Free Energy and its Political Economic Reality

Fair enough; it's a subjective point anyway. In my experience you're never going to find a forum totally without its trolls. One of the bad things about the internet is that everyone can be an "expert", and real expert opinion is often lost in the chatter. Perhaps that's why we have been allowed and encouraged to have such easy access to the internet...

It's also the case that you're never going to get away from repetition. Whilst there are those who read every point, there are also plenty who jump in to respond to a point early in the discussion, and then, instead of going back to carry on reading from where they stopped, they go to the end to pick up after their own comments are posted. I know this is true - seen it far too many times on 9/11 forums over the years since then. I would say it's a sad fact of internet life that all you can do is get used to the fact that you're going to have to keep on repeating the same points over and over and over again. There are always going to be newcomers to the discussion. There advantages to repetition, of course...

Hi Franzbeckenbauer:

I respect your opinion on the trolls and repetition, and yes, I am probably doomed to repeating myself a zillion times. : - )

Thank god that I can just link to where the presentations in my work are, instead of repeating huge text blocks. That aspect of the Internet is truly great.

Yes, the internet is where fifteen-year-old boys can pose as engineers and other “experts.” That is one reason why I always use my real name on the Internet. People will know who I am and where I live, and my tale is richly documented. When anonymous trolls begin challenging my “credentials,” it almost makes me laugh. Trolls are time wasters, IMO, and it took several years of interacting with them for me to understand them and the many varieties that they come in. I probably COULD write a book on them, but I have better uses of my time. Showing how deeply irrational they are is about the only nods that I will make to them in my work:

www.ahealedplanet.net...

Be well,

Wade

Originally posted by franzbeckenbauer

Originally posted by NRen2k5
Discussion of the political and economic aspects of free energy is moot because there’s no such thing as free energy.

Would you care to expand on that? "There is no such thing as free energy because the powers-that-be won't allow it"? Or "there is no such thing as free energy because the technology does not exist"?

What I have been saying from the very beginning: There is no such thing as free energy. There is, however, energy in nature and in the cosmos that can be tapped into or otherwise exploited. But down here on Earth you aren't going to get free energy from mechanical systems.

I'd agree to the first, but the second is patently false.

Depending on your definition of “free energy” as I said before.

The universe consists of nothing BUT energy, it's just a matter of learning how to harness it.

Exactly my point. But it is quickly lost between Wade and Stellar’s inane chatter, pseudo-scientific babble and philosophical/intellectual pissing contests.

That people HAVE learned how to harness it in various shapes and forms cannot be denied

Nor have I tried to.

probably the most obvious example (that I have seen) was on a documentary called The Race To Zero Point where an engine powered by nothing more than inertia was demonstrated, which was estimated to be around 20 times more powerful than a jet engine.

And for it to function, it first needs to be supplied with inertia. And what you get out of it will be less than what you put in.

reply to post by wadefrazier3



franzbeckenbauer and wadefrazier3 kudos to the both of you. trolls are an online menace for sure.

A troll's main goal is usually to arouse anger and frustration among the message board's other participants, and will write whatever it takes to achieve this end. One popular trolling strategy is the practice of Winning by Losing. While the victim is trying to put forward solid and convincing facts to prove his position, the troll's only goal is to infuriate its prey. The troll takes (what it knows to be) a badly flawed, wholly illogical argument, and then vigorously defends it while mocking and insulting its prey. The troll looks like a complete fool, but this is all part of the plan. The victim becomes noticeably angry by trying to repeatedly explain the flaws of the troll's argument. Provoking this anger was the troll's one and only goal from the very beginning.
en.wikipedia.org...

That being said, lets get back to the topic at hand and allow the thread trolls wherever they may be to get back under those bridges

Hello Wade:

Thank you for your intense work of spirit.

Several months pass I send $15 M.O. to Ralph Hovnanian for a copy of 'Medical Dark Ages'. To date I have not received a reply.

Have you any news on his well-being? Do you communicate?

Thank you,
cruise

Hi Cruise:

I have not talked to Ralph for several years, and getting back in touch with him was on my list of things to do. I have been in hibernation on several fronts for several years (this ATS stuff is part of my recent coming out efforts), but you have spurred me to try contacting him. I hope he is well. He is probably nearly 70 by now.

Sorry you have not heard back from him. If you cannot get one from Ralph, I can send you one of my copies.

Wade

Originally posted by FredT
reply to post by wadefrazier3

 

franzbeckenbauer and wadefrazier3 kudos to the both of you. trolls are an online menace for sure.

A troll's main goal is usually to arouse anger and frustration among the message board's other participants, and will write whatever it takes to achieve this end. One popular trolling strategy is the practice of Winning by Losing. While the victim is trying to put forward solid and convincing facts to prove his position, the troll's only goal is to infuriate its prey. The troll takes (what it knows to be) a badly flawed, wholly illogical argument, and then vigorously defends it while mocking and insulting its prey. The troll looks like a complete fool, but this is all part of the plan. The victim becomes noticeably angry by trying to repeatedly explain the flaws of the troll's argument. Provoking this anger was the troll's one and only goal from the very beginning.
en.wikipedia.org...

That being said, lets get back to the topic at hand and allow the thread trolls wherever they may be to get back under those bridges

Thank you Fred. You're off the mark but your source and intentions are good.

Seeing as Stellar and has2b have run off and taken their snake oil with them, it's just as well to let Wade take the stage again. Though free energy is a pipe dream, it's interesting to talk about what could happen if it were otherwise.

[edit on 21-9-2007 by NRen2k5]

reply to post by NRen2k5


As you may or may not remember i never tried to sell anything and simply attempted to correct the ignorance you were propagating. I am sorry for not spending the time to respond to your posts but i think anyone who were following would have noticed that you never addressed any of the information i introduced trough sources with anything but blunt denials, with no reasoning provide, or insults.

I do you want to respond but i have many people to respond to and i try to spend the time i can on people who can still be helped.

Stellar

Originally posted by StellarX
reply to post by NRen2k5

 

As you may or may not remember i never tried to sell anything and simply attempted to correct the ignorance you were propagating.

I am not propagating ignorance. You are propagating nonsense. We've gone through this already. Don't take me and the rest of the good members of this board for idiots.

I am sorry for not spending the time to respond to your posts but i think anyone who were following would have noticed that you never addressed any of the information i introduced trough sources with anything but blunt denials, with no reasoning provide, or insults.

I did address your sources. You were not satisfied with my rebuttals. That is your problem. I suggest you stay in school to remedy this problem.

I do you want to respond but i have many people to respond to and i try to spend the time i can on people who can still be helped.

With regards to understanding the way the universe works, you need the help much more badly than I do.

reply to post by wadefrazier3


OMG...

Your efforts and the time you have put into sharing the truth and shining your light are AMAZING and COMMENDABLE AT THE HIGHEST LEVELS! I regret that I cannot 'download' your entire website into my mind... but I guess the journey of reading it will be just as joyous (if not more rewarding).

I will give deeper insights and/or ask more pertinent questions when I have read more into your website. I am in the process of reading the intro as I write this, and hope you will still be around here at ATS when I do wish to comment, ask, and add to your efforts!

...

And I 100% believe in what you have said:
---The scarcity paradigm of kill-or-be-killed will naturally give way into an abundance para(gon!)digm of live-and-let-live once people have freed themselves from the belief that there can never be enough... And I know your efforts will/have/are playing a large role in this wonderful peaceful revolution RIGHT NOW!

well heres a good start for everyone.

www.youtube.com...
Fuel from water! part 1

Originally posted by NRen2k5
I am not propagating ignorance.

Well what should i call the propagation of 'facts' that never were?

You are propagating nonsense.

You have never introduced sources that objects to the facts i presented so you have not gained the right to call what i say nonsense.

We've gone through this already. Don't take me and the rest of the good members of this board for idiots.

I in fact only feel that way about you and please do not pretend that you are a 'good member' as those actually support their views with facts.

I did address your sources.

With your opinions which i do not care for. If you can not support your claims with facts why waste the 'good members' of this forums time?

You were not satisfied with my rebuttals.

I am always satisfied when 'rebuttals' contains sources and supported statements and when you start doing such rebuttals we might both learn something.

That is your problem. I suggest you stay in school to remedy this problem.

Schooling is directly responsible for your type of ignorance and schooling is at this point unlikely to bring me back into my original ignorant state.

With regards to understanding the way the universe works, you need the help much more badly than I do.

Since you have never in fact addressed any of my supported claims with anything but derision and contempt no one will know if you are in fact accurate in your assessment. Why wont you just start sourcing your claims as the rest of us do? If observation and reality supports your point of view why not introduce it as i have my disagreements with establishment views?

Stellar

Originally posted by mastermind77
well heres a good start for everyone.

www.youtube.com...
Fuel from water! part 1

Nope. Dead end.

Even if you could modify a car to have an increase in performance from the injection of hydrogen, an onboard hydrogen production system won't do you any good.

It takes more energy to separate hydrogen from water than you will get from burning it. So you end up with a loss in performance rather than a gain.

Even offboard, the feasibility of producing hydrogen from water as a source for energy is questionable.

This is not just unique to electrolysis and combustion. There is only a certain amount of energy in the bond between hydrogen and oxygen - in an ideal situation you can only get as much energy out as you put in. And of course in the real world there are always losses.

Instead of using a power source to electrolyse water (at a great loss) and then burning hydrogen to power something (again at a great loss), why not use that power source to charge a battery or supercapacitor to power something?

reply to post by NRen2k5


So let me see if I understand:

Since your schools have taught you that (from currently existing technology, or the technology that has been released to the public) it takes much more energy to separate hydrogen from water and that will create a net loss of energy. Of course, this is only from what we have been told (what is current day Americanized school other than blind memorization?) and it stands to reason that as long as people believe something will only net a loss that they will never pursue a discovery in that sector...

Let me give you this school of thought (pun intended!) to ponder on:

An inventor creates inventions - they believe it is possible.
A critic creates criticism - they believe it is impossible.

After a lifetime of creations, I wonder which one will have made the highest possible contribution to society, the world, and the human race at large?

Do you think more people would appreciate the critic or the inventor?

There are many many people in our history who are honored and valued for their inventions, their additions, and their contributions to existence. Critics, on the other hand, only bear prestige when they are condemning and are quickly forgotten in the annals of history.

Do any of us remember the critics of Galileo?
I don't - but I sure remember Galileo himself!

Keep an open mind, and the world will open to you in return.

Originally posted by StellarX

Originally posted by NRen2k5
I am not propagating ignorance.

Well what should i call the propagation of 'facts' that never were?

My facts were and are.

You are propagating nonsense.

You have never introduced sources that objects to the facts i presented so you have not gained the right to call what i say nonsense.

Established science objects to the material (NOT FACTS) you have presented. And as an American you should know I have every right to call what you say nonsense.

We've gone through this already. Don't take me and the rest of the good members of this board for idiots.

I in fact only feel that way about you and please do not pretend that you are a 'good member' as those actually support their views with facts.

I don't have any need to pretend, as I am a good member, and I have presented practically nothing but facts.

I did address your sources.

With your opinions which i do not care for.

No, with established science and plain facts (which unfortunately you do not care for).

If you can not support your claims with facts why waste the 'good members' of this forums time?

Hey, that's my line!

You were not satisfied with my rebuttals.

I am always satisfied when 'rebuttals' contains sources and supported statements and when you start doing such rebuttals we might both learn something.

I have. And you'll go right on believing whatever you want, like that little gem about magnets being "powered" by "dark energy".

That is your problem. I suggest you stay in school to remedy this problem.

Schooling is directly responsible for your type of ignorance and schooling is at this point unlikely to bring me back into my original ignorant state.

Wrong and wrong again. You're more ignorant now than ever. You're so ignorant you have to manufacture your own entire personal universe around a few wrong beliefs. A few wrong beliefs that you picked up on the internet (because we all know everything on the internet is true. )

With regards to understanding the way the universe works, you need the help much more badly than I do.

Since you have never in fact addressed any of my supported claims with anything but derision and contempt

That's just your opinion.

no one will know if you are in fact accurate in your assessment. Why wont you just start sourcing your claims as the rest of us do?

You want my sources? Pick up any high school physics book! These are the fundamentals discovered by great minds like Isaac Newton and Georg Ohm.

If observation and reality supports your point of view why not introduce it as i have my disagreements with establishment views?

Show me where you don't understand and I'll see how I can make it any easier.

[edit on 22-9-2007 by NRen2k5]

reply to post by wadefrazier3


Wade:

Greetings.
Thanks for the reply.

I saw no means of electronic contact on your site, hence why I had to track you down here.

I cannot send private messages on ATS as a new member. Maybe you can send me an 'u2u', if so, please send an address to which I can mail you a money order for the book.

Much thanks,
cruise.

Hi Wade,

I just wanted to say thanks for the hard work that went into your site. I’ve spent the last few days reading lots of it and this thread.

Many of your essays are easy to corroborate and I think a lot of the people here on ATS are already versed with some or even much of them.

Now to the original point of this thread. I not only think unlimited energy is possible I think it’s almost inevitable. Baring WWIII or some other global catastrophe that blows us back into the dark ages, I believe we are on the cusp of unlimited energy with existing technology.

Thermal Depolymerization
en.wikipedia.org...

The process isn’t quite economically viable yet, but if oil prices continue it will be. Not only does the process scale somewhat, it also has the advantage of dealing with humanities waste products.


Nuclear Power
en.widipedia.org...

More and more evidence is becoming available that cold fusion might be possible (and without a doubt MIT SCREWED the field for the last 18 years). Even lacking fusion if any of the more clean disposal methods for fission-waste can gain just a little bit more credibility then fission wouldn’t be such a bad interim.

Geothermal Binary plants and possibly even a version of a binary plant using the heat pump that you were involved in!

These technologies are already here, but it does seem as if the powers-that-be aren’t interested in bringing them to marking. We have the technology to end hunger on the planet. We have the technology to end most disease. Also more and more people are becoming aware of the establishments lack of desire to Cure certain problems, which fuels the alternatives (not to say there aren’t plenty of quacks and charlatans out there, unfortunately there are).

Of course none of these terrestrial technologies would bring about the paradigm change that exotic technology could. So lets say with existing tech we basically continue on at the same rate we have been (which looking at the last hundred years is pretty fast!).

But if we were to have exotic tech introduced….

You’ve mentioned here and on your page that you wonder if humanity could handle that change. Would religion go away? Would bigotry? The level of awareness of the planet as a whole seems to be still in the young adult stage. Children/young adults even when they have no ‘need’ to be cruel often are.

Give the planet unlimited food, shelter and take away the need for money and what would 4 billion people do, if they aren’t working and they don’t ‘need’ for anything?

Lets say many of the people become engaged in entertainment: games, films, and writing etc. some other people pursue their dream jobs…research, teacher, actor etc. There would still be a lot of people with very little to do. Children would be born in record numbers, the planets population would jump right off the scale. Would we look to colonize? Would the rest of the school yard let us leave our sandbox? Would religion/bigotry/selfishness still run rampant? (It seems those last two would be very closely related).

I’m not sure that just a change in the scarcity paradigm would be enough to let us grow up. But it would certainly jump start the process.

And i agreed up to just about here.

Originally posted by Abbadon777
Of course none of these terrestrial technologies would bring about the paradigm change that exotic technology could. So lets say with existing tech we basically continue on at the same rate we have been (which looking at the last hundred years is pretty fast!).

Actually our rate of progress in the last hundred years were pretty sluggish compared to the body of knowledge that briefly become available at the end of the nineteenth century only to be suppressed for the duration of the twentieth.

But if we were to have exotic tech introduced….

You’ve mentioned here and on your page that you wonder if humanity could handle that change. Would religion go away? Would bigotry? The level of awareness of the planet as a whole seems to be still in the young adult stage.

I don't think one would have needed a controlled world media, thousands of years of class warfare and suppression of alternative ideas, the falsification of human history the assassination of the leaders of progressive movements and the like if people were so immature and stupid. What you say is exactly the idea the controlled media wants to sell but i have not seen any evidence for it.

Children/young adults even when they have no ‘need’ to be cruel often are.

Given what they see happening in the world and their largely absent parents it's in my opinion surprising that people are not more vindictive and angry.

Give the planet unlimited food, shelter and take away the need for money and what would 4 billion people do, if they aren’t working and they don’t ‘need’ for anything?

They would raise kids and while away their time building relationships and communities protecting each others interest as they used to do before the advent of agriculture and subsistence slavery.

Lets say many of the people become engaged in entertainment: games, films, and writing etc. some other people pursue their dream jobs…research, teacher, actor etc. There would still be a lot of people with very little to do.

And people with so little inspiration are rarely any danger to anyone but themselves given a satisfaction of their basic needs.

Children would be born in record numbers, the planets population would jump right off the scale.

The world population is already slowing and we know that wealthy and a good living tends to result in 2-3 children families which is never going to be a problem. I find all this talk about 'too many people' very upsetting as it's somehow assumed that more people are in fact a 'bad thing' for the planet? Since i have never seen anyone introduce logical reasons for believing in such lunacy i am still writing if off as a particularly good propaganda campaign.

Would we look to colonize? Would the rest of the school yard let us leave our sandbox?

The universe is a very large place but so is this planet given a proper application of all known and understood technologies. I think that even with current wasteful technologies and the totally unnecessary environmental destruction the planet could probably sustain three or four times as many people as it currently does.

Would religion/bigotry/selfishness still run rampant? (It seems those last two would be very closely related).

When resources are perceived to be scarce people obviously want to know who has it all and given a controlled media and perspective of history such 'enemies' can easily be manufactured to take the blame and punishment for corporate greed.

I’m not sure that just a change in the scarcity paradigm would be enough to let us grow up. But it would certainly jump start the process.

Given my knowledge of just what has been done to maintain the scarcity paradigm i am quite convinced that TBTB are quite sure of the result hence their desperate and consistent efforts to indoctrinate us and suppress or kill the efforts or proponents.

Stellar

Originally posted by NRen2k5
My facts were and are.

Which facts? Please point me to some that were validated by the introduction of sourced claims?

Established science objects to the material (NOT FACTS) you have presented.

That is what your claiming but unless you actually introduce the facts you claim supports your point of view why should anyone consider your opinion?

And as an American you should know I have every right to call what you say nonsense.

I am not American and it just goes to show how much effort you have spent reading what is plainly in front of you. You certainly have the right to call what i say nonsense but it would be far better for your credibility if you can defend your claims with sourced data.

I don't have any need to pretend, as I am a good member, and I have presented practically nothing but facts.

You may have presented some facts but since all your claims have gone un-sourced your basically just appealing to convention to defend your OPINIONS. Please start sourcing your claims.

No, with established science and plain facts (which unfortunately you do not care for).

I do care for science and established facts and that is why i keep citing them in support of my opinions and claims.

Hey, that's my line!

I have supported many of my opinions and claims while you have done nothing but deride and insult me for trying to support my point of view.

I have. And you'll go right on believing whatever you want, like that little gem about magnets being "powered" by "dark energy".

You haven't so far employed sources in defense of what you claim to be our 'understanding' of the world and until you do it really can not serve as 'rebuttals' of anything.

Fact is our current understanding of magnets simply denies the fact that they do work in the effort to explain what they 'do'. If you have a better idea as to why we can observe them doing work then give it as i have heard some real gems of theories trying to explain magnets under our current theories.

Wrong and wrong again. You're more ignorant now than ever. You're so ignorant you have to manufacture your own entire personal universe around a few wrong beliefs.

That might be so but since you have introduced no evidence to support that specific contention your opinion is once again nothing but entirely useless to anyone who is looking for something remotely objective.

A few wrong beliefs that you picked up on the internet (because we all know everything on the internet is true.

)

Everything on the Internet is about as true as everything in scientific texts. My beliefs might very well be wrong but since your not introducing anything but your quite ignorant opinions of science and the world i have found absolutely no benefit by them.

Since you have never in fact addressed any of my supported claims with anything but derision and contempt

That's just your opinion.

That is in fact quite the fact as everyone can validated by reading the last few pages of this stupid 'discussion'.

You want my sources? Pick up any high school physics book!

I did and while they sometimes expressly support the conclusions you believe in the data they employed does not in fact support their given conclusions hence my interest in this subject matter.

These are the fundamentals discovered by great minds like Isaac Newton and Georg Ohm.

Right and the fundamentals they 'discovered' serves your defense of ignorance and lies how?

Show me where you don't understand and I'll see how I can make it any easier.

I have introduced plenty of factual evidence for you to address but all you have done is deny that it's true citing no reasons beside your sole supposed authority.

I have now decided to send a message to each of this moderators on this forum as your disruptive behaviour can clearly not be addressed in a normal civilized manner.

Edit: Given the lack of interest normally displayed with these types of complaints i am kind of interested to see if a larger number of thread and member specific complaints might gain positive results.

Here is a list of the U2U addresses of this forums moderators and if anyone here feels the way i do i would like you to make your feelings known

www.abovetopsecret.com...

www.abovetopsecret.com...

www.abovetopsecret.com... Wizard

www.abovetopsecret.com...

www.abovetopsecret.com...

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Thanks...

Stellar

[edit on 25-9-2007 by StellarX]

The world runs on an oil based economy, so it doesn't matter which leaders are elected or selected, or in which country. The only solution I have heard which makes sense, is to make a toy.
No, seriously. A toy that runs on free, or over unity energy, and sell it without divulging that it does so. When it has reached a decent market penetration, THEN divulge it's secrets. There will then be so many in the market, un traceable and not able to be killed easily, that it won't be able to be hidden or repressed.