Re: Free energy???

On Mar 2, 11:29 pm, "gdewi...@xxxxxxxxx" <gdewi...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Mar 3, 2:28 am, "mike3" <mike4...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:





On Mar 1, 10:33 am, "PD" <TheDraperFam...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Feb 28, 8:42 pm, "mike3" <mike4...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Hi.

Why say thatfree energyis impossible? We do not know everything, and
we should never pretend to.Free energymay still be possible, it's
just that nobody has found out how to do it yet.

Of course it's possible. And you are *perfectly* entitled to expend
any and all resources available to you to demonstrate that it's
possible.

However, if you want to conscript or recruit *others* to the effort,
then you're going to have to demonstrate that the risk is worth it.
Presently, the patent office has taken the position that any
application that involves violation of the rule of energy conservation
is not worth the risk of assigning personnel resources to it.

And I'm supposed to get all this proof _myself_? Few if any research
projects can be done on one's own.

What "risk" are you referring to? You mean, because the scientific
community ridicules them so much? And I did not say anything about
patents, I was talking about simply searching for free energy, not
about
patenting/selling anything.

What I am trying to say is that science can never pretend to have all
the answers, this is a fundamental precept. Therefore we should be
free to question absolutely every doctrine, every theory, every
experiment, search for any evidence for/against any claim, etc.
Questions are of the utmost importance in science, and without them
there can be no scientific progress.

Or did you think that other people's time and effort is just as free
as energy?

PD

oh but the patent office argument is very good.

First there is a liar who claims perpetual motion apparatus can not be
patented.

"without a working model"


This is obviously a fraudulent statement.

"Fraudulent" implies both FALSE and INTENTION to profit by deception.
The reason the statement seemed false in the first place is because
YOU misquoted it.



On display of a working device they have to grant you a patent.

And there has never been a working perpetual motion machine.


Don't think they will just give you one for a baseless claim.

The operative words here are "Don't think"


Howard Johnson didn't take no for an answer and got his patent.

They patented HoJo's????


Stanley Meyer only got his patent when he filled the patent office
building with hydrogen gas.

"If a single bomb falls on the German Reich, you can call me Meyer" -
Hermann Goering


After looking like a goldfish the patent office priest started running
around the building. "Put your cigarettes out there is hydrogen in the
building!!"

There are priests in the patent office? Lock up the altar boys!
There are goldfish in the patent office? "My fish's name is
Eric" (Monty Python)


It was hooked up to a battery so it was safe according to the
thermodynamics fairy.

"Not that there's anything WRONG with that..."


Still they gave him the patent and build rockets as well as (adapt)
hummers based on his innovation.

Do you GIVE hummers based on this innovation, or your own?


@all

Now go look at the video brain-dead ***-heads

Don't be so hard on yourself.


http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-3333992194168790800- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -


.