Cont: Brilliant Light Power Going To Market - Free Energy Generator Part 3

[abaddon]

Look, I don't want to come across as snarky, but please pay attention to my statement that

When I did my search about 4 years ago, the company names were available. Since that time, BLP has made use of the Memory Hole. It has been four years, so frankly my memory has not retained the details you want. As I recall, there were about 8 deals which had been announced, and I was only able to find contact information on 2 of them. You know the results of the first. The second was a European company, and they never replied to my query.

Particularly since it was clear that nobody was actually going to start generating power via hydrinos (TM), the details of exactly who had signed on with Mills seemed pretty unimportant, sort of like the exact length of a unicorn's horn.

Sorry not to be able to provide more detailed information.

Those are all still listed in the press section of the current site.

They all date to 2008/9. Since then, nothing new.

Of the four mentioned, Akridge is a shell, Escatado is a shell. The farmers co-op is real but you have detailed their position. The fourth is a real Italian power company but they are unresponsive.

Two are unnamed. Or are they.

Escatado, a one man operation, was bought by the real power company, Roosevelt County Electric Cooperative. Why? Unknown. But I bet they are being counted as a licensee.

The Akridge press release mentions two other real companies, Conectiv and Pacificorp, and likely they are also creatively counted.

 

[RecoveringYuppy]

Of the four mentioned, Akridge is a shell, Escatado is a shell.

What is it with you and "shell companies". Estacado doesn't appear to have been a shell, it appears to have been a wildcatter. And if Arkridge is a shell (which isn't actually well established) it's owned by someone else (an actual victim of Mills based on actual evidence) and was formed for legitimate purposes. If it is a shell it's only because it's inactive because it's partner, BLP, didn't deliver. It misleading to leave out those pertinent details.

 

[abaddon]

What is it with you and "shell companies". Estacado doesn't appear to have been a shell, it appears to have been a wildcatter. And if Arkridge is a shell (which isn't actually well established) it's owned by someone else (an actual victim of Mills based on actual evidence) and was formed for legitimate purposes. If it is a shell it's only because it's inactive because it's partner, BLP, didn't deliver. It misleading to leave out those pertinent details.

Well now we know you don't read responses.

 

[SOdhner]

I'd be happy to validate your work. I'm sure we can come to some sort of arrangement

I'd just like to say that I've seen the ICCD running and can verify that it operates exactly as SOdhner claims. And I have no commercial ties and have signed no IP agreements with the SOdhner organisation.

Okay great, so that's the independent validation out of the way.

The visionary behind the invention of ICCD the polymath and Top Trumps champion (Year 7) SOdhner today announced that there are several companies bidding to acquire the rights to a worldwide non-exclusive license to develop and market the ICCD process. SOdhner said "We plan to have ICCD-based devices commercially available by 2Q 2019/20/21/22/23/24/25/26/27/28/29/30 (delete as applicable), he also stated under his breath "forward-looking statement."

Unlimited Molten Confectionary Solutions Inc. is currently in intense negotiations with the inventor of the ICCD for a worldwide non-exclusive license to develop and market the ICCD process. We plan to have ICCD-based devices commercially available by 2Q2019.

And the industry is beating down my door!

So Markie, what are your actual standards? My theory is that you can't define any that exclude my ICCD but include Mills, because you're (possibly unknowingly) applying totally different standards to BLP.

Prove me wrong, Markie! Tell me what your standards are!

 

[Hans]

So Markie, what are your actual standards? My theory is that you can't define any that exclude my ICCD but include Mills, because you're (possibly unknowingly) applying totally different standards to BLP.

Prove me wrong, Markie! Tell me what your standards are!

Okay that's just mean! In the sense it's very funny!

Markie's standard? Allow BLP any latitude to include longitude and the 5th dimension if they need it for wiggle room.

 

[jonesdave116]

Those are all still listed in the press section of the current site.

The Akridge press release mentions two other real companies, Conectiv and Pacificorp, and likely they are also creatively counted.

From previous digging around, I think I read that Mills' supporter Peter Jansson was employed by Conectiv, and did the deal. He was evidently sacked. I'll have to see if I can find the piece I read again.

 

[RecoveringYuppy]

From previous digging around, I think I read that Mills' supporter Peter Jansson was employed by Conectiv, and did the deal. He was evidently sacked. I'll have to see if I can find the piece I read again.

Try "Atlantic Energy" as a search term.

 

[Mike!]

Okay that's just mean! In the sense it's very funny!

Markie's standard? Allow BLP any latitude to include longitude and the 5th dimension if they need it for wiggle room.

Energy from water and the 5th Dimension?



Let the Suncell shine in.

 

[halleyscomet]

 

[LTC8K6]

Try "Atlantic Energy" as a search term.

Mills calls it "Atlantic Electric" in some interviews.

 

[Mike!]

Mills calls it "Atlantic Electric" in some interviews.

Given what an absolute stickler for pinpoint accuracy Randal Mills is, it must be two completely different companies he's referring to, and not just one that he can't manage to keep the name straight on.

 

[Hans]

Given what an absolute stickler for pinpoint accuracy Randal Mills is, it must be two completely different companies he's referring to, and not just one that he can't manage to keep the name straight on.

You think that's a problem you should view his record dealing with production schedules.....chuckle

 

[Darat]

Split the posts about Deneum to its own thread: http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=331601

Posted By: Darat

 

[Mike!]

Has the possibility of a competing scam shut down the BLP conversation?

 

[fromdownunder]

I suspect saying the same thing over and over again for many years becomes rather boring after a while, and anybody who is competent to post on this thread (not me, but I have lurked here since day one) is waiting for the next big non announcement.


"Dolphins Still Missing" is not all that newsworthy as Douglas Adams once pointed out.


Norm

 

[AlaskaBushPilot]

[qimg]https://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/dark_matter_candidates.png[/qimg]

That was hilarious. And I'm not even a physicist.

 

[Horatius]

I suspect saying the same thing over and over again for many years becomes rather boring after a while, and anybody who is competent to post on this thread (not me, but I have lurked here since day one) is waiting for the next big non announcement.


"Dolphins Still Missing" is not all that newsworthy as Douglas Adams once pointed out.


Norm

But "Whales go missing too!" would be a story for a while. It's interesting to show another company using exactly the same playbook. I'd really like to hear how markie, or other people like him, react to such an obvious copy. Does it make them think that the other company is on to something as well, or do they recognize that the other company is full of crap? And if it's the latter, how do they distinguish between the two?

Like most woo, once it's been shown comprehensively that it is just woo, the discussion becomes much more about the mindset of the believers: How do they justify belief in one type of woo, but not the other? Or do they accept both types of woo, even if they're mutually incompatible? Is there ever a point at which they'll accept that they were wrong?

 

[markie]

But "Whales go missing too!" would be a story for a while. It's interesting to show another company using exactly the same playbook. I'd really like to hear how markie, or other people like him, react to such an obvious copy. Does it make them think that the other company is on to something as well, or do they recognize that the other company is full of crap? And if it's the latter, how do they distinguish between the two?

Like most woo, once it's been shown comprehensively that it is just woo, the discussion becomes much more about the mindset of the believers: How do they justify belief in one type of woo, but not the other? Or do they accept both types of woo, even if they're mutually incompatible? Is there ever a point at which they'll accept that they were wrong?

"Exactly the same playbook"? Hardly. Where are the validation reports? Where is the due diligence for potential investors?

Now, there *may* be something to that company's method of generating what would amount to LENR power, but I don't see how one could properly judge that. Again there doesn't appear to be any way of doing due diligence before investing. The white paper (page 11 of https://deneum.com/pdf/White_Paper.pdf) says that they will be live streaming a video of their demonstration device on October 1, and that people who have invested over an certain amount in cryptocurrency can attend in person and meet people in the company.

But why see such a demonstration after investing and not before? And again, where are the outside validators? LENR may well occur but the problem has always been getting it to the point of a reliable, reproducible reaction, let alone a commercial device. To imagine that this company has done it where other LENR researchers have failed for decades is at this point a blind leap of faith without validated demonstrations.

To me this is a case of an entrepreneur taking a couple of scientists/engineers and telling them he will attempt to commercialize and reward their decades of research. It's a win for the scientists/engineers and it's a win for the entrepreneur who gains some supposed scientific credibility or traction for a good cause - green energy - and a great potential money stream in a world needing an energy change.

There has to be a sales pitch, but so far it seems 98 percent pitch and projection and 2 percent science.

BLP is far and away about the science, which has been excellent and progressing. The sales pitch, personally I gloss over it since it's been essentially the same over the last 20 years.

 

[halleyscomet]

"Exactly the same playbook"? Hardly. Where are the validation reports? Where is the due diligence for potential investors?

Given the COMPLETE lack of ACTUAL validation by third parties, I'd say the newcomer has the edge on Mills in that regard.

 

[abaddon]

"Exactly the same playbook"? Hardly. Where are the validation reports? Where is the due diligence for potential investors?

Now, there *may* be something to that company's method of generating what would amount to LENR power, but I don't see how one could properly judge that. Again there doesn't appear to be any way of doing due diligence before investing. The white paper (page 11 of https://deneum.com/pdf/White_Paper.pdf) says that they will be live streaming a video of their demonstration device on October 1, and that people who have invested over an certain amount in cryptocurrency can attend in person and meet people in the company.

But why see such a demonstration after investing and not before? And again, where are the outside validators? LENR may well occur but the problem has always been getting it to the point of a reliable, reproducible reaction, let alone a commercial device. To imagine that this company has done it where other LENR researchers have failed for decades is at this point a blind leap of faith without validated demonstrations.

To me this is a case of an entrepreneur taking a couple of scientists/engineers and telling them he will attempt to commercialize and reward their decades of research. It's a win for the scientists/engineers and it's a win for the entrepreneur who gains some supposed scientific credibility or traction for a good cause - green energy - and a great potential money stream in a world needing an energy change.

There has to be a sales pitch, but so far it seems 98 percent pitch and projection and 2 percent science.

BLP is far and away about the science, which has been excellent and progressing. The sales pitch, personally I gloss over it since it's been essentially the same over the last 20 years.

I have only ever seen the like before among the religious. It is kind of shocking. Yet not really surprising. The shock is more about the religious fervour. "My church is better that yours" and all that crap. Seeing it introduced wilfully into scientific endeavour is disturbing.

Anyway markie, so far, to show for your thirty year investment is nothing and you will likely pass on with none. You have claimed in 2019 that if there is no significant progress you will reassess your engagement with BLP. Has not happened for the last thirty years. What makes you think it will now?

Nothing, it's just more of the same nonsense. The Arkwright corner set up a corner store shell company much like anyone would do. I would. If I want to get into a dodgy venture given I already have a perfectly viable business, I would make sure that the venture was insulated away from my existing business so that my core was safe. That is good business practice.

Your real problem is that you do not operate in such spheres and thus do not understand them.

And you cannot understand that those who do know when someone is selling a pup. And you fail to notice when a bloke with a legitimate business was careful enough to insulate himself, his business and his employees from a purely speculative investment. You simply do not operate in those kind of spaces.

That is not a slur. You simply don't and I do. That is a matter of fact. So do others in this thread that I am aware of. But not you.