement on others and at the same time be so blind to your own failings ...    as for ' how his device actually works'     .. he did indeed explain how it actually works, just as others have ..maybe that was your 'day off'    in fact the device is actually being analysed and explained in other places by people far more knowledgable than yourself, the conclusion .. that it is perfectly feasable and has been known about for a long time.   It does however cover subject matter about which on your own admission you have little or no knowledge.

As for getting on Clarence's case because in your opinion he doesn't speak your technical language ... the same might apply to Tesla  .. there was not the technical language in his time, no ohms law or multimeter .. and  let's not leave out Tesla's other great failing, his autism. ...   and of course he was a bum living on the streets, he didn't have a pot to P**ss in and he died in poverty.  There have been others like Tesla a more modern equivalent  Dollard,  another incompetent underdog who had everything and threw it all away I suppose ..  he also has spent much of his life not being able to hold a technical discussion with people on your level ..    maybe .. if you spent a little more time away from your cupboard and your keyboard you might be a little more successful in keeping up .. although you have toned down your language a bit you are still bad-mouthing someone because you don't understand what they are doing ..   perhaps you should sit back and reflect on the situation a little more .. you are not god's gift to humanity ..  and putting yourself on a pedestal will not gain you the adoration of the people.  you need to get out a bit and see what's going on.  just because YOU  don't see it doesn't mean it isn't there.

Skribat:

You really can just kiss my ass with all of your attempts to impugn my character.  I am not perfect but most of what you say is junk and the reason you are stating it is because you are just frustrated that I could pick apart this proposition and also question the motives of the person presenting the proposition.  Most of your technical critiques about me are just gratuitous bullshit.

You are unhappy and despondent because people have a right to express their opinions?  Tough luck for you and try to get rid of the huge chip on your shoulder.  I am trying to do good, stop being blind to that.  Sometimes being good means saying something is crap, deal with it.

If something real comes along believe me I will support it.  I said to you if you believe in this proposition then explain how you think it works and even try to build it yourself.  You clearly have nothing to say or do in that department.

If you want to argue the technical merits or lack of merits of a free energy proposition with me, that's fine.  But I don't want to hear any more of your little-frustrated-dude attack-the-messenger comments.  Talk tech, don't talk about me.

the conclusion .. that it is perfectly feasable and has been known about for a long time.

You are totally FOS in your statement above.  Prove me wrong and give us credible links or apologize for being a bald-faced liar.

MileHigh

[ramset]

It is true that this is being investigated at a much higher level than this prestigious establishment.
It is also true that MH has Done absolutely No experiments here and has no knowledge whatsoever of what would or would not cause energy to inter from a ground array [outside of normal trickery].

perhaps this will be the example which will be "sited" in the near future  ,one thing is certain
there is a TREMENDOUS amount of potential energy beneath our feet.

have Tariel . B+L, Clarence or others figured a simple method to put it to work at little or no cost ??

Who Knows ..of one thing I am certain MH
you certainly don't .
And I am also of the opinion that it would probably look ridiculous to the text book when it does happen.[or it would have happened already]

[TinselKoala]

...he doesn't speak your technical language ... the same might apply to Tesla  .. there was not the technical language in his time, no ohms law or multimeter .. and  let's not leave out Tesla's other great failing, his autism. ...   and of course he was a bum living on the streets, he didn't have a pot to P**ss in and he died in poverty.

skribat needs to work a little harder to get his facts straight.

Nikola Tesla was born on 10 July 1856 and died on 7 January 1943.

Ohm's Law:

In the 1850s, Ohm's law was known as such and was widely considered proved, and alternatives, such as "Barlow's law", were discredited, in terms of real applications to telegraph system design, as discussed by Samuel F. B. Morse in 1855.^[11]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ohm%27s_law#History

Multimeters:

The first moving-pointer current-detecting device was the galvanometer in 1820. These were used to measure resistance and voltage by using a Wheatstone bridge, and comparing the unknown quantity to a reference voltage or resistance. While useful in the lab, the devices were very slow and impractical in the field. These galvanometers were bulky and delicate. The D'Arsonval/Weston meter movement used a fine metal spring to give proportional measurement rather than just detection, and built-in permanent field magnets made deflection independent of the orientation of the meter. Instead of balancing a bridge, values could be directly read off the instruments's scale, which made measurement quick and easy. By adding a series or shunt resistor, more than one range of voltage or current could be measured with one movement.
Multimeters were invented in the early 1920s as radio receivers and other vacuum tube electronic devices became more common. The invention of the first multimeter is attributed to British Post Office engineer, Donald Macadie, who became dissatisfied with having to carry many separate instruments required for the maintenance of the telecommunications circuits.^[1] Macadie invented an instrument which could measure amperes (amps), volts and ohms, so the multifunctional meter was then named Avometer.^[2] The meter comprised a moving coil meter, voltage and precision resistors, and switches and sockets to select the range.
Macadie took his idea to the Automatic Coil Winder and Electrical Equipment Company (ACWEEC, founded in ~1923).^[2] The first AVO was put on sale in 1923, and many of its features remained almost unaltered through to the last Model 8.
Pocket watch style meters were in widespread use in the 1920s, at much lower cost than Avometers. The metal case was normally connected to the negative connection, an arrangement that caused numerous electric shocks. The technical specifications of these devices were often crude, for example the one illustrated has a resistance of just 33 ohms per volt, a non-linear scale and no zero adjustment.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multimeter#History


Tesla never lived on the street and was not autistic.

Starting in 1934, the Westinghouse Electric & Manufacturing Company began paying Tesla $125 per month as well as paying his rent at the Hotel New Yorker, expenses the Company would pay for the rest of Tesla's life.
...................
On 7 January 1943, Tesla, 86, died alone in room 3327 of the New Yorker Hotel. His body was later found by maid Alice Monaghan after she had entered Tesla's room, ignoring the "do not disturb" sign that Tesla had placed on his door two days earlier.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nikola_Tesla#Later_years_.281918.E2.80.931943.29

125 dollars in 1934 is the equivalent of at least ten times that in today's dollars, and that is not including the rent on the hotel room in a pretty fancy hotel.


If such easily checkable FACTS are gotten so wrong by posters here, what are we to conclude about statements that aren't easily checked? Especially when so many similar reports have turned out to be utter fabrications? I know the answer to that.... and so do you.

[MileHigh]

Chet:

It is true that this is being investigated at a much higher level than this prestigious establishment.

Really?  Please provide some credible links, because otherwise I don't believe it.

It is also true that MH has Done absolutely No experiments here and has no knowledge whatsoever of what would or would not cause energy to inter from a ground array.

The old "no experiments" argument, huh?  I guess four years of bench experiments at school and five years of design engineering are things that you have conveniently forgotten.  Like TK mentioned, legitimate experiments around here are very rare.

You are the one that "has no knowledge whatsoever of what would or would not cause energy to inter from a ground array."  I know that there is no logical reason to expect electrical energy "to come up from the ground."

perhaps this will be the example which will be "sited" in the near future  ,one thing is certain
there is a TREMENDOUS amount of potential energy beneath our feet.

Where is that coming from?  I have never heard that in my life.  And I am assuming that you won't do something silly like mention geothermal energy.  I think that you are just blowing smoke.  There is absolutely nothing "certain" about energy beneath our feet.  Please come up with some legitimate links or retract your statement.  Don't link to the bloody pistol shrimp.

have Tariel . B+L, Clarence or others figured a simple method to put it to work at little or no cost ??

The answer is no.  Anyone in the whole wide world is welcome to prove me wrong.  This crap just insults science and common sense.

Who Knows ..of one thing I am certain MH
you certainly don't .
And I am also of the opinion that it would probably look ridiculous to the text book when it does happen

I can tell you what I am certain of.  You certainly don't have common sense when you latch onto one of these stories.  GDS Technologies was as fake as three-dollar bill and you latched onto that and still haven't let go.

Didn't you make reference to a Rosch buoyancy play?  I supposed that you edited that out of your posting when you saw this:

Rosch is a complete fake.  See Overunity.DE.  See Stefan's comments to Sterling.

Not to mention Wayne Travis and James Kwok.

I have said it before, how you as a fully grown man can endorse some of these things is beyond me.  It's like your critical thinking skills and common sense all get thrown out the window.

Take the GDS guy with his web site, his lack of English language skills when his native language is English, his obvious total lack of technical skills, and his overall demeanor coming off as a low-life uneducated sleazy carny, his "energy from water" pitch, and you still believe him, or at least you are still willing to give him the benefit of the doubt.

You have real issues with respect to your extreme gullibility.

MileHigh