Stanley Meyer and The Water Car Hoax

[wizardofmars]

wizardofmars,

No doubt that some inventors have made up elaborate suppression stories to defend their work/scams.     But chances are some are true as well.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_energy_suppression

I'm fully familiar with the Free Energy suppression theory. Note what the article says - Free energy suppression is a conspiracy theory ...

The chances are approaching zero that any perpetual motion schemes or the like will hold water, and the suppression theory is even less credible. This has become especially obvious in the past few years when legitimate attempts to solve the current energy crisis and create more energy efficient means of transportation are booming all around the world. Any special interest group trying to 'suppress' discoveries would certainly have their hands full. And yet still inventors are making claims but failing to deliver proof.

[wizardofmars]

@wizardofmars,

I cannot agree with your overgeneralization of those on this site.  I would question how many of the topics you have actually spent time reading in detail.  Your Newbie status might be an indicator, or it may not.

But in any case, I believe a more fair observation of the discussions on this site would show quite a variety of backgrounds and knowledge represented.  There are those from mechanical and electrical engineering backgrounds, also chemical engineering.  There have also been those with true science background, traditional training, currently employed in commercial labs. 

When you talk about delusion and groupthink, I would suggest you expand your observation group and rethink, as I would propose your conclusion lacks proper evidence and justification â€ââ,¬Å" and is hence just an opinion and not scientific.

My observation has been that there are many points of view represented here.  And while the overall theme may, in some opinions, be impossible, that it is exactly this kind of mix of believers, non-believers, science and engineering explorers that can leverage the Internet to discover new technologies.
 
Also, you should recognize that many of the projects undertaken here are along similar paths as traditional mainstream scientific research.  Hydrogen, HHO, and related topics are examples also being done at universities and in commercial entities.  So while you have pointed out â€Ã...“perpetual motionâ€Ã, as a topic that can demonstrate no success (and I assume you imply it is without scientific basis), that is only one of many, many types of projects discussed here.

On the other hand, I am not saying that anyone sensible should just blindly believe what they read here.  Some of the topics just blow my mind and I find them absolutely silly.  Others degrade into childish name calling and insults that just belittle the whole concept of the site.

I would suggest that before you draw more conclusions and jump into one side of an argument or the other (as you have done with Jason’s case), that you spend a little more time evaluating the situation to give a more accurate representation of what happens here, and also to have a better informed opinion before you express it.

Regards,
jeffc

Jeff

Thanks for your thoughtful posting. For your info, it's a field I've been studying for 20+ years. Many years ago I believed all this nonsense - my grandmother filled my head full of Erik von Daniken, Lobsang Rampa, Kirlian aura's and Carlos Castaneda among others bogus mystical and pseudoscience topics. I was literally a subscriber to many of these ideas. It took me years to figure out how to sort the wheat from the chaff.

I have to disagree about the content of this board. It seems to me that overunity.com is all about the wildest kind of pseudoscience. Just a survey of the front page right now would tell you that. We have several old chestnuts (Tesla, Steven Marks, Meyer, Bedini), aliens, cancer cures, the New World Order, chemtrails, water cars, flying cars, HHO etc etc. About the only pseudoscience topic I don't see listed is Bigfoot.

I realize posting is unlikely to convince someone who is of this worldview. Having said that, better to light one candle in the dark than to curse the darkness. For every hundred people who refuse any criticism, perhaps one reader sees the light.

Wiz

[newbie123]

I agree this site is polluted with the "wildest kind of pseudoscience" and that's unfortunate.

[jeffc]

Jeff

Thanks for your thoughtful posting. For your info, it's a field I've been studying for 20+ years. Many years ago I believed all this nonsense - my grandmother filled my head full of Erik von Daniken, Lobsang Rampa, Kirlian aura's and Carlos Castaneda among others bogus mystical and pseudoscience topics. I was literally a subscriber to many of these ideas. It took me years to figure out how to sort the wheat from the chaff.

I have to disagree about the content of this board. It seems to me that overunity.com is all about the wildest kind of pseudoscience. Just a survey of the front page right now would tell you that. We have several old chestnuts (Tesla, Steven Marks, Meyer, Bedini), aliens, cancer cures, the New World Order, chemtrails, water cars, flying cars, HHO etc etc. About the only pseudoscience topic I don't see listed is Bigfoot.

I realize posting is unlikely to convince someone who is of this worldview. Having said that, better to light one candle in the dark than to curse the darkness. For every hundred people who refuse any criticism, perhaps one reader sees the light.

Wiz

Very fair response Wiz.  I would agree as I said before that I also find some topics quite silly.  And I can understand specifically your history in belief about all of the supposed OU/FE devices that have conveniently disappeared over the years.  Those things I view with suspicion as well.  But I still do think that there are many topics with a very sane group participating, and that any serious efforts aren't really undermined by aliens, or wild new fantasies about our alien overlords, or even bigfoot 

My main thought in responding to your post is that when a new person like Jason comes to this site, and makes the challenge he does â€ââ,¬Å" to prove the not provable.  And he immediately finds the answer he wants in some responses â€ââ,¬Å" namely that everything here is rubbish, then we don’t give some efforts here a fair representation.

In any case, I mostly observe and try to keep an eye on things that appear to have real experimentation as opposed to just theory play.  Also, I will admit to reading the more outlandish topics from time to time, just out of pure entertainment.

Anyway, I’m neither a skeptic or believer.  But, we need a variety of opinions here to keep things in some sort of balance.  I hope to see you more here and thanks for a proper discussion.

Regards,
jeffc

[spinner]

.....I have to disagree about the content of this board. It seems to me that overunity.com is all about the wildest kind of pseudoscience. Just a survey of the front page right now would tell you that. We have several old chestnuts (Tesla, Steven Marks, Meyer, Bedini), aliens, cancer cures, the New World Order, chemtrails, water cars, flying cars, HHO etc etc. About the only pseudoscience topic I don't see listed is Bigfoot.

I realize posting is unlikely to convince someone who is of this worldview. Having said that, better to light one candle in the dark than to curse the darkness. For every hundred people who refuse any criticism, perhaps one reader sees the light.
Wiz

"...better to light one candle in the dark than to curse the darkness..."

Excellent! Thanks! And the same for the rest of your evaluation....

I agree this site is polluted with the "wildest kind of pseudoscience" and that's unfortunate.

Truth... I'm a member on this site since the yahoo's, and a "pseudoscience" is the main thing which comes to my mind whenever a think about all of this....
It was always a mistery to me, why all the  top 'FE' people/researchers  think that the "rest" of the technically viable people (some 99,99% of the classically trained technicians,..engineers,..science teachers,.. doctors ...) could be so dumb not to recognise a 'FE'....?
Strange....