Over Unity is No Longer Disputable

[Ziggurat]

Let's be just a little bit careful here. While I agree 100% with your conclusions, radioactive isotopes have nothing to do with electron shells.

I know that, I was just drawing an analogy. Unstable isotopes are unstable because there's a lower-energy state available to them, which they decay into. Excited electrons do the same thing (though usually on a faster time scale): they decay from excited states to lower-energy states. The details of the interaction don't really matter for that basic principle. If what we consider the ground state was not the true ground state, then there would be similar decays from the fake ground state to the true ground state, but there aren't. That's my only point.

 

[TjW]

Hmm, I am pretty sure they would be in jail though, so.............

No. I haven't seen any proof that they have accepted outside investment.
It wouldn't surprise me at all if it were a scam, but it could be as Wollery says.

Regarding your confusion about why a scammer would go through the motions of producing something without actually producing anything:

A good scam doesn't require the scammer to ask you for money. The idea is to set up a situation in which the mark is begging to give you money.

Once the mark has invested, there's a reluctance to walk away from the sunk costs of the investment. This happens in other investments as well.

Ponzi schemes (no, I don't think it's a Ponzi scheme) rely on this same reluctance to walk away. There's an initial high return, then more money is needed to "protect your investment".

It's my understanding that some of the more unethical "We'll help you patent your idea / develop your product" businesses work on this principal, too. It's not even illegal, if it's worked right.

Even if Steorn is deluded rather than dishonest, the end result to the investor will be the same.

 

[PixyMisa]

I am completely confused. If I was running a scam. I would not set up 4 cameras in a public display and never produce anything at all. Why?

What is the gain?

Why not make a video of a fake? Or stage a private bogus display with a paid audience?

Possibly they were all set to go with the fake, and the fake broke and now they have to fix it.

C' mon skeptics make me believe.

Not in our job description.

 

[g4macdad]

Possibly they were all set to go with the fake, and the fake broke and now they have to fix it.

Not in our job description.

Now you expect us to believe you have a job?!

 

[Beady]

Is it true, in Cajun cooking, that crows' feet are considered edible?

 

[g4macdad]

Is it true, in Cajun cooking, that crows' feet are considered edible?

Gulp!

 

[Horatius]

I am completely confused. If I was running a scam. I would not set up 4 cameras in a public display and never produce anything at all. Why?

What is the gain?

Think of it as Evolution In Action. They're eliminating the smarter people from their pool of potential investors, by putting out such stupid excuses. They know that only the really dumb ones will "keep the faith", so that when the time comes to start soliciting investments, they know that all the people who are still interested in their product (those who haven't already decided it's a total scam), are the dumbest of the whole lot, who will be the least likely to ever realize they've been scammed.

C' mon skeptics make me believe.

You do realize that's almost the exact opposite of what skeptics do, right?

 

[g4macdad]

Think of it as Evolution In Action. They're eliminating the smarter people from their pool of potential investors, by putting out such stupid excuses. They know that only the really dumb ones will "keep the faith", so that when the time comes to start soliciting investments, they know that all the people who are still interested in their product (those who haven't already decided it's a total scam), are the dumbest of the whole lot, who will be the least likely to ever realize they've been scammed.







You do realize that's almost the exact opposite of what skeptics do, right?

You realize they will go to prison for this?

BTW I have no money invested in this. If the claim is true, money won't have much value anymore anyway. Not a good investment.

I do have lot's of money in oil though, I guess I am safe either way. Who is dumb again? LOL

 

[joobz]

...snip, as long as they are semi-plausible. ...snip

And that's the rub. As you know, Steorn's claim isn't even plausible.

However, to the general public, it seems equivilent to any other alternative energy research. So, when Steorn's work is shown to be lies and deceit, it will by proxy make all alternative energy research look equally distrustful and a waste of time.

Government efforts into alternative energies is entirely driven by politics. When the people lose interest or trust in it, politicians no longer back it. When politicians no longer back it, money is no longer allocated toward it.
Thus stopping real research.

The general public isn't knowledgable enough to know draw the distinction between Steorn and honest research. For instance, there are some groups working on enzymatic degradation to extract more useful energy out of biomass. This includes exploring enzymes existing in the cockroach's gut. Do you think an average person would recognize this work as more feasible than Steorn's overunity device?
.
If anyone truly wishes to see alterative energy become a reality, they should rapidly discredit sharlatans like Steorn. To support Steorn is to discredit all alternative energy research and by default support the existing energy industries.

 

[g4macdad]

And that's the rub. As you know, Steorn's claim isn't even plausible.

However, to the general public, it seems equivilent to any other alternative energy research. So, when Steorn's work is shown to be lies and deceit, it will by proxy make all alternative energy research look equally distrustful and a waste of time.

Government efforts into alternative energies is entirely driven by politics. When the people lose interest or trust in it, politicians no longer back it. When politicians no longer back it, money is no longer allocated toward it.
Thus stopping real research.

The general public isn't knowledgable enough to know draw the distinction between Steorn and honest research. For instance, there are some groups working on enzymatic degradation to extract more useful energy out of biomass. This includes exploring enzymes existing in the cockroach's gut. Do you think an average person would recognize this work as more feasible than Steorn's overunity device?
.
If anyone truly wishes to see alterative energy become a reality, they should rapidly discredit sharlatans like Steorn. To support Steorn is to discredit all alternative energy research and by default support the existing energy industries.

Erm, what happened to the whole burden of proof thing?

You are making a boatload of claims here. We need links that support your woo.

 

[joobz]

Erm, what happened to the whole burden of proof thing?

You are making a boatload of claims here. We need links that support your woo.

sure,
http://www1.eere.energy.gov/biomass/understanding_biomass.html

it's easy to provide when it has a solid foundation in actual science.

 

[g4macdad]

sure,
http://www1.eere.energy.gov/biomass/understanding_biomass.html

it's easy to provide when it has a solid foundation in actual science.

How is this proof of your claims about supporting steorn being bad for alternative fuel sources?

 

[fuelair]

You realize they will go to prison for this?

BTW I have no money invested in this. If the claim is true, money won't have much value anymore anyway. Not a good investment.

I do have lot's of money in oil though, I guess I am safe either way. Who is dumb again? LOL

If they have done it correctly, there is little chance they will go to prison, be successfully sued, etc. Unless they have taken money under demonstrably false pretenses............

 

[joobz]

How is this proof of your claims about supporting steorn being bad for alternative fuel sources?

You were not clear as to what you wanted "proof" of.

I gave my premises for the argument:

1.) steorn is clearly a joke and can't do what they claim
2.) Thier failure (and any other overunity device's failure) reduces public faith in alternative energy research, since people are not able to distinguish between them and honest research
3.) Lack of public support equals decrease in political support
4.) Lose of political support results in no government funding of alternative energy.

premise 1 was proved by steorn for us.
premise 2 is based upon people's general lack of scientific knowledge
premise 3 and 4 have historical basis. Look at funding of energy in the late 70's 1980's (early) when the US was in a gas crisis. Alternative fuel research boomed. In the mid to late 80's and all through 90s, when no crisis existed, funding dried up. We need public support to maintain political support.

 

[g4macdad]

You were not clear as to what you wanted "proof" of.

I gave my premises for the argument:

1.) steorn is clearly a joke and can't do what they claim
2.) Thier failure (and any other overunity device's failure) reduces public faith in alternative energy research, since people are not able to distinguish between them and honest research
3.) Lack of public support equals decrease in political support
4.) Lose of political support results in no government funding of alternative energy.

premise 1 was proved by steorn for us.
premise 2 is based upon people's general lack of scientific knowledge
premise 3 and 4 have historical basis. Look at funding of energy in the late 70's 1980's (early) when the US was in a gas crisis. Alternative fuel research boomed. In the mid to late 80's and all through 90s, when no crisis existed, funding dried up. We need public support to maintain political support.

premise 2 is based upon people's general lack of scientific knowledge

Doesn't this cancel out everything else you say? Or would you have us to believe you are some fantastic exception, without any exceptional proof that you are?

 

[joobz]

Doesn't this cancel out everything else you say? Or would you have us to believe you are some fantastic exception, without any exceptional proof that you are?

look into my past posts if you question my scientific knowledge. This thread would be a good start.

 

[Grimoire]

How is this proof of your claims about supporting steorn being bad for alternative fuel sources?

You ask for proof of this, but accept that Steorn as an OU device?!

 

[joobz]

You ask for proof of this, but accept that Steorn as an OU device?!

I don't mind. I'm providing defendable premises. I'm interested to see if he can tell the difference. Although, I'm starting to believe he's a troll. I can't imagine anyone being that dense.

 

[Ziggurat]

You realize they will go to prison for this?

No they won't. Nobody is going to be able to prove that they did this maliciously, rather than just having deluded themselves. And there's nothing illegal about the latter. Stupidity isn't a crime, and in cases like this, you can't actually prove that wasn't the cause.

 

[g4macdad]

No they won't. Nobody is going to be able to prove that they did this maliciously, rather than just having deluded themselves. And there's nothing illegal about the latter. Stupidity isn't a crime, and in cases like this, you can't actually prove that wasn't the cause.

o they won't. Nobody is going to be able to prove that they did this maliciously, rather than just having deluded themselves.

Proof?