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 hey1212
Maybe they've decided to try and bankrupt the rich middle east countries or at least stem their income by releasing a new energy source other than oil.
Originally posted by consciousgod
Why would society change so much? It's like your utility switching from coal to gas. You like that there's less smog. Other than that life is pretty darn similar. Cars and aircraft totally changed people's habits and expectations for travel and business.
Society would change because the instant the fact that these machines exist and are ready to deploy hits wall street and the main stream, oil futures crash. This will cause a chain reaction that totally destroys all world economies and plunges the entire would into chaos.
And a new world will emerge after suffering greatly but temporarily, but many will die of starvation.edit on 14-1-2012 by consciousgod because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by mbkennel
Originally posted by consciousgod
Why would society change so much? It's like your utility switching from coal to gas. You like that there's less smog. Other than that life is pretty darn similar. Cars and aircraft totally changed people's habits and expectations for travel and business.
Society would change because the instant the fact that these machines exist and are ready to deploy hits wall street and the main stream, oil futures crash. This will cause a chain reaction that totally destroys all world economies and plunges the entire would into chaos.
This makes no sense. You realize that, all else being equal, lowering petroleum costs increases economic growth in oil consuming nations.
And, besides, these machines only purport to make hot water. (And we don't yet know that it produces excess work, either. Excess heat can come from a heat pump).
How are you going to run a Boeing on them?
If there's any temporary crash in oil futures as a result if this kind of news, I'm buying heavy. It will snap back very quickly, because people will realize that for next month's oil delivery people still need to fill up up their tanks at Exxon.
Changes in energy technology take many, many decades.
And a new world will emerge after suffering greatly but temporarily, but many will die of starvation.edit on 14-1-2012 by consciousgod because: (no reason given)
Why?
*
This device was debunked by an condition in “the Doubter” in the spring of 2001. Lutec was offered a $100,000 reward if they could prove their claims, yet never allowable any testing to be done. Instead, the figures they provided showed the apparatus was 33% efficient, not 300%
Originally posted by boncho
reply to post by consciousgod
*
This device was debunked by an condition in “the Doubter” in the spring of 2001. Lutec was offered a $100,000 reward if they could prove their claims, yet never allowable any testing to be done. Instead, the figures they provided showed the apparatus was 33% efficient, not 300%
More
They have 86 patents. Why? That's a lot of money to spend on nothing.
Now they have moved to China to build their machines.
Recently it has been reported that Lutec has given permission to a Hong Kong company to handle the licensing rights. This company is:
Evergreen Enterprise International LTD,
Floor 17 Tai Yau bldg, 181 Johnston Road,
Wan Chai, Hong Kong.
www.evergreenltd.com.hk...
I recently asked a colleague of mine, who lives in China and has a business in Hong Kong, to do a check on Evergreen Enterprise; and he has just reported back to me today that he visited the address.
It is an apartment block, and there is no such company listed on the occupants' directory in the foyer. However there is an accounting firm on that floor which would suggest that Evergreen is a shelf company and does not produce anything.
They are not listed in the Hong Kong telephone directory nor does their website carry any apartment number.
In the meantime, Lutec continues to advertise for investors for an unproven device that still remains unsubstantiated.
Your article does not prove this is a fake.
They have completed an independent test from an independent laboratory. The machine passed the test. This could very well be legit. I wouldn't discount it based on one skeptics research.
I think the Australia government would have stopped them if this was nonsense. Fraud is illegal.
Originally posted by NeoVain
reply to post by boncho
The Lutec does indeed seem to be a Fraud. However that is not the topic of this thread.
Please stay on topic.
This coming from the person when asked to produce papers by NASA, you produced notes from random people on Rossi's ecat. Why don't you address the questions that you are asked....
Originally posted by drakus
If he starts selling them around say 21-dec, it'll be "epicly" funny.
I was not aware of these Naval Command of Whatever researches into Cold fusion, granted, I never really studied much of the topic.
I remember arguing with Boncho about it back when, and he was convinced it was another sham by Rossi, instantly discrediting it and saying there was no possible way.
Only a number of months later. He's now manufacturing 1 million home unit E-Cats and they will go up for sale this Fall, possibly even earlier if he sets the timeline back. So you really think he came this entire way & is going to manufacture a million units, all part of a hoax???
The chances of it being a hoax at this point is nil.
I was never asked about papers specifically from Nasa, but "on this" which means cold fusion/Lenr.
The best papers "on this" is indeed those about Rossi, as Nasa are just trying to plagiarize what he is doing, but have no working model themselves.
Peer Review All the articles published on the Journal Of Nuclear Physics are Peer Reviewed. The Peer Review of every paper is made by at least one University Physics Professor.
This you would know if you did any research yourself.
Rossi at least has a working model.(and not just a prototype, but hundreds)
Despite this, there are still alot of papers on this from Nasa, as well as from SPAWAR, plenty of which are already covered earlier in this thread by zorgon etc, no need for me to re-post those links again.
That statement also begs me to question your sincerity in this matter, as you would already know all of this if you had a genuine interest, which is what you want to convey to us that you have when asking about "peer-reviewed papers".
It is quite obvious by now that your only interest is to find any angle of attack to try to discredit alot of topics here on ATS, and has been for quite some time. From now on, don´t expect to be taken seriously by me or anyone else that have also seen this when posting anything, as you will most probably be ignored.
In other words, NASA hasn't confirmed anything!
Originally posted by NeoVain
2. Rossi is the frontrunner here, not Nasa. While Nasa knows it to be real, they have no working prototype themselves and no complete theory. Rossi at least has a working model.(and not just a prototype, but hundreds)
First the disclaimers: While I do work for NASA, I do not speak for them. They employ me for my professional capabilities and on occasion my professional opinion.
Nothing I say should ever be construed as anything other than my personal opinion. As a NASA employee I am allowed and often times encouraged to say what I think. This and the exceptional people I get to work with every day are what make NASA great and a great place to work.
There have been many attempts to twist the release of this video into NASA’s support for LENR or as proof that Rossi’s e-cat really works. Many extraordinary claims have been made in 2010. In my scientific opinion, extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.
I find a distinct absence of the latter.
So let me be very clear here. While I personally find sufficient demonstration that LENR effects warrant further investigation, I remain skeptical. Furthermore, I am unaware of any clear and convincing demonstrations of any viable commercial device producing useful amounts of net energy.
There has been a lot of work done in the past 20+ years. When considered in aggregate I believe excess power has been demonstrated. I did not say, reliable, useful, commercially viable, or controllable. If any of those other terms were applicable I would have used them instead. If anything, it is the lack of a single clear demonstration of reliable, useful, and controllable production of excess power that has held LENR research back
Originally posted by Arbitrageur
In other words, NASA hasn't confirmed anything!
Originally posted by NeoVain
2. Rossi is the frontrunner here, not Nasa. While Nasa knows it to be real, they have no working prototype themselves and no complete theory. Rossi at least has a working model.(and not just a prototype, but hundreds)
Way to debunk your own thread!
Wow!
Originally posted by boncho
Joe Zawodny
So let me be very clear here. While I personally find sufficient demonstration that LENR effects warrant further investigation, I remain skeptical. Furthermore, I am unaware of any clear and convincing demonstrations of any viable commercial device producing useful amounts of net energy.