Selfrunning Free Energy devices up to 5 KW from Tariel Kapanadze

[LtBolo]

Umm, all of them.

So you've been there and seen the devices, as well as gotten designs for them, built and tested the the designs, and found them to not work? I'm impressed, then. I went there and saw them, saw enough to convince myself there was more going on than I understood, but was not able to get WITTS to work with us.

[baroutologos]

Maybe this has been seen already and after kapagen who cares. But maybe it is still important.
Jesus

The (failed) Kapagen device has two grounds as per Naudin's understanding. Original and mysterious Kapanadze device use only 1.

[flathunter]

[A author=exnihiloest link=topic=7679.msg248088#msg248088 date=1278511489]
Nevertheless among them some publish experiments (good thing if they are not classic) and claim they have OU (bad thing until now). So when OU is claimed, it is natural for the others to try to duplicate these "inventions". The problem is that either they are scams, or measurement errors, or pure fantasy from egocentrics needing recognition or from sincere believers wrongly seeing in conventional results what they dreamed instead of reality.
Surely there are normal errors. But claiming OU on the base of inaccurate measure devices and without having checked and rechecked and rerechecked is not a "normal error". It is a not excusable fault wasting everybody's time.

because you missed the target.
[/quote]

I dont see this as a ''problem''.  If we look at the history of science there have been more than a few ''geniuses'' who have accepted or advocated what are now called errors by the mainstream - The geocentric model of Ptolemy was widely accepted and I would argue even advanced scientific knowledge in spite of the error it was based on.  And it was because of ''replications'' of Ptolemy's observations that later the error was discovered and the heliocentric model replaced it.  This is how the scientific method procedes.  So there is nothing shameful in being wrong from time to time - ESPECIALLY if one recognises that error, and as such admits ones mistake for all to see.  But even if one doesnt recognise their error - where is the shame in that???  Shame and guilt belong in the realms of religious knowledge, lets not let them enter the purely objective realm of science.  Experiment will determine who is right or wrong....

...and surely thats what we're here to do, eh ex-man??  Prove or disprove OU by replicating others, OR by trying new variations of our own.  Leading by experiment.  Letting our builds do our talking.  And if someone makes a mistake along the way, then there'll be plenty of others to find that mistake and point it out making us all the wiser and better for it.  And thats what happened here.  JuJu and you and dllbarre and a few others (mopozco) immediately replicated Naudins kapagen and demonstrated the error in various ways.  Now we all know better - Thanks Guys!  Lets keep getting our hands dirty.

       

[Pirate88179]

So you've been there and seen the devices, as well as gotten designs for them, built and tested the the designs, and found them to not work? I'm impressed, then. I went there and saw them, saw enough to convince myself there was more going on than I understood, but was not able to get WITTS to work with us.

And you believed in them so much that you gave them the required "donation" amount and received all of the schematics and plans to build all of their devices, which you then built, and are now making headlines all over the world with free energy devices...right?  No?  Well, that is my point.

They "claim" to be taking in all this money in "donations" for total disclosure of these devices and yet, no one has ever seen one that has been built by a donor anywhere in the world.  Don't you find this a little strange to say the least?

And, as posted by someone in the What ever happened to Thrapp topic, if you have to donate to receive plans or a device that is actually called selling a device, no matter what they say. They are selling devices and plans which are unproven, undisclosed, untested, unverified and unsubstantiated.  I call that fraud.  (My opinion)

Bill

[exnihiloest]

...
If we look at the history of science there have been more than a few ''geniuses'' who have accepted or advocated what are now called errors by the mainstream
...

Sure that ''geniuses'' as Einstein could revisite Newton mechanics, which was the mainstream of his time. But these geniuses gave evidence of their claims by writing papers intended to scientists, with the complete description of their research.
The history of science is not applicable to today life where anybody can publish the worst nonsenses in pretty html pages or obscure youtube videos to charm uneducated and credulous people or to convince themselves.
How many geniuses in comparison with the number of real crackpots or ignorants believing they are geniuses? 1/1000000?