A Big List Of Suppressed Technologies Related To Energy. We Are Being Deceived Once More...

Originally posted by amazing

Originally posted by hawkiye

Originally posted by Skyfloating
Anything an actual profit can be made of, you can be sure it wont be suppressed for long. Thats human nature. Thats why I quit believing in all this suppressed science stuff. The world is an extremely competitive place and if something comes along that is better, it will be used.

It's not a matter of belief it is a matter of facts. A simple study of the history of Tesla and how JP Morgan tried to erase him from history and stole the future of free abundant electricity from us will dispel any false belief.

edit on 30-5-2011 by hawkiye because: (no reason given)

So the question is: If Tesla created or demonstrated something, we should be able to duplicate or recreate it. Why don't we? What is this technology and why can't someone build it or send the diagrams/schematics/step by step instructions for making it to everyone?

Because he was a genius and a lot of his work got burned?

Do I believe that multiple different forms of free energy exist? yes. yes I do.

But the bottom line is.......nothing in this life is free. Even if the concept can be sold, it will require infrastructure and that doesn't come free. Even if you purchase a one time device.....its still not free.

If your free energy device is bought by your parents at the time of your birth, and it cost them $15,000. And you live to be 75, and it never breaks or needs replacement.......

It still cost $200 a year for life.

If it breaks or needs replaced every 15 years.......at 75yrs old, it cost $75,000.


So you see the whole crock of free energy......well its all BS. Sorry to break the bad news.

reply to post by Shadowalker


Well it's the same thing with everything you buy. Everything breaks down, but that's part of another economic conspiracy (make fragile products so people have to buy back. In fact, a product that lasts forever isn't profitable for the companies). A car, which runs on oil (explosion engine), still has to be replaced every 10-15 years.

Yes, free-energy will never be free, but it can be a lot better than our current technologies!

SOME REASONS FOR OVER-UNITY SUPPRESSION

1. The strong oil lobby has throughout recent history suppressed high mileage carburetors through
violent threats or rigid mandates. Their tremendous investments in oil fields, refineries and distribution
systems wields a big stick against free energy, over-unity systems. (They have to be informed, and it will
take tens of years to implement this technology.) They can be a major player in this revolution.

Big industries fail when new technology makes the old obsolete. The reason the oil industry is alive and kicking is because nothing has come along to replace it.

2. Some have said the world is on the "brink of financial collapse." And work of revolutionary
breakthroughs in the energy production or distribution system could cause economic upheavals in our
economic system which is based on finite sources of money and energy. The powers that be can control
the masses by controlling the energy supply. They don't want to lose that control

Sorry... what? How would "free energy" in anyway affect the economy adversely? Access to energy will make or break a nation when it runs scare, hence the billions upon billions of dollars of investment in fusion by nations around the world. To peddle the "TPTB are suppressing it to control the masses" is not only paranoid but unsubstantiated.

3. As Einstein stated, "Great ideas often receive violent opposition from mediocre minds." Egos of
competing companies, or establishment views that this technology is a hoax or preposterous can also
create these violent oppositions.

How long have these claims been made? 30, 40, 50, 60 70+ years? Yet NONE have been validated independently in laboratory conditions. That is the reason there is opposition, because these claims are made my fraudsters and delusional who prey on the ignorant. That is morally repugnant.

4. The unenviable tasks of adding to or changing some of the laws of classical physics and chemistry will
take vast amounts of research time before verification of these new discoveries can be made by the ivory-
tower university types.

No they don't. Einstein's ideas were picked up pretty damn quick, and he pretty much turned established science on it's head! See above point.

5. People in power (academic, political, technological, or business) do not like revolutionary changes
which might threaten their position or standing.

So you're telling me that scientists and other academics are continuing to research "fake" science because they can't handle the paradigm shift? Utter nonsense.

6. Ignorance and indifference by the masses in this materialistic uninformed age about the state of the
earth's delicate ecosystem and the effects of pollutants on human, plant and animal life.

I'm not following what the point is here.

7. National Security: This technology used in a war would be a decided advantage. The major could war is over.
Let's help financial independence of the masses and save Mother Earth.

See nuclear technology. Notice how a) the secret weapon development eventually became public knowledge and b) the science found application in civilian technology. More importantly, the science was laid down BEFORE the secret weapon research began. Again, see point 4.

8. Galactic Security: Over-unity magnetic technology is related to anti-gravity, space, time warping
(unified field theory), and Area 51 Top Secret technology. The Galactic Cold War has begun.
www.byronwine.com...

Oh come on now, this is just ridiculous.

reply to post by Gab1159

Where is the peer-reviewed science? That for me is evidence. Some wiki of all things is not evidence. There's websites dedicated to astrology and unicorns, it doesn't make them any more legitimate.

Originally posted by john_bmth

SOME REASONS FOR OVER-UNITY SUPPRESSION

1. The strong oil lobby has throughout recent history suppressed high mileage carburetors through
violent threats or rigid mandates. Their tremendous investments in oil fields, refineries and distribution
systems wields a big stick against free energy, over-unity systems. (They have to be informed, and it will
take tens of years to implement this technology.) They can be a major player in this revolution.

Big industries fail when new technology makes the old obsolete. The reason the oil industry is alive and kicking is because nothing has come along to replace it.
.

So you should research why "nothing has come along".

Originally posted by john_bmth

6. Ignorance and indifference by the masses in this materialistic uninformed age about the state of the
earth's delicate ecosystem and the effects of pollutants on human, plant and animal life.

I'm not following what the point is here.

If people were not so extremely ignorant, indifferent, and uninformed about effects of industry on the environment, humans, and the world as a whole than the suppression of technology would not be so easy.

Originally posted by Jezus

So you should research why "nothing has come along".

Show me the peer-reviewed science and/or the independently-verified laboratory test results.

If people were not so extremely ignorant, indifferent, and uninformed about effects of industry on the environment, humans, and the world as a whole than the suppression of technology would not be so easy.

If people were not so extremely ignorant, indifferent, and uninformed about science then people would not be suckered into such unsubstantiated tales of over unity.

I can explain the current situation easily.

A new car is good for about 12 yrs if you drive the traditional 15-20K miles per year.

But lets say you have a two car garage. you buy two new cars. One gets driven the 15-20K the other gets driven 5k. After 12 years time one needs replaced. The other has 2/3 of its working life left. Now the second one that may last 24 years no longer has any car payment. just periodic replacement of parts and fuel. Its gravy time for car number two. It is now 2/3 cheaper to operate and it has most of its life still left in it.


You know full well after 24 yrs of its life you will have to replace it. Its now ugly. Its out of style. The paint is oxidized. Its been labeled as uncool. But you are charging your next door neighbor $150 a month to carpool to work with you. It cost you $50 in gas to take him. You pocket $1200 per year for the next 12 years. You put his $15000 into the next car you buy, which is better and cheaper to operate.


That ugly POS car is our electric plants, substations, and giant towers with high tension wires. Its your electric company. And its your $150 spent to carpool with them.

reply to post by john_bmth


Victor Klimov's work has been peer-reviewed. I posted that link twice, and it contains additional link for you to read. But you won't...it seems. Now that's just one of the 50 examples listed in my OP's link..."I can only show you the door, Neo, you are the one that has to walk through it".

Now can you argue without using bad connotation words? Stupid BS non-sense prank hoax delusional and so on. Can you please be objective, or are you planning using these adjectives to down people's credibility?

Now, did you really take the time to explore my links? How can you know they're all hoaxers? You know all of these technologies? Or are you a real fast reader and read through all the info provided in my link? If you did so...wow you're fast! :O

reply to post by Shadowalker


I'm not sure I get your point on this one...

reply to post by john_bmth

Big industries fail when new technology makes the old obsolete. The reason the oil industry is alive and kicking is because nothing has come along to replace it.

"Nothing to replace oil?" I would argue that hemp could replace oil. Textiles, resins, plastics, lubricants, fuel etc....

www.rense.com...
www.naihc.org...
Suppression? Yes, can't have something that grows like a weed filling our needs so thoroughly and efficiently, in terms of cost and sustainability. I do not think the energy barons want to lose any profit margin's.

How would "free energy" in anyway affect the economy adversely?

Because it's free(er)? Abundant in it's availability, as in sun, wind, water, bio/hemp fuel. Even if there were charges to link into 'free energy," surely it would be significantly cheaper than oil.

Why,spend billions upon billions of dollars on outdated technology,that requires that much money ,and probably more,if history is any judge.when we can use even half,that much to build free energy devices that will save money over time.Rather than suck more money from us over what few resources we have left.Why should we compete with ourselves,it only wastes money and time in the long run.We end up killing each other for no good reason,except greed.

No,pollution

No,ongoing energy costs

No, carbon credits to pay

No, worrying about blackouts from overloaded powerlines

No wind,water,or even ,sun,necessary.

No more expensive power plants to build.

In,fact,no long distance powerlines needed

No more overpaying for your energy needs,once the free energy devices are built.

Just, maintaince costs,if needed.

Access to energy will make or break a nation when it runs scare, hence the billions upon billions of dollars of investment in fusion by nations around the world.

So do you think the advent of fusion tech will not lower costs to manufactures and consumers? I realize nothing is free, but surely a better alternative exists.

How long have these claims been made? 30, 40, 50, 60 70+ years? Yet NONE have been validated independently in laboratory conditions.

Do you not think it's possible for genuine suppression at all? If so, well we are entitled to our opinions, but to claim ex/conclusively one way or the other is disingenuous, imo.
Frauds? Yes, plenty, I agree, but not all.

So you're telling me that scientists and other academics are continuing to research "fake" science because they can't handle the paradigm shift? Utter nonsense.

"I'm" not telling you anything, "I'm" sharing some reasons that may address such suppression, for the people's sake.
Yes, I would say that some people in power(academic, political, technological, or business) may resist change that threatens their security via work/job. So you think this is impossible and does/can not happen?

8. Galactic Security: Over-unity magnetic technology is related to anti-gravity, space, time warping
(unified field theory), and Area 51 Top Secret technology. The Galactic Cold War has begun.

Oh come on now, this is just ridiculous.

Far fetched certainly, ridiculous may be a little harsh though for such speculation, but to each their own...respectfully.

Peace,
spec

If the technology is suppressed, why is there so much information about it? That's sort of an oxymoron isn't it? The internet is full of free energy devices. There are published patents available (or used to be until the patent office demanded a working model). There is nothing to prevent anyone from making use of them.

BTW, the link in the OP claims that "Henry T. Moray" was shot and killed in his lab.
Thomas Henry Moray (they got his name wrong) was not shot and killed in his lab. His son has his notes and is not being "suppressed" but he needs lots of money.
pesn.com...

Originally posted by john_bmth

Originally posted by Jezus

So you should research why "nothing has come along".

Show me the peer-reviewed science and/or the independently-verified laboratory test results.

I'm talking about the history of industry, not a specific product.

Originally posted by john_bmth

Originally posted by Jezus
If people were not so extremely ignorant, indifferent, and uninformed about effects of industry on the environment, humans, and the world as a whole than the suppression of technology would not be so easy.

If people were not so extremely ignorant, indifferent, and uninformed about science then people would not be suckered into such unsubstantiated tales of over unity.

I might agree with that, but these same educated people would also prevent others from making money off the destruction of the environment.

Originally posted by Gab1159
reply to post by john_bmth

 

Victor Klimov's work has been peer-reviewed. I posted that link twice, and it contains additional link for you to read. But you won't...it seems. Now that's just one of the 50 examples listed in my OP's link..."I can only show you the door, Neo, you are the one that has to walk through it".

Now can you argue without using bad connotation words? Stupid BS non-sense prank hoax delusional and so on. Can you please be objective, or are you planning using these adjectives to down people's credibility?

Now, did you really take the time to explore my links? How can you know they're all hoaxers? You know all of these technologies? Or are you a real fast reader and read through all the info provided in my link? If you did so...wow you're fast! :O

Ignore this guy he is a typical disruptor or sock puppet. You and i have both posted links to patented over unity technology some even in use by the military and he simply ignores it and repeats his nonsense over and over he will do this ad nausea to disrupt the thread for that is his only goal. Best to ignore him, if he gets a reaction thats what he wants. Give him nothing!

PS Also he may have a buddy who comes on and argues against him and they will go back and forth to dominate the thread and take everyones attention off the real issues as they get fed up with the arguing. My 3 cents.

reply to post by Phage

Howdie Phage!

If the technology is suppressed, why is there so much information about it?

Just takin' a stab here, but I think various tech, in it's development and experimentation, is recorded and published via academic studies, and this info gets spread out through the interwebs. Additionally, private investors could be supporting developing projects and therefore some of the info/progress has to be reported.
I wanted to bring up the doc Who Killed The Electric Car as an example of how this"supression' may work sometimes.

It comes down to politics and money it seems. Powerful figures occupy powerful positions, certainly with conflicts of interests at times.

spec

Originally posted by speculativeoptimist

"Nothing to replace oil?" I would argue that hemp could replace oil. Textiles, resins, plastics, lubricants etc....

www.rense.com...
www.naihc.org...
Suppression? Yes, can't have something that grows like a weed filling our needs so thoroughly and efficiently, in terms of cost and sustainability.

Where I live, it is legal to cultivate hemp for manufacturing (and they do so) so that is probably not the best example.

Because it's free(er)? Abundant in it's availability, as in sun, wind, water, bio/hemp fuel. Even if there were charges to link into 'free energy," surely it would be significantly cheaper than oil.

When solar power gets to decent levels of cost and efficiency, people will be able to get "off the grid" without over unity devices. Hell, some people have made substantial cuts to their gas and electric bills is countries that are blessed with good weather and alternative energy subsidiaries. Not only that, but they can CHARGE their power companies for excess electricity they generate. I'm sorry, but that's really not the actions of a government that is using energy to stick it to the little man. Granted, I live in a country that doesn't really support alternative energy but that's because my government is incredibly short-sighted (no surprise there, eh?).

Why,spend billions upon billions of dollars on outdated technology,that requires that much money ,and probably more,if history is any judge.when we can use even half,that much to build free energy devices that will save money over time.Rather than suck more money from us over what few resources we have left.Why should we compete with ourselves,it only wastes money and time in the long run.We end up killing each other for no good reason,except greed.

No,pollution

No,ongoing energy costs

No, carbon credits to pay

No, worrying about blackouts from overloaded powerlines

No wind,water,or even ,sun,necessary.

No more expensive power plants to build.

In,fact,no long distance powerlines needed

No more overpaying for your energy needs,once the free energy devices are built.

Just, maintaince costs,if needed.

But governments DO charge large corporations for polluting (in some cases very large amounts) and they are slowly getting moving away from oil dependency. I'm not saying that governments aren't corrupt or that big business doesn't hold a great deal of power. Corruption is a genuine problem and large corps do hold too much sway. Couple that with political short-sightedness and a "next election is all that counts" attitude and the wheels turn painfully slowly, but the idea of global suppression of over unity has no basis. The science isn't there and the technology has not been demonstrated.

So do you think the advent of fusion tech will not lower costs to manufactures and consumers? I realize nothing is free, but surely a better alternative exists.

I'm sure that if over unity devices existed they would be taxed to high heaven. The power companies would have a good say in that one. But the fact that billions upon billions of dollars is being invested into fusion research shows how high up access to cheap, abundant energy is high up on every nation's agenda. Why not just whip out the over unity power generators? Even putting the civilian agenda aside, the military would die for an over unity power source...

Do you not think it's possible for genuine suppression at all? If so, well we are entitled to our opinions, but to claim ex/conclusively one way or the other is disingenuous, imo.
Frauds? Yes, plenty, I agree, but not all.

Suppression of technology happens, sure. Try getting access to F-22 or Eurofighter tech (ain't gonna happen). But the difference is that the science is there and it came before the tech, Not only that, but we know about the tech, we just don't know the details. There is no scientific basis for over unity devices nor is there any credible evidence. Even the Manhattan Project was an open secret in Nevada.

"I'm" not telling you anything, "I'm" sharing some reasons that may address such suppression, for the people's sake.
Yes, I would say that some people in power(academic, political, technological, or business) may resist change that threatens their security via work/job. So you think this is impossible and does/can not happen?

Sure, people resist change all the time for their own self-interests. It's one of the many reasons why the human race is so backwards. But to say that EVERY scientist/politician in the world is working on lock-step to secure their self-interests is absolutely implausible. I;m a researcher in academia. My field is not a natural science but I still publish work and go through the peer review process. I understand how the system works. It's not flawless as there's human beings involved and they have a habit of getting in the way of perfection but it's a damn-sight better than using websites, books and youtube videos as a means of appraising knowledge. Not only that but I have friends who are involved in physics, engineering and other such disciplines. It's easy for people to point the finger at the scientific establishment and cry "CONSPIRACY!" when they have no contact with the scientific establishment (friends, family members etc.) but the fact of the matter is that these people are human beings like you and me. There is no grand conspiracy. Every physicist on the planet would give an arm and a leg to overthrow established science. The idea that they protect established thinking out of self-interest or as part of some global, unified secret society is just not the case

Far fetched certainly, ridiculous may be a little harsh though, but to each their own...respectfully.

Fair enough, but you can see how to the majority of people that would not be a reasonable argument in a debate?

reply to post by speculativeoptimist

The electric car isn't really a good comparison. It wasn't "revolutionary" technology. As I recall, I think the movie goes a bit overboard on the conspiracy angle and definitely relies too much on celebrity babble.

Are electric vehicles being suppressed now? Are oil companies making less money?

reply to post by john_bmth

Where I live, it is legal to cultivate hemp for manufacturing (and they do so) so that is probably not the best example.

Must be nice! We are so far behind here in the states because they have not even distinguished hemp from recreational cannabis. Can anyone say Big Energy LOBBYIST?!?!
I did not realize how many other countries are growing/producing hemp.
List Of Countries
Other than that, glad we found some middle ground instead of getting locked into an 'either or' situation.
Debating the Galactic repercussions? I'll leave that one alone too.

Peace,
spec

Originally posted by Gab1159
reply to post by john_bmth

 

Victor Klimov's work has been peer-reviewed. I posted that link twice, and it contains additional link for you to read. But you won't...it seems. Now that's just one of the 50 examples listed in my OP's link..."I can only show you the door, Neo, you are the one that has to walk through it".

Then you will have no trouble posting a link to his paper published in a credible, peer-reviewed journal then, no?

Now can you argue without using bad connotation words? Stupid BS non-sense prank hoax delusional and so on. Can you please be objective, or are you planning using these adjectives to down people's credibility?

Someone who fakes research and their credentials in order to extort money out of gullible investors is a fraud. Someone who believes they have broken the laws of physics yet cannot substantiate their claims is delusional. We have a poster on here who sincerely thinks he has invented a time machine. He is delusional. I am not using these words to cause offence, I am saying it how it is. I do not have an axe to grind against you nor is it my agenda to belittle you or make you look foolish. I choose my words as I believe they are the most succinct, not to cause offence or an adverse emotional response.

Now, did you really take the time to explore my links? How can you know they're all hoaxers? You know all of these technologies? Or are you a real fast reader and read through all the info provided in my link? If you did so...wow you're fast! :O

Peer-reviewed papers from credible publications. Lab results form independent, credible institutions. That is all I ask.

Originally posted by hawkiye
Ignore this guy he is a typical disruptor or sock puppet. You and i have both posted links to patented over unity technology some even in use by the military and he simply ignores it and repeats his nonsense over and over he will do this ad nausea to disrupt the thread for that is his only goal. Best to ignore him, if he gets a reaction thats what he wants. Give him nothing!

See my above comment.

PS Also he may have a buddy who comes on and argues against him and they will go back and forth to dominate the thread and take everyones attention off the real issues as they get fed up with the arguing. My 3 cents.

Sounds like someone is taking confrontation of ignorance a little too personally. If can't handle having unsubstantiated or downright incorrect statements challenged then the solution is not make them. Simple

reply to post by Phage

It wasn't "revolutionary" technology

True, but it is a decent example of how something that may generate smaller margins and be more available, could be slowed or suppressed.
I agree, the doc goes a little overboard, as so many conspiratorial debuts do, but that should not take away from any facts they presented, with the boards voting in Cali.

Are electric vehicles being suppressed now? Are oil companies making less money?

No, but they were, just like the electric car's advent in the 20's, when the oil baron's derailed it's promotion and instead went forward with a more profitable method.
The internet is empowering consumers more now, as well as the common sense of getting off of oil and exploring/developing alternative solutions. Today compared to 96 is a different world, imo, post Gulf spill tragedy, higher oil prices and war(s). I think there are more efforts and financing for alternative energy, and monetary incentive is more involved now because of the demand for such, especially since it is being promoted by our current administration.

spec