It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by Keeval
The Jury eventually came back with a result, however due to various reasons (lack of data etc.) the scientists decided that there was not enough information to provide a verdict
Originally posted by Keeval
See, this is why I find the whole thing interesting.
To prove that Steorn have what they say, they need to jump through hoops and give rigourous published proof... fair enough. But, when the Jury just says that "sorry we don't believe that it works" (paraphrased) without any backing up of the result with details of their investigation you believe their result without even thinking about it. It would be fair enough if they produced data as to why they didn't think it worked and published that data, but they didn't, why not? But somehow their word is taken at face value and Steorns' is not.
I'm not taking any side, but I want to be objective, and so far the process has not been objective. I can certainly see why Steorn are going about things in the way they are.
-Keeval-
[edit on 22-12-2009 by Keeval]
Originally posted by dereks
Originally posted by Keeval
The Jury eventually came back with a result, however due to various reasons (lack of data etc.) the scientists decided that there was not enough information to provide a verdict
Garbage, they provided a verdict - "The unanimous verdict of the Jury is that Steorn's attempts to demonstrate the claim have not shown the production of energy. The jury is therefore ceasing work."
so it does not work....
Originally posted by Keeval
when the Jury just says that "sorry we don't believe that it works" (paraphrased) without any backing up of the result with details of their investigation you believe their result without even thinking about it. It would be fair enough if they produced data as to why they didn't think it worked and published that data, but they didn't, why not?
That is the question you should ask Steorn - Why havent they released the results of the jury? Why did Sean McCarthy lie about being able to release the results?
Originally posted by plumranch
You sound like you are deeply into this. How and why do you know so much,
who is paying you and why?
Originally posted by dereks
My boss, and I get paid because I work....
Originally posted by plumranch
reply to post by dereks
That is the question you should ask Steorn - Why havent they released the results of the jury? Why did Sean McCarthy lie about being able to release the results?
You sound like you are deeply into this. How and why do you know so much, who is paying you and why? Simple question.
It may well be that a battery is required for the system to work sustainably. However it should also work without an external power supply, it just might not be sustainable
Batteries in this type of system are often used, as I recall, to add capacitance or an electrical sink effect to sort of get the mechanism over the high spot so to speak. Often anything other than a battery might not work. Batteries make it difficult to evaluate the OU in the system, however. And concerning the electromagnets, it might be worth a try to substitute them but I suspect it has already been tried?
lol so just cos a guy reads up on the science behind the machine and tries to get how it works to make sure he isnt being scammed hes in their payroll? Well if youd rather dismiss it out of hand thats your own lookout i guess... i read the bible before i poopooed god and christians? Isnt it the same?