Language: 
To browser these website, it's necessary to store cookies on your computer.
The cookies contain no personal information, they are required for program control.
  the storage of cookies while browsing this website, on Login and Register.

GDPR and DSGVO law

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

Google Search

Custom Search

Author Topic: Holcomb Energy Systems:Breakthrough technology to the world  (Read 31921 times)


Offline Lunkster

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 118
Re: Holcomb Energy Systems:Breakthrough technology to the world
« Reply #466 on: May 13, 2022, 04:05:11 PM »
Hi Everyone,

I am trying to get a better understanding of how the Holcomb generator can have a gain in the output coil when
the generator looks more like a transformer in its basic components.

The 16 sets of stator1, output coils, and stator 2 coils are intended to produce the 3 phase output signal
that is used in the industry today.  I get that.  So I believe that the OU should be able to
be demonstrated with one single set of Stator 1, output coil and stator 2 coils in the generator design.


 Does the air gap between the stators and the output coil have a critical function in producing OU
in Holcomb's generator design.  A permanent magnet has the same flux going into the magnet as the flux
leaving the magnet.   In the same way, the flux entering the drive coil is the same as the flux leaving the
drive coil.  Now since the output coil is wound tightly on the same core as the drive core, then the flux
entering and leaving the output coil has to be the same as the drive coil.  What happens to the output
coil when we put an air gap between the top and bottom of the output coil.  It will now allow another
flux path to occur through the output coil besides the drive coil flux.

With this air gap, will the drive coil flux flow through the output coil producing both an electrical current
and creating an magnet in the core of the output coil?  At this point power is being generated in the
output coil.  If the core is being changed into a magnet during this process, it then may generate even
electrical power in the output coil because the air gap provides an additional path for the additional flux
to flow in addition to the drive coils flux.

The power to the drive coil is now turned off.
The output coil's core is magnetized.  But it is decreasing in its strength.  It is this change in the
amount of flux flowing in the output coil that is generating electrical power in the generator
at this time.  So there is now power in the drive coil and the output coil is generating electrical energy
at this time.  The air gap is providing the path for this flux to flow.  It is not locked in a transformer core.

You have power in a pulse that is spent in a short duty cycle of the generators operation.
You have power generation in the output coil in a longer duty cycle while the core of the
output coil is turned into a magnet and then relaxes again all awhile the output coil is
generating electrical energy.

Now setting up an testing this simple configuration should be easy for someone to do.
If this works, then the 16 sets of stator1, output coil and stator 2's should work as well.

I would try to set up the experiment with a small flux bias in the primary coil as
I have already shared ideas in this thread on how to do it.

For those like me how like a sketch of what I have said, download the attached file.
The drawing shows one drive coil and one output coil because I think the Holcomb
generator can be reduced to this kind of a design configuration.

I hope I here from you about my idea's about this.  I have had some good
thoughts in the past along with a lot of bad ones.  So keep that in mind!

Lunkster

Online Ufopolitics

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 272
Re: Holcomb Energy Systems:Breakthrough technology to the world
« Reply #467 on: May 13, 2022, 04:33:47 PM »
Hi Everyone,

I am trying to get a better understanding of how the Holcomb generator can have a gain in the output coil when
the generator looks more like a transformer in its basic components.

The 16 sets of stator1, output coils, and stator 2 coils are intended to produce the 3 phase output signal
that is used in the industry today.  I get that.  So I believe that the OU should be able to
be demonstrated with one single set of Stator 1, output coil and stator 2 coils in the generator design.


Lunkster


Hello Lunkster,

If you are trying to understand this device, then leave aside all "conventional knowledge" about transformers...
This is NOT a "Typical" transformer...
Conventional Generators would -some how- help you better to understand how these devices work...well, sort of.

First, think of a Single Phase one...simple first.

Then Your mind set, would first need to "see" a Magnetic Field spinning within a Two Part Rotary Generator...forget about the coils and rotors spinning...just the magnetic field...and how it influences the Induction on the Stators...

Only then you would be ready to start thinking about these devices.

Regards

Ufopolitics

Offline rakarskiy

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 257
    • Personal Systems Free Energy (UA)
Re: Holcomb Energy Systems:Breakthrough technology to the world
« Reply #468 on: May 13, 2022, 04:37:54 PM »
Lunkster, you make the same mistake as the replicators of Figuer's idea.
The winding must be in a gap (groove) inside the core
Let me remind you once again the evolution of Figuer's replicators' error as the gap between the magnets turned into a coil on the core.

WATCH SLIDE


Online Ufopolitics

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 272
Re: Holcomb Energy Systems:Breakthrough technology to the world
« Reply #469 on: May 13, 2022, 05:04:54 PM »
Lunkster, you make the same mistake as the replicators of Figuer's idea.
The winding must be in a gap (groove) inside the core
Let me remind you once again the evolution of Figuer's replicators' error as the gap between the magnets turned into a coil on the core.

WATCH SLIDE


@Rakarkiy,

Please, let me ask you a simple question...Have You replicated Figuera's Generator Successfully?

If so, could You please show your videos where you are doing it successfully?...showing it self powering itself?

Because I DO have tried myself to replicate Figuera's Device, many, many ways, for a very long time, all possibilities...

and I DO have the proof, for years...in You Tube Videos...


The winding must be in a gap (groove) inside the core...

Your assumption, will not make any difference, Rakarskiy...

if that would be the "secret" to a "successful" Figuera..., then show it working!!


Ufopolitics

Online Ufopolitics

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 272
Re: Holcomb Energy Systems:Breakthrough technology to the world
« Reply #470 on: May 13, 2022, 05:10:12 PM »



The Phrase of the day...

Quote
...It is "so easy" to write here, showing to be an "Authority" on any given subject...
But, without any, absolutely any proof...

Anyone could do that...I mean, literally anyone.

I could also make very complicated graphics...and beautifully elaborated...Plus Animated... ;D

which will mean ABSOLUTELY "nada", nothing, without THE REAL PROOF


Ufopolitics

Offline rakarskiy

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 257
    • Personal Systems Free Energy (UA)
Re: Holcomb Energy Systems:Breakthrough technology to the world
« Reply #471 on: May 13, 2022, 06:59:47 PM »

@Rakarkiy,

Please, let me ask you a simple question...Have You replicated Figuera's Generator Successfully?

If so, could You please show your videos where you are doing it successfully?...showing it self powering itself?

Because I DO have tried myself to replicate Figuera's Device, many, many ways, for a very long time, all possibilities...

and I DO have the proof, for years...in You Tube Videos...

Your assumption, will not make any difference, Rakarskiy...

if that would be the "secret" to a "successful" Figuera..., then show it working!!


Ufopolitics

Ufopolitics, I don't want to prove anything to anyone. Don't like it, don't listen. My rule that everything we invent was invented by others is confirmed even in my case: by Figer, by Tesla, by many others, and now by Holcomb. I saw in Holcomb what I developed on my RAGEN - rotover without copying anyone. If you see, all questions will disappear.

Online Ufopolitics

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 272
Re: Holcomb Energy Systems:Breakthrough technology to the world
« Reply #472 on: May 13, 2022, 07:26:23 PM »
Ufopolitics, I don't want to prove anything to anyone. Don't like it, don't listen.


 ;D ...


Rakarskiy, basically you wrote:

Quote
all other Replicators of Figuera failed because of NOT winding inside a core gap..."

It would obviously mean that "You got it right"...that "You did it right"...and successfully...

And it happens, that I was one of those "Failed Replicators of Figuera"...

so, I am asking you...could you please, Enlighten Us All, failures, miserable mortals, that could not get it right!!

LOL


Freaking funny as sh*t



Ufopolitics

Online Ufopolitics

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 272
Re: Holcomb Energy Systems:Breakthrough technology to the world
« Reply #473 on: May 13, 2022, 08:23:09 PM »
Hi Rakarskiy

I read with interest what you said about the Holcomb technology. You linked it to Figuera's patent, which seems relevant, but very worrying since after more than a century we do not have any machine working according to Figuera's plan today. So won't we have any with Holcomb in 2122 either?

The problem with Holcomb is that in his patent, the energy is claimed to come from electron spin. So by talking about spin, Holcomb is relying on academic science to justify the extra energy produced.

If one considers the academic science incorrect, then the explanation by the spin does not make sense, and only the demonstration of the extra-energy by facts that everyone can observe and reproduce, is indispensable.

If we consider academic science correct, then :
- the imputation of extra-energy to electron spin is not valid since its mathematical formalism forbids the creation of energy in a closed system.
- or the imputation of extra-energy to the electron spin is valid but then the spin is only an intermediary capturing energy from elsewhere, so that Holcomb's explanation is incomplete and the real source of energy remains unknown
- or Holcomb ignores the source of the extra-energy, he just observes it, and he provides a bogus explanation in order to justify the extra-energy and make it credible for patentability and investors.

But what I see everywhere about Holcomb are digressions on magnetic fields and their couplings, based on the known rules of electromagnetism, which in no case can give rise to extra-energy.

As with all claims of overunity, there is a need to check the facts first. The problem with Holcomb's machine is that it is already an industrial machine, without proof of concept, i.e. without a simple setup based on the underlying principle involved in the phenomenon.
What would that principle be? What could be the elementary setup that would demonstrate it, even if it only produces a few mW?


I think this is the main interesting question. What is your analysis?


Excellent Post!!

How could I have missed it?

Figuera and Holcomb are completely different technologies...yes, both "move" the magnetic field itself (no cores, no coils movement)...and that is about the only thing in common they have.

1-Holcomb supposedly rotates field.
2-Figuera moves Field back and forth, by stepping up and down its currents by using resistors or inductors.


Regards


Ufopolitics

Offline rakarskiy

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 257
    • Personal Systems Free Energy (UA)
Re: Holcomb Energy Systems:Breakthrough technology to the world
« Reply #474 on: May 13, 2022, 08:46:13 PM »

Excellent Post!!

How could I have missed it?

Figuera and Holcomb are completely different technologies...yes, both "move" the magnetic field itself (no cores, no coils movement)...and that is about the only thing in common they have.

1-Holcomb supposedly rotates field.
2-Figuera moves Field back and forth, by stepping up and down its currents by using resistors or inductors.


Regards


Ufopolitics

Technology in sight. Once again I want to note on the example of a synchronous electric generator for a car, with field excitation from an electromagnet. To obtain the appropriate electromotive force in the stator slots, the electromagnet creates a magnetic flux with a corresponding magnetic induction. Mechanical force is needed to rotate the resulting magnetic field from the rotor. The conductor and the stator are stationary, the magnetic saturation of different poles moves inside the stator. Thus, there is no evidence that mechanical energy is converted into EMF. EMF in phases is a magnetic flux that changes with time. The wire is inside the core.

The maximum excitation current of the electromagnet is 5A, with an on-board network voltage of 12V. The maximum excitation power is 72 watts. The maximum output power of the generator is 1500 watts. What does it mean that the electromagnet created the corresponding magnetic flux (magnetic induction) to form an EMF, as a result of which, when the circuit is closed to the load, we have a current for 1500 watts of power. Do you explain this by the mechanical force of the drive?

The whole problem is that all researchers (independent), before doing, skip the design stage by parameters. Do you know the dimensionality of the magnetic induction in the stator slot when the field is rotated by switching electromagnets in your armature?

https://rakatskiy-blogspot-com.translate.goog/2018/12/permanent-magnet-constant-device.html?view=flipcard&_x_tr_sl=ru&_x_tr_tl=en&_x_tr_hl=ru&_x_tr_pto=wapp#!https://rakatskiy.blogspot.com/2018/12/permanent-magnet-constant-device.html

Online Ufopolitics

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 272
Re: Holcomb Energy Systems:Breakthrough technology to the world
« Reply #475 on: May 13, 2022, 11:03:42 PM »
Technology in sight. Once again I want to note on the example of a synchronous electric generator for a car, with field excitation from an electromagnet. To obtain the appropriate electromotive force in the stator slots, the electromagnet creates a magnetic flux with a corresponding magnetic induction. Mechanical force is needed to rotate the resulting magnetic field from the rotor. The conductor and the stator are stationary, the magnetic saturation of different poles moves inside the stator. Thus, there is no evidence that mechanical energy is converted into EMF. EMF in phases is a magnetic flux that changes with time. The wire is inside the core.

The maximum excitation current of the electromagnet is 5A, with an on-board network voltage of 12V. The maximum excitation power is 72 watts. The maximum output power of the generator is 1500 watts. What does it mean that the electromagnet created the corresponding magnetic flux (magnetic induction) to form an EMF, as a result of which, when the circuit is closed to the load, we have a current for 1500 watts of power. Do you explain this by the mechanical force of the drive?

The whole problem is that all researchers (independent), before doing, skip the design stage by parameters. Do you know the dimensionality of the magnetic induction in the stator slot when the field is rotated by switching electromagnets in your armature?

https://rakatskiy-blogspot-com.translate.goog/2018/12/permanent-magnet-constant-device.html?view=flipcard&_x_tr_sl=ru&_x_tr_tl=en&_x_tr_hl=ru&_x_tr_pto=wapp#!https://rakatskiy.blogspot.com/2018/12/permanent-magnet-constant-device.html


@Rakarskiy,


The worst example about generation of Energy in a typical Rotary Generator...is to cite a "Car Alternator"...

These things require so much torque, that only being attached to a car Engine will function properly...

Besides its arrangement of the Exciter is a waste of flux galore!!

I mean, look at it again!!...the Field is Static, however Poles are REDIRECTED to each upper-lower Solid Steel Rotor with tooth design...

Even the shaft of the Alternator gets magnetized!!

If it produces 1500 Watts is due all about Amperage...it needs around 200  to even 600 Amps torefil the battery after a few attempts to start the car...just because the Starter Motor requires around that much!!

It only produces from 12-14V Max...the rest is amperage to reach the 1500W...

And by the way, post above was not directed to you, but the guy who posted it originally did ask you to "analyze" the Holcomb Design...

It is a waste!!...only good to keep the 12V battery charged...




Ufopolitics

Offline onepower

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 848
Re: Holcomb Energy Systems:Breakthrough technology to the world
« Reply #476 on: May 13, 2022, 11:31:01 PM »
Ufopolitics
Quote
The Phrase of the day...
Quote
It is "so easy" to write here, showing to be an "Authority" on any given subject...
But, without any, absolutely any proof...

This was always the case regarding everything we have not seen first hand or proven for ourselves. I would suspect the majority of everything we were taught or read on any subject is accepted on good faith.

It's obviously a slippery slope because we can be judged in the same way and measure we judge others. Thus I could discard all scientific knowledge I have not seen first hand proof of in the same way my work could be judged. Some could argue thousands of people have proven something over decades. However I don't know all of them, I have not seen any proof first hand so I can discard there beliefs using the same kind of reasoning they have.

So we should be clear any supposed authority anyone believes they may have is for the most part imaginary. We are free to believe whatever we want... as it should be.

The way forward is to make a compelling argument based on logic, reason and justification. The better we can justify something the more credibility it has and then it's up to the readers to decide.

Regards
AC





Offline bistander

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 161
Re: Holcomb Energy Systems:Breakthrough technology to the world
« Reply #477 on: May 14, 2022, 05:31:45 AM »

@Rakarskiy,


The worst example about generation of Energy in a typical Rotary Generator...is to cite a "Car Alternator"...

These things require so much torque, that only being attached to a car Engine will function properly...

Besides its arrangement of the Exciter is a waste of flux galore!!

I mean, look at it again!!...the Field is Static, however Poles are REDIRECTED to each upper-lower Solid Steel Rotor with tooth design...

Even the shaft of the Alternator gets magnetized!!

If it produces 1500 Watts is due all about Amperage...it needs around 200  to even 600 Amps torefil the battery after a few attempts to start the car...just because the Starter Motor requires around that much!!

It only produces from 12-14V Max...the rest is amperage to reach the 1500W...
...
It is a waste!!...only good to keep the 12V battery charged...

Ufopolitics

Hi Ufo,
The Lundell (claw rotor) alternator has served the automotive industry and market well over a long span of years. You, and others, often bad-mouth the common 12V alternator found under the hood of practically every car for decades and decades, and for some valid reasons, primarily due to the competitive industry beating every last penny out of it, sacrificing energy efficiency and other attributes which you deem important. But the reasons which you mentioned above are not valid.

The claw rotor topology appears to be your main gripe. It is commonly called a Lundell rotor, and considered an MPM (Modulated Pole Machine) or transverse flux machine. Modern versions of this topology are used to design some excellent efficiency and power dense motors and generators. And recently, past decade or two, the automotive alternator design has been rethought in terms of costs of materials and process so they would require no more "engine torque" than another type of generator of similar specifications.

Manufacturing tolerance and cheap materials may in fact contribute to flux leakage, but I don't think the shaft is magnetized, and even if it was, a non(or slowly) changing flux is not a loss mechanism, so what's the big deal? We already mentioned efficiency and size.

The alternator doesn't need "around 200  to even 600 Amps torefil the battery after a few attempts to start the car." It is limited to the rating of the alternator, like 60 or 90A and takes a while longer to recharge the battery.

And it isn't uncommon to see experimenters repurpose standard old car or truck alternators to put out 100+ volts.

It is far from a "waste". It was a tremendous improvement over the commutator generator which it replaced.

I hope you can't delete this post. But it is off topic, but a valid reply to the nonsense which you posted.
Regards,
bi

Offline rakarskiy

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 257
    • Personal Systems Free Energy (UA)
Re: Holcomb Energy Systems:Breakthrough technology to the world
« Reply #478 on: May 14, 2022, 07:06:20 AM »
Quote
And by the way, post above was not directed to you, but the guy who posted it originally did ask you to "analyze" the Holcomb Design...

Design? Everything is simple there, these are two generators in one product. If we consider the "hardware" with grooves for the winding of the generator, then we will see the groove outside and inside. There is such an analogy in the system of generators, see the slide. The question is whether the availability of information on the network prevents someone from getting it. I was looking for an axial similar design and found a direct analogy with electromechanical.
Everything else according to the traditional algorithm, friends. There are no secrets, the design is only an engineering solution. What is not indicated is the electrical steel materials used, with which the maximum magnetic induction is achieved.

https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/12/9/1761 For the engine, and why  "NO" for the generator. By the way, now I know what Figuera wanted to say in the 1908 patent. The system did not give, published but corrected, and everything came to a standstill. Holcomb came up with the only correct solution for such a design.

As for the car generator, in order to move one electromagnet relative to another, which is installed statically, overcoming their mutual attraction, mechanical force is needed. The cause of EMF is the magnetic flux of the rotor, which has its own power consumption. When compared with the output power of a generator, explain the reason for the transformation under the action of a mechanical driving force in order to overcome the magnetic blocking of the electromagnets. All this can be organized by the electromagnet current control system, or by a combined electromagnet on/off system.

The alternator in the car's on-board circuit powers the loads and recharges the battery. After starting the car engine, you can generally remove the battery from the circuit. The approximate peak value of the generator current is up to 100 amperes. If it is at a speed of 100 km / h, the cost of mechanical drive force will be less. than at 40 km/h. The excitation current is changed to form the corresponding EMF. The current is the resultant force of the vortex magnetic field from another opera. When designing a particular device, engineers take into account the performance of tasks in various conditions. Designing a car generator is quite difficult.
« Last Edit: May 14, 2022, 02:47:58 PM by rakarskiy »

Online Ufopolitics

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 272
Re: Holcomb Energy Systems:Breakthrough technology to the world
« Reply #479 on: May 14, 2022, 06:41:12 PM »
Hi Ufo,
The Lundell (claw rotor) alternator has served the automotive industry and market well over a long span of years. You, and others, often bad-mouth the common 12V alternator found under the hood of practically every car for decades and decades, and for some valid reasons, primarily due to the competitive industry beating every last penny out of it, sacrificing energy efficiency and other attributes which you deem important. But the reasons which you mentioned above are not valid.

The claw rotor topology appears to be your main gripe. It is commonly called a Lundell rotor, and considered an MPM (Modulated Pole Machine) or transverse flux machine. Modern versions of this topology are used to design some excellent efficiency and power dense motors and generators. And recently, past decade or two, the automotive alternator design has been rethought in terms of costs of materials and process so they would require no more "engine torque" than another type of generator of similar specifications.

Not valid?...hahahahaha

A Car Alternator is designed to put out more Amperage than Voltage...is that a wrong statement?

A Car Alternator waste a lot of Magnetic Strenght due to the simple fact, known to everyone skilled in the Arts...and that is by using the "Claw" solid steel rotor, which redirects and fraction into "multiple poles" in a 90º (a portion) of the main magnetic strenght-volume of flux, which emanates specifically from both poles...and yes, of course main shaft gets most of this flux...that is the reason why, they have to build the rotor with such huge mass of steel on both claws caps, in order to ¨take away¨some more from the shaft...is this ¨not valid¨??!!

Manufacturing tolerance and cheap materials may in fact contribute to flux leakage, but I don't think the shaft is magnetized, and even if it was, a non(or slowly) changing flux is not a loss mechanism, so what's the big deal? We already mentioned efficiency and size.

The "big deal" or better called "bad efficiency" is precisely that...the way flux is redirected and angled at 90º and fractured into smaller, multiple poles...a waste.

If this design method would be ¨so efficient¨ then why it is not applied in ALL the High Voltage, High Amperage, Industrial and Home Generators?
Nope, ALL Rotary Generators Home and Industrial, use the DIRECT, STRAIGHT ANGLE, MAGNETIC POLE FACE TO STATOR FACE OPERATION, period!!
...Then I wonder why not using the Lundell "Design Technique"?... ;D

The alternator doesn't need "around 200  to even 600 Amps torefil the battery after a few attempts to start the car." It is limited to the rating of the alternator, like 60 or 90A and takes a while longer to recharge the battery.

What you have written above is SO WRONG, so NON SENSICAL!!...it just shows your TOTAL IGNORANCE on these fields.
just search, do your job...search online and you will see that Alternators for a typical 8 Cylinder car (not talking about a Toyota Corolla, or a Hyundai 4 Cylinders) REQUIRE FROM 170- 200 Amps!!

As a matter of fact, in order to get the right Battery for your car...besides the size to fit in the battery housing, the most important requirement to get the right battery is to know the right CRANKING AMPS...And "Cranking Amps" are NEVER, but NEVER RATED at 60-90 Amps!!

Cranking Amps starts at around 200A (for a very small vehicle, four cylinders)...and a Six Cylinders you are looking at 400-600 Cranking Amps.

And that is due to the other "Monster of Motor" utilized, to be able to Crank the Pistons with compression so the Farting Machines could start farting...the Starter Motor, which is also "designed" to consume so much Amperage to convert it in High Torque required to turn the Crankshaft.

After each successfull start (not failed) the battery amperage drops considerably, so the Alternator must refill it again during the drive...voltage-amperage regulator systems controls that operation.

Basically, after the start stage, during the vehicle normal operation, not so much amperage is required, except to run the AC Compressor Magnetic Clutch.
Ignition does not consume much, since it is operated thanks to Tesla design applied to the Ignition Coil, which utilizes low amperage and 12V to amplify into High Voltage to the spark plugs...and the rest are just the Electronics, the Entertainment System and Lights, etc,etc...

And it isn't uncommon to see experimenters repurpose standard old car or truck alternators to put out 100+ volts.

Same way it isn't uncommon to see experimenters use bicycle wheels as Generators... ;D

It is far from a "waste". It was a tremendous improvement over the commutator generator which it replaced.

From an ISOLATED point of view ANALYSIS (not looking at it as an accessory to the High Torque requirements of the Farting Machines) it is a bad design, a waste, just built to do what it must do...crank the high compressed pistons on every ICE.

I hope you can't delete this post. But it is off topic, but a valid reply to the nonsense which you posted.
Regards,
bi

Unfortunately, here I can not delete your post... I must admit that I love to do that...hahahaha

"A valid reply" to the nonsense I POSTED??!!

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA...Your point is just to find a spot to argue AGAINST whatever I write, no matter what it is about...

But it is OK...I am used to it....as a matter of fact, I find it very funny...


Ufopolitics