WF Killer Patents & Secret Science Vol. 1 | Free Energy & Anti-Gravity Cover-Ups

a reply to: Naftalin

Well, I used to think that we lived on a planet, just as we had been told. But then some random information came up in some video somewhere, and I watched it just for fun to see what the fuss was about. Very quickly I realised that what this person was saying wasn't crazy at all. The thing that most convinced me that we live in a world which is dominated by a flat plane rather than a spherical planet, was the long range infrared photography - even ordinary long range photography. There have been photographs of the Rocky Mountains taken from 500 miles distance, which is utterly impossible on a spherical planet, as the mountain range would be hidden by miles of Earth curvature 'over the horizon'.

Repeated investigations into long range photography proved to me that it was an utter impossibility that someone could take these photos on a spherical Earth, and therefore no matter how crazy it seems (we have all been intensively conditioned since birth to believe that we live on a spherical planet) the facts of the matter cannot be debunked - those photos are legitimate, there is no denying it. The photos would be impossible on a spherical planet. So then I began to look into other evidence which was arrayed in certain video summaries by researchers with long experience looking into the matter, and it quickly became clear that were were actually several hundred individual proofs that the Earth is a planar expanse surrounded by a spherical firmament which rotates around the planar expanse, making for a closed system.

I would be more than happy to share resources on this matter so you can investigate for yourself - again, it is a black pill, a bitter pill to swallow, which requires that you painstakingly undo all of your unconscious conditioning, rebuilding a model of reality which actually fits with the tangible and undeniable physical evidence - I don't want to derail the thread by dumping a bunch of links in this post, but please do pm me & I will send you a selection of research videos & written resources which explain & demonstrate the whole situation.

To conclude, a couple of years before I came across this revelatory material & changed my worldview after carrying out some research, I'd had a dream in which a guide spoke to me & stated "It is impossible to fully understand the system while you are living within the system". By this I took it to mean that there are elements of our world system that would be considered 'magical' from any rational perspective, so although we can unpack a bundle of evidence proving we live on a planar expanse rather than a spherical planet, we cannot fully comprehend the magnitude & nature of some elements of the system in its totality.

Thanks for inquiring politely, that is a very rare thing for someone to do when approaching the flat Earth reality for the first time, I respect your position of agnosticism regarding the matter, however loosely that position may be held currently. If you're willing to look over the resources I send, it will expand your consciousness in terms of opening your mind to greater possibilities - of divine creation, the centrality of Man's position in the cosmos, amongst other things.


FITO.








Picture taken from some 443 kilometres distance, utterly impossible on a spherical planet.

Totally possible on a planar expanse.

originally posted by: charlyv
One thing certain; In the ATS of even 5 years ago, this thread would have over a few hundred posts by now.
So many do not even give a s... anymore.

Yeah and the majority of those would be fervently debunking any claims of free energy.

I’m not sure what you mean by me getting my facts straight in my previous post, can you elaborate?
Or are you suggesting there have never been any hoaxers?

a reply to: FlyInTheOintment
Hello FlyInTheOintment,

Thank you very much for answering me in such detail. I haven't had much to do with the topic yet. Except whatI hear on street. You are the first person with whom I have discussed the topic in more depth than 'such a thing exists'. Basically, my attitude is that I have no problem if others think the earth is flat. It doesn't hurt me and I'm not responsible for what others think. I listen to this and have no emotions. I'm just curious.

You're not wrong when you say that photos like this shouldn't be possible. I've been to the Zugspitze myself and you can see around 200km away - but only under optimal conditions. So far your statement matches my experience. But I have also seen ships disappear behind the horizon on the beach through binoculars. Which in turn suggests the curvature of the earth. It was a three-master and the top of the mast was the last to disappear. "The mast" because the sailing ship was sailing pretty straight away from me. So I saw it from behind.

So you made me curious and I just did a little searching and reading. And a good explanation was found: Because of the refraction of light in the air, we can already see the sun on the horizon even though a direct line of sight is not yet possible. So light is deflected by air molecules and therefore takes a more curved path, which is why we see beyond the horizon when the conditions are good.

But now there is a problem of understanding on my side. Maybe someone with more knowledge can say something about this:

So we know that objects outside our atmosphere can appear to us in a different position than they actually are. Like the sun. As I understand it, the light has to travel from outside into the atmosphere in order to achieve this refraction of the light. At least that's how I understood it.

So photos like the ones you posted here shouldn't actually be possible. I only know one phenomenon within the atmosphere - namely 'Fata Morgana' or 'mirage'. You've probably heard about it too. But I've never heard of such large and sharp mirages.

Now, I actually have more questions than before! Which doesn't mean I now believe that the earth is flat, I just want to say: Bravo, you really got me thinking! Thank you for your respectful and patient answer. I'll delve deeper into the topic and come back to you.

a reply to: FlyInTheOintment

The problem with Zero Point Energy is that it offers no potential differences to exploit that energy.

Imagine you've got a lake placed high up on a mountain. You could harness the energy by, for instance, creating a river and place a water wheel on that river. The lake is high (high potential energy) and the water flows down the mountain so you have work (usable energy).

But the problem with ZPE is that is permeates EVERYTHING.

Everything has ZPE so in our analogy, there are no "down slopes". Everything is high up. You try to dig a river but all you have is a flat plateau the same level as the lake itself. There are no potential differences, nowhere for the ZPE to "flow down" and do work.

Only way you could harness ZPE is to create an area in space with no ZPE, and harness the difference between the two energy levels. But how to create an area with no ZPE without spending energy? Hmmm.

a reply to: leongrad
Is the ZPE field the same everywhere?

Just a theory: If the ZPE field is not the same everywhere and you fly through then - in theory - you can have two different potential differences, front and back. But since everything is constantly in motion, these potential differences should be able to be recorded in a fluctuating field even without relative additional movement.

Just an idea. I have no idea about ZPE, I'm comparing it to clouds that you fly through, sometimes they're denser and sometimes they're not.

I don't know anything about it, I just know that electricity requires potential differences, I learned that in my training as a firefighter. And that was explained by water and the difference in altitude. In addition, I know that direct current cannot transmit energy via the magnetic field. I also learned that because solar systems can be dangerous during firefighting operations. got a crash course in electrical engineering.

Does what I'm saying here make any sense? After the training, we opened a barrel and drank a lot, and one or two brain cells may have been deleted again.

a reply to: Naftalin

It'd work if the ZPE was, as you say, like clouds.

But unfortunately the ZPE is the same everywhere, it's kind of like the "minimal temperature" of matter.

Still, that's what we THINK we know. In truth who knows? Maybe spacetime curvature could lead to different matter density. Einstein and quantum (ZPE is from quantum model) never sat well together so the truth is we just don't know.

All we know is that we can't freeze Helium-4, so this tells us there's a "minimal" temperature to matter.

Which we THINK is ZPE.

a reply to: AllisVibration

I like the analogy of a "water wheel device" pulling energy from the vacuum.

Cheers

a reply to: leongrad
I can no longer keep up and unfortunately I have to pass. I'm in new territory with Einstein and quantum sauces.

We only know what we know, we don't know what we don't know.

a reply to: F2d5thCavv2

I didn’t mean it that way, with the example the water wheel I was referring to utilising an external force aka gravity.

Pulling energy out of the vacuum has been claimed by some inventors, the Bedini coil being an example. I don’t know about the validity of that though. I do know it’s possible to create a motor/generator from permanent magnets with the right magnetic shielding, you would need a crank to get it going but then it runs by itself. Connecting to a load could stop it immediately, but once you have spin and a magnetic field you can generate electricity, now if you connected that to a series of of capacitor banks I see no reason why you couldn’t generate useful energy.

a reply to: Naftalin

Thanks for your open-minded reply!

But I have also seen ships disappear behind the horizon on the beach through binoculars. Which in turn suggests the curvature of the earth. It was a three-master and the top of the mast was the last to disappear. "The mast" because the sailing ship was sailing pretty straight away from me. So I saw it from behind.

In this situation, it has been repeatedly proven that the illusion of the ship going 'over the horizon' is actually a trick of our eye's anatomy, in terms of how our sense of perspective causes a vanishing point at extreme distances, beyond which we cannot physically see. If you were to replace your existing binoculars with much higher power binoculars or a telescope after the ship has 'gone over the horizon', you would immediately see the entire ship once again, sailing away on the ocean with absolutely no action having occurred that involves going 'over' a horizon. Higher power telescopes, cameras, or binoculars will always bring that ship back into full view, until the magnification level no longer serves to reach beyond the now augmented & technologically-extended vanishing point seen by the eye's anatomy.

There is a lot to discover friend, I'm always willing to discuss & share resources. There's been some fantastic citizen science over the past few years, in which average smart people set up experiments (with lasers across massive lakes, as just one example) to prove that the Earth is flat, or to disprove that the Earth is a sphere. There's loads to look into, it's fascinating stuff. And in truth, it's a major spiritual boost as well, causing you to realise that you live in a specially created environment designed exclusively for the well-being of the human race. Whilst in this environment, and beyond, in the heavenly realms, we are able to contact God in prayer & hear Him speak with us through the still small voice of the Holy Spirit, giving visions & wisdom/insight to solve any problems we may be facing in life.

a reply to: leongrad

I see your point, but it has repeatedly been proven that many, many inventors have successfully demonstrated the use of ZPE, to do work, hence it must be possible. As for the actual mechanics of how they solve the problem, that's one for the smart kids. I can handle general concepts, but maths & engineering are most definitely not my strong points...

a reply to: FlyInTheOintment

If you were to replace your existing binoculars with much higher power binoculars or a telescope after the ship has 'gone over the horizon', you would immediately see the entire ship once again, sailing away on the ocean with absolutely no action having occurred that involves going 'over' a horizon. Higher power telescopes, cameras, or binoculars will always bring that ship back into full view,

My experience makes me doubt that. These weren't children's binoculars, I'm a hunter and buy professional. I can't remember the model name but it was a Nikon somewhere around 20x magnification.

I could even make out the rigging. My biggest problem was staying still and having to lean on a railing to keep it from wobbling. How then are even more powerful binoculars supposed to bring the ship back above the horizon?

Now that doesn't make any sense at all. I'm open to new things but now it's getting strange:

until the magnification level no longer serves to reach beyond the now augmented & technologically-extended vanishing point seen by the eye's anatomy.

With respect, but I don't think you know what you're talking about here. It sounds like you don't know how binoculars or optics work. For a hunter who has a lot to do with it, especially with glasses -scopes-, so many things don't fit...

A question that addresses your theory: Why is it the mast that you see last? The top end? Yes, logically the mast gets bigger when you look at it with better binoculars, but no more of the mast comes into your field of vision. It's just larger in your optical field of view now because you used a higher magnification factor.

That's what you're confusing.

originally posted by: 727Sky
youtu.be...

It's true there are secret patents. But if you don't know what's in them, you can use your imagination to make them anything you want them to be, like free energy or anti-gravity. But that's your imagination, I doubt there are any secret patents for free energy or antigravity which actually work. It's kind of like we don't know exactly what goes on at Area 51 so we can imagine aliens there if we want, but that doesn't mean there are aliens at area 51.

AJ mentions the Pais patents, we know those make similar claims and they read like the turbo encabulator so I'm pretty sure those don't actually work and the inventor Pais doesn't claim to have made any working models AFAIK. My guess is those patents have a secret purpose which is to get Chinese researchers to waste their time on things like that which have zero chance of working, instead of working on other projects that will actually bear fruit.

Here's a key line from the video:
44:50
"Now I'm sure most clean energy/antigravity inventors are frauds, but not all of them."

Ok if that was true, why did AJ waste our time going through the frauds? Which ones does AJ think are real? He doesn't say, because he doesn't know.

But here's a big clue to help you spot at least some frauds, like Floyd Sweet-aka "Sparky" and his Vacuum Triode Amplifier
with 0.3 mW in, supposedly produced almost 224,000 watts out. Use your brain. If this thing is cranking out 224,000 watts, why not just siphon off the 0.3 mW from that output so you don't need to have any input? If it worked, you could do that, but those cases are either frauds, or in some cases, the inventors don't understand the ins and outs of the technicalities of the measurements they are making, and they may actually fool themselves into thinking they have something, when in fact what they have are erroneous measurements due their lack of technical understanding. This is more common with tinkerers who lack a lot of technical training.

Anyway if enough people believe these claims, maybe it's easier to sell this kind of "snake oil" to gullible people than I thought. I've researched a lot of these claims in depth and the ones I've researched are frauds, like the video says, or else are incompetents who don't understand what they are doing, which probably applies to Tom Bearden, one of the folks mentioned, who also claimed more output than input but couldn't figure out how to make such a device self-powered.

Actually I could list a lot more frauds than the ones mentioned in the video, I've researched a lot of them.

So I don't actually disagree with the video completely when he says most are frauds, the only problem I have is he doesn't say which ones he thinks are not frauds. I think they all are either frauds or incompetents, so it might make for a good conspiracy theory to think that some of these things actually produce free energy or antigravity, but that's about it. Every inventor whose device fails to perform as claimed re-inforces that our understanding of physics is not as lacking as they claim. Same with inventors who are constantly trying to make perpetual motion machines. Centuries of failures of "impossible" devices is mounting evidence that the theories of physics which forbid such devices are seeming more and more correct with each successive failure.

I also agree with the video when he points out some problems with the way we are calculating the total impact of "green" technologies. I don't know if I would go so far as to call them a "scam" like the video does, but I do agree we haven't taken all environmental impacts fully into account in our decision-making processes, so I think he makes a good point about that.

originally posted by: FlyInTheOintment

Picture taken from some 443 kilometres distance, utterly impossible on a spherical planet.

Totally possible on a planar expanse.

Actually that photo is not possible on a planar expanse, and it actually proves the curvature of the Earth, but you apparently stick your fingers in your ears so you don't consider any evidence which proves your false beliefs are false. This video explains why it's not possible to take this photo on a flat eath and how it proves the curvature of the Earth, but I'm sure you'll just ignore this again like the previous time you brought this up, and ignored it then too. I also don't know why you have to bring up flat earth in a free energy/anti-gravity thread.

Flat Earth 'evidence' That SHOWS CURVATURE

The Guinness World Record holding photograph by Mark Bret is often cited by Flat Earthers of proof that the Earth can't be curved, but if you actually break the image down, it proves the existence of curvature

What a great video!!! For those interested Dr. Holcomb is trying to find manufacturers for deployment of the HES (Holcomb Energy Systems). The output various, but the best is apparently 1:5 and basically an electronic transformer. He states his facility is operating on these. I highly suggest you spread this and perhaps contact your power companies and congressman (though they may stamp it out, especially in TX). I hardly remember anything of my electronics training, this is over my head.

This is one of his patents for a mechanical generator that lead to the development of the electronic transformer.

HIGH EFFICIENCY ELECTRIC GENERATOR WITH ELECTRIC MOTOR FORCES
High Efficiency Electric Generator With Electric Motor Forces

Here is a brief video of Dr Holcomb explaining about the generator, wish he'd leave out the tree hugger comments...

originally posted by: oouthere1
Here is a brief video of Dr Holcomb explaining about the generator, wish he'd leave out the tree hugger comments...

I ve seen this one.
What do you think?

originally posted by: FlyInTheOintment
a reply to: leongrad

I see your point, but it has repeatedly been proven that many, many inventors have successfully demonstrated the use of ZPE, to do work, hence it must be possible. As for the actual mechanics of how they solve the problem, that's one for the smart kids. I can handle general concepts, but maths & engineering are most definitely not my strong points...

Can you show some examples?
Zero point energy is a quantum mechanical concept and refers to the lowest possible energy a quantum mechanical system have.

originally posted by: FlyInTheOintment
a reply to: Naftalin

which is utterly impossible on a spherical planet,

Negative ghost rider.

From one high point to another with refraction taken in account. Is the mountain you’re looking at supposed to be taller. But seems the same hight or below than the point the picture was taken.

for on a sea shore, at seal level, when the conditions are not conclusive for refractions, why is the horizon only three or four miles away.

Why is there a dip to the horizon.

Why waste your time with stupid things easily explained, and debunked.

If the earth is flat, and not a sphere. Why does a simple dial star atlas reliable map and predict the times of constellations for the southern hemisphere.

originally posted by: Lazy88

originally posted by: FlyInTheOintment
a reply to: Naftalin

which is utterly impossible on a spherical planet,

Negative ghost rider.

From one high point to another with refraction taken in account. Is the mountain you’re looking at supposed to be taller. But seem the same hight or below than the point the picture was taken.

for on a sea shore, at seal level, when the conditions are not conclusive for refractions, why is the horizon only three or four miles away.

Why is there a dip to the horizon.

Why waste your time with stupid things easily explained, and debunked.

If the earth is flat, and not a sphere. Why does a simple dial star atlas reliable map and predict the times of constellations for the southern hemisphere.

Someone said earth is flat and not a sphere? Apologies but I haven't followed the conversation from the beginning.

a reply to: oouthere1

Go out and build one yourself with there being access to 3D printers to Harbour Fright metal lathes.

You have motor heads to rednecks to rogue states like South Korea. People can make cars that run on wood gasification, but not this?

😂😂