Storing Cookies (See : http://ec.europa.eu/ipg/basics/legal/cookies/index_en.htm ) help us to bring you our services at overunity.com . If you use this website and our services you declare yourself okay with using cookies .More Infos here:
https://overunity.com/5553/privacy-policy/
If you do not agree with storing cookies, please LEAVE this website now. From the 25th of May 2018, every existing user has to accept the GDPR agreement at first login. If a user is unwilling to accept the GDPR, he should email us and request to erase his account. Many thanks for your understanding

User Menu

Custom Search

Author Topic: quentron.com  (Read 1254780 times)

sarkeizen

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1923
Re: quentron.com
« Reply #1785 on: January 09, 2014, 04:20:46 AM »
What price would you sell the first proved 2nd law violators for?
I guess the same price for the first square circle or true falsehood.
Quote
They come in a presentation box with a test certificate and a certificate certifying they are a limited edition.
Seriously?  I mean I could point out all the stupid there but ask yourself this.  Philip has your knowledge of marketing, in the history of Quenco.  EVER been right?   You made a few hundred dollars on caricatures when you thought you would make a few million.
Quote
In any case I expect that professionals and universities will be the main buyers as it would cost them at least $5,000 to make their own.
I expect you will not sell all 100.  Care to wager?

Philip Hardcastle

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 326
Re: quentron.com
« Reply #1786 on: January 09, 2014, 05:10:10 AM »
I guess the same price for the first square circle or true falsehood.Seriously?  I mean I could point out all the stupid there but ask yourself this.  Philip has your knowledge of marketing, in the history of Quenco.  EVER been right?   You made a few hundred dollars on caricatures when you thought you would make a few million. I expect you will not sell all 100.  Care to wager?


Sure, contact me via my website contact form with your name and legitimate contact details and we can arrange a bet.








profitis

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3952
Re: quentron.com
« Reply #1787 on: January 09, 2014, 06:19:16 AM »
sarkeizen wont accept your bet @phillip.he wont even accept my challenge about the wikipedia cell.im going to bet him too that he wont EVER bring a scientist friend onboard to explain to us how to kill that wikipedia cell.

sarkeizen

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1923
Re: quentron.com
« Reply #1788 on: January 09, 2014, 12:45:58 PM »
Sure, contact me via my website contact form with your name and legitimate contact details and we can arrange a bet.
Why would you need my contact info to bet with me here?  I read over your posts on that moletrap place you talked about and I don't see where you asked for any of their real names and addresses.  Perhaps you can give me a quote?  Oh and hey isn't this some of the same info you demanded from the owner of this website so that you could sue me?

Thanks for pointing that place out. It really cemented my skepticism of you and your claims and let me see the full cycle of "Just wait until..." nonsense.

So now that you are talking to me, what is your timeline for selling 100 crazymachines?
sarkeizen wont accept your bet
Actually it's MY bet moron-boy and it looks like Philip is going to weasel out of it just like he has with other people.  He's going to put an arbitrary restriction on it just like he's done elsewhere.  Then he's going to artificially inflate the importance of that restriction.  "Oh I only bet with people who own an elephant.  I would love to bet with you but you just don't have an elephant."  Of course he won't say "elephant" he'll appeal to arbitrary and abstract concepts like honor (not to be confused with honesty) and bravery.
Quote
he wont even accept my challenge about
...being stupid.  Yes.  I confess fully, that I don't engage in being stupid nearly as much as you do.

I've been pretty straight-forward.  You made a series of pretty strong statements about batteries which last eternally.  I took issue with them not just because I think they are wrong but because it appeared they could be reasonably settled.  If most or all textbooks clearly said: "Hey here's how to make a battery that will run eternally" then it would be easy to point out one I could find.  Even if most or all textbooks only made such statements from which it could be deduced that eternal batteries could be made.  Again this would be easy for you to quote a text and then supply a formal argument. 

Anything less would mean that you are either wrong about the outcome or wrong about the strength with which you asserted it and would likely expose your assumptions and possibly your error.  All good things.

Instead what has happened?  You have lied repeatedly.  You have spent months alternating between avoiding supporting your point and attempting to distract away from your point by trying to get me involved in discussions which are either monumentally stupid or poorly defined.

Sorry, not interested.  Especially since I think I just won an argument with you and you can't be honest and admit it.

So now you're on distraction tactic #523.  Make up a position which you think is stronger and then try to bully me into arguing it.  Again I have to ask you.  Do these tactics of yours ever work?  If not, perhaps you could ask your home room teacher to direct you to some place where you can learn better ones.  If so, I suggest that all those people who say "You're a good arguer" are stupid.

profitis

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3952
Re: quentron.com
« Reply #1789 on: January 09, 2014, 05:42:49 PM »
geez calm down @sarkeizen.sorry for being a bully.i only asked you to bring a scientist on to explain how a textbook cell runs owta juice.i didnt ask you to find the lost ark for me man,yeoowwch..

sarkeizen

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1923
Re: quentron.com
« Reply #1790 on: January 09, 2014, 05:50:36 PM »
geez calm down @sarkeizen
You keep thinking you're exciting.  You are continually incorrect.

profitis

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3952
Re: quentron.com
« Reply #1791 on: January 09, 2014, 05:59:16 PM »
i am? Where in the textbook am i 'incorrect' @sarkeizen.

sarkeizen

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1923
Re: quentron.com
« Reply #1792 on: January 09, 2014, 06:05:57 PM »

profitis

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3952
Re: quentron.com
« Reply #1793 on: January 09, 2014, 06:17:42 PM »
its incorrect to ask for evidence of the kelvin statement in a textbook cell? Even on paper?@sarkeizen?

sarkeizen

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1923
Re: quentron.com
« Reply #1794 on: January 09, 2014, 06:20:37 PM »
its incorrect to ask for evidence of the kelvin statement in a textbook cell? Even on paper?@sarkeizen?
No it's incorrect to think you are doing much above boring me.

profitis

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3952
Re: quentron.com
« Reply #1795 on: January 09, 2014, 06:30:36 PM »
uh-huh so you dont think its incorrect to ask for evidence of kelvins statement then.now that thats cleared can you provide it in this case then please @sarkeizen

sarkeizen

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1923
Re: quentron.com
« Reply #1796 on: January 09, 2014, 06:42:21 PM »
uh-huh so you dont think its incorrect to ask for evidence of kelvins statement then.now that thats cleared can you provide it in this case then please @sarkeizen
You need to re-think how "no" is used in English.  As I said earlier.  Your other point etc.. isn't something I'm interested in talking about until you clarify your point concerning textbooks necessitating eternal batteries.

As far as I see you've already admitted that this other point (whatever it is) is either irrelevant, weaker than your textbook or invalidates your textbook point.  Not to mention that it appears to be an argument from ignorance. :D :D :D

Come back when you're not being stupid.

profitis

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3952
Re: quentron.com
« Reply #1797 on: January 09, 2014, 07:20:55 PM »
lol! @englishmaster- sarkeizen.this discussion has become a joke man.im asking you to prevent a textbook device from being branded perpetual motion and youre asking me to unprevent it from being branded perpetual motion.dont you think that the righteous deed is now on you to defend kelvins statement?for the sake of showing me up as incorrect (as you claim)at least?then you can show me up as the liar you claim me to be.catch me out @sarkeizen coz my ego is growing fast here by the minute and i dont like it when my ego gets ahead of me.

sarkeizen

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1923
Re: quentron.com
« Reply #1798 on: January 09, 2014, 07:52:18 PM »
lol! @englishmaster- sarkeizen.this discussion has become a joke man.
Yes, you made it a joke by being an EOA.
Quote
im asking you to prevent a textbook device from being branded perpetual motion
Sorry.  Don't care.  You were the one who made the statement about eternal batteries.  Which I cornered you on in two posts and you spent months backing away from.
Quote
and youre asking me to unprevent it from being branded perpetual motion
No I'm not.  I've asked you to defend a statement which you claimed was true and implied easy to demonstrate.  You have spent months avoiding answering some of the most simple and obvious questions and attempting to distract with other questions that are either vague to the point of being useless, irrelevant or invalidate your own point.
Quote
then you can show me up as the liar you claim me to be
Dude.  You have admitted to being a liar, twice.  I don't think I need to do any more work here.
Quote
.catch me out @sarkeizen coz my ego is growing fast here by the minute and i dont like it when my ego gets ahead of me.
I'm pretty sure I don't care.  Be as stupid as you want troll-boy.

profitis

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3952
Re: quentron.com
« Reply #1799 on: January 09, 2014, 08:49:22 PM »
you really truly are sillier than i thought you were @sarkeizen.power,my friend,in science,lies in the ability to demonstrate something,regardless of what any book says.thats why i keep pushing you with my demonstrate rhetoric i.e. to pivot my point ruthlessly to the public,who are the ones which count here at the end of the day.in other words you can use wikipedia to tell you how to build a magical unicorn if your smart enough,let alone an self-repeating battery,and nobody would give a dam,especially you.