"Vortex Based Mathematics by Marko Rodin"

Originally posted by buddhasystem

Originally posted by Americanist

Originally posted by buddhasystem

Originally posted by Americanist
And when I think of internet, I'm brought back to a derivative of the US Military during the 60's.

You can be "brought back" to anything, it's just doesn't map onto technology and facts. Internet as you know it is the Web, not some transport layer or FTP. Gasoline existed long before cars were invented, same applies to TCP/IP and the Web. Anyhow, if you don't know the difference between the Web and the Internet protocol, it's not too late to learn.

Learn? Your response may convince a layman, but I worked for an ISP inside a major hub nearly 15 years ago. My job was to connect people to the net. The web maps to US military channels which evolved into various protocols.

You can't look up "the Web" on Wikipedia or comprehend what's said in that page, for starters. This is rich. WWW as a concept has noting to do with "military" channels, just like the concept of electric shaver has nothing to do with the US power grid.

Here, try again:
en.wikipedia.org...

Web as a "Side Effect" of the 40 years of Particle Physics Experiments. It happened many times during history of science that the most impressive results of large scale scientific efforts appeared far away from the main directions of those efforts... After the World War 2 the nuclear centers of almost all developed countries became the places with the highest concentration of talented scientists. For about four decades many of them were invited to the international CERN's Laboratories. So specific kind of the CERN's intellectual "entire culture" (as you called it) was constantly growing from one generation of the scientists and engineers to another. When the concentration of the human talents per square foot of the CERN's Labs reached the critical mass, it caused an intellectual explosion The Web – crucial point of human's history – was born... Nothing could be compared to it... We cant imagine yet the real scale of the recent shake, because there has not been so fast growing multi-dimension social-economic processes in human history..

en.wikipedia.org...

The origins of the Internet reach back to research of the 1960s, commissioned by the United States government in collaboration with private commercial interests to build robust, fault-tolerant, and distributed computer networks. The funding of a new U.S. backbone by the National Science Foundation in the 1980s, as well as private funding for other commercial backbones, led to worldwide participation in the development of new networking technologies, and the merger of many networks. The commercialization of what was by the 1990s an international network resulted in its popularization and incorporation into virtually every aspect of modern human life. As of 2009, an estimated one-quarter of Earth's population uses the services of the Internet.

It goes on to mention the US Military involvement. Your mistake is... You've searched WWW not Internet.

en.wikipedia.org...

During the 1960s, Paul Baran (RAND Corporation), produced a study of survivable networks for the US military.

Originally posted by Mary Rose
You have to study the information about these people. You have to put in the time and effort. There is a voluminous record.

Yes there is a voluminous record of extraordinary claims. There is no record of any extraordinary evidence. And you won't have to dig too hard when an inventor implements over unity. It will look like the Rossi power plant project where a real power plant will actually be built to utilize the technology:

Are we on the Brink of an Energy Revolution? Andrea Rossi to Build 1MW Power Plant

Andrea Rossi and partner Professor Sergio Focardi recently announced to the world that they have created a cold fusion device which produces more energy than it consumes.

So there's the extraordinary claim.

One way to prove your sceptics wrong is to actually do what you say you are going to do. Once the deed is done in a public and undeniable way, there is nothing left for the sceptics to say .

That's true isn't it? None of the folks you mentioned have done that.

“In the coming weeks Rossi aims to activate a 1MW plant, which is now almost ready, and we had the opportunity to inspect it during the demonstration of yesterday. If the plant starts up then it will be very difficult to affirm that it is a hoax. Instead, we will be projected suddenly into a new energetic era.”

And that Mary, is what a breakthrough technology will look like (if it works). You won't have to spend countless hours watching youtube videos of loopy claims.

You'll see bold newspaper headlines if Rossi's plant actually starts up and the scientific community as well as the power plant people confirm it works as Rossi promised.

So we are either on the verge of a huge breakthrough, or we aren't. If the breakthrough really happens, we'll all be reading about it in the newspaper.

And this applies to anybody's technology, Bearden's included. If his technology worked, HE would be the one involved in building a power plant. You won't have to dig for it, or pay Bearden 11 million dollars to build some more $200 breadboards.

reply to post by Arbitrageur


pesn.com...

www.forbes.com...

ecatnews.com...

www.i-sis.org.uk...

reply to post by Arbitrageur


Ha ha.

I have a keen appreciation and knowledge of what the pioneers in free energy have gone through. So, my perspective is different from yours.

By any chance did you listen to the Wade Frazier/Brian O'Leary interview I posted or did you read the transcript of it?

Originally posted by Mary Rose
I have a keen appreciation and knowledge of what the pioneers in free energy have gone through. So, my perspective is different from yours.

Yes I know you like believing outrageous claims made by people even if they don't have any evidence.

By any chance did you listen to the Wade Frazier/Brian O'Leary interview I posted or did you read the transcript of it?

You mean this transcript? projectcamelot.org...

yes, and I think O'Leary's example illustrates my point:

Obviously these technologies are a big threat to vested interests, whether you’re a scientist... And we know that the whole history of science is just riddled with denial of new developments, whether it was during the Copernican revolution, the time of Keppler, Galileo. The Wright brothers -- their initial flight, the reporter that reported it was far from its position and Scientific American about a year later ran an editorial, a scathing editorial, denying that aviation ever existed -

There's no doubt he's correct in his claim that science can and has denied major paradigm shifts initially. But I think the aviation example he chose is telling. How long was aviation suppressed?

Some people denied Einstein's theory at first too, but when there was ample evidence more people accepted it.

And that's where we are at with "free energy". It's presenting a theory that conflicts with the scientific establishment, but unlike the case of Einstein's paradigm shift which only resulted from evidence, there is no extraordinary evidence.

So the scientists... most of the mainstream scientific community, just like in the early days of aviation, are denying the possibility of free energy and will go out of their way to debunk it. And there certainly have been many, many examples of that.

And once again, in aviation, the truth eventually prevailed. And it didn't take all that long.

One thing you have to keep in mind, is the scientific community rejects lots and lots of new ideas that don't fit the current paradigm, and most of the time that's the right thing to do, because most of the paradigm shifts aren't valid. But the ones that are eventually come to light.

And regarding second hand stories, you really should be skeptical, especially when they read like that one:

KC: OK. Can you tell us what aspect of, or do you know, what part of the military was involved in showing this stuff?

WF: This person does not even know who it was who showed it to him...

KC: And where was the underground base located? Can you say the state?

WF: I am not sure. I believe it was in the United States. This person does not know where.

So a friend told him he was shown something, but he doesn't know who showed it to him, and he doesn't know where it was shown to him, and he's not exactly sure what it was or how it worked.....but it had something to do with antigravity and free energy.

I can find stories like this all over the internet all day every day. You can't just believe everything that everybody tells you from second hand sources which can't be confirmed, especially when the claims are extraordinary like antigravity and free energy. But humans are good story tellers. We like telling stories, and we like being told stories. That's what you have here, you're being told stories.

If you want to know the truth you have to go beyond the story-telling.

And if you really believe this, why haven't they murdered Rossi yet? Isn't he supposedly on the verge of upsetting TPTB with his over unity device?

Originally posted by Americanist
Your mistake is... You've searched WWW not Internet.

I said specifically "the Web" in my posts. It's not my problem that your reading comprehension skills are nowhere to be found.

But hey, "follow the path". Also, do the "centripetal spin". And above all, follow the "teachings of the ancients".

Originally posted by buddhasystem

Originally posted by Americanist
Your mistake is... You've searched WWW not Internet.

I said specifically "the Web" in my posts. It's not my problem that your reading comprehension skills are nowhere to be found.

But hey, "follow the path". Also, do the "centripetal spin". And above all, follow the "teachings of the ancients".

And I specified internet straight from the beginning, which is the network of computers commonly referred to as "the web..." Touché.

Originally posted by Americanist

Originally posted by buddhasystem

Originally posted by Americanist
Your mistake is... You've searched WWW not Internet.

I said specifically "the Web" in my posts. It's not my problem that your reading comprehension skills are nowhere to be found.

But hey, "follow the path". Also, do the "centripetal spin". And above all, follow the "teachings of the ancients".

And I specified internet straight from the beginning, which is the network of computers commonly referred to as "the web..." Touché.

Well then you still don't comprehend the difference between the internet and the Web.
You can keep your touché, you haven't earned it by a long shot. I don't really want to chew it up for you, but one example is: e-mail systems run on the internet but have nothing to do with the Web. This is what you missed in the link you provided:

However, the Internet and the World Wide Web are not one and the same. The hardware and software infrastructure of the Internet establishes a global data communications system between computers. In contrast, the Web is one of the services communicated via the Internet. It is a collection of interconnected documents and other resources, linked by hyperlinks and URLs.

Reading comprehension skills...

Originally posted by Arbitrageur
Yes I know you like believing outrageous claims made by people even if they don't have any evidence.

I don't believe outrageous claims. I simply don't conclude they're fraudulent because products haven't gone on the market.

But I think the aviation example he chose is telling. How long was aviation suppressed?

Some people denied Einstein's theory at first too, but when there was ample evidence more people accepted it.

Denying a theory at first is one thing; firing a reporter and publishing a scathing editorial is something else.

As far as story-telling goes, anecdotes from people who stick their necks out to share extraordinary, dangerous, experiences related to black operations are invaluable. It is up to the listener to use discernment. We have contempt for each other's discernment so we're not going to agree on what is credible and what is not.

Perhaps TPTB think it's not in their best interests to murder Rossi. Do you think they have to murder everyone that is important in free energy for the allegation to be true? Is that the extraordinary evidence you demand?

Originally posted by buddhasystem

Originally posted by Americanist

Originally posted by buddhasystem

Originally posted by Americanist
Your mistake is... You've searched WWW not Internet.

I said specifically "the Web" in my posts. It's not my problem that your reading comprehension skills are nowhere to be found.

But hey, "follow the path". Also, do the "centripetal spin". And above all, follow the "teachings of the ancients".

And I specified internet straight from the beginning, which is the network of computers commonly referred to as "the web..." Touché.

Well then you still don't comprehend the difference between the internet and the Web.
You can keep your touché, you haven't earned it by a long shot. I don't really want to chew it up for you, but one example is: e-mail systems run on the internet but have nothing to do with the Web. This is what you missed in the link you provided:

However, the Internet and the World Wide Web are not one and the same. The hardware and software infrastructure of the Internet establishes a global data communications system between computers. In contrast, the Web is one of the services communicated via the Internet. It is a collection of interconnected documents and other resources, linked by hyperlinks and URLs.

Reading comprehension skills...

edit on 19-10-2011 by buddhasystem because: (no reason given)

"The Web" doesn't exist without the internet. Trust me, I earn it plus called its origin correctly.

You exemplify "the trend" I've noticed with naysayers in general... You'll bounce between facets while most of us are focused on foundation.

Originally posted by Mary Rose

Originally posted by Arbitrageur
Yes I know you like believing outrageous claims made by people even if they don't have any evidence.

I don't believe outrageous claims. I simply don't conclude they're fraudulent because products haven't gone on the market.

...and it doesn't bother you that even a small fully functional prototype is not humming peacefully, continuously generating energy, somewhere on Searl's desk, to power his desk lamp? Because you know, they tend to fly away the moment he build them. Does it not raise a red flag (or a very large number of it, thinks People's Liberation Army in China)?

Forget the "market", there is not a matchbox sized contraption that can be reliably demonstrated.

My offer to sell you some quality New Age crystals is still in effect.

reply to post by buddhasystem


You disbelieve that he generated his own electricity with his technology for which he got hauled into court many years ago?

Originally posted by Americanist
"The Web" doesn't exist without the internet. Trust me, I earn it plus called its origin correctly.

You exemplify "the trend" I've noticed with naysayers in general... You'll bounce between facets while most of us are focused on foundation.

OK, you are saying that the Wiki is 100% wrong. Go to other sources and read up, because you need that.

I haven't bounced 1/10th of an inch in what I said, I've been 100% clear in terms and meaning, and it seems like and you simply don't qualify as a tech guy. You can't see the difference between multiple layers in protocols and a service that's created beyond that. The Web could operate on a different network altogether, but I'm pretty sure you can't see this because of your limited capacity. So much for a conversation

Originally posted by Mary Rose
reply to post by buddhasystem

 

You disbelieve that he generated his own electricity with his technology for which he got hauled into court many years ago?

Right on Mary, I simply can't believe that. If he was able to generate a measly 100W from his invention, he would do that for coolness factor and as an aid to his budget. Hell, if you make 5 of those, you drive a moped without paying for fuel, that's perpetual motion on the cheap.

We've never seen anything like it. I don't see a controlled experiment in which Searl generates electricity from whatever he claims he does. A stupid video filmed in a rented office space called "Global Headquarters" (the size of my bathroom) does not qualify as evidence, because even there no evidence is presented. Decades later, Mary, not a watt of electricity is flowing off this moronic wheel of Searl's.

I know you are in denial. Doing due diligence which nobody appreciates is losing its luster fast for me. I'll retire for the night soon, it's late in Geneva. Another case of me ignoring Matthew 7:6.

Originally posted by buddhasystem

Originally posted by Americanist
"The Web" doesn't exist without the internet. Trust me, I earn it plus called its origin correctly.

You exemplify "the trend" I've noticed with naysayers in general... You'll bounce between facets while most of us are focused on foundation.

OK, you are saying that the Wiki is 100% wrong. Go to other sources and read up, because you need that.

I haven't bounced 1/10th of an inch in what I said, I've been 100% clear in terms and meaning, and it seems like and you simply don't qualify as a tech guy. You can't see the difference between multiple layers in protocols and a service that's created beyond that. The Web could operate on a different network altogether, but I'm pretty sure you can't see this because of your limited capacity. So much for a conversation

You done? Yeah, our web could, but it doesn't. I'm positive my past includes configuring modems/ routers plus working hardware/ software support. I won't necessarily reference highchairs and fat crayons, but I was in the trenches for the initial days of dial-up.

Originally posted by Americanist
I won't necessarily reference highchairs and fat crayons, but I was in the trenches for the initial days of dial-up.

I am one of the first 10 or maybe 100 users of WWW on the planet. Long before you ever heard of it. I also have been writing code since age 14. I have no peer in this thread. Go ahead and reference your highchair. Or crayons.

Originally posted by buddhasystem
I know you are in denial. Doing due diligence which nobody appreciates is losing its luster fast for me. I'll retire for the night soon, it's late in Geneva. Another case of me ignoring Matthew 7:6.

Exactly what is your point here?

reply to post by Mary Rose


He gave you the reference and you can't look it up and figure it out??

Mathew 7.6 - one of the more famous verses in the bible I would have thought...

"Do not give what is holy to dogs; and do not throw your pearls before swine, or they will trample them under foot and turn and maul you."

Originally posted by buddhasystem

Originally posted by Americanist
I won't necessarily reference highchairs and fat crayons, but I was in the trenches for the initial days of dial-up.

I am one of the first 10 or maybe 100 users of WWW on the planet. Long before you ever heard of it. I also have been writing code since age 14. I have no peer in this thread. Go ahead and reference your highchair. Or crayons.

I was under the impression most of us were writing code at 13 (typically in junior high), but go ahead and tout more of yourself... It's a common theme with BS.

Originally posted by Americanist
I was under the impression most of us were writing code at 13 (typically in junior high),

Back in 1977? In assembly?