Author Topic: New invention of motion less generation of electric power (Read 350881 times)

teslaalset · « **Reply #255 on:** October 05, 2009, 04:39:12 PM »

I would still be interested in how Ali did the AC version and it's phenomenon though.....

jibbguy · « **Reply #256 on:** October 05, 2009, 05:03:55 PM »

Yes of course LENR... The technology that was denied for twenty years until continued suppression looked so idiotic and they were forced to accept it... And the naysayers and paid shills were all left with their asses hanging out in the wind

YeahRight · « **Reply #257 on:** October 05, 2009, 05:57:31 PM »

I don't believe there have been any suppression involved in the case of Cold Fusion.
When reported it was replicated over and over by universities but it is so extremely
hard to successfully run a cold fusion setup. And I'm not yet sure the new progress
really is cold fusion or just some other reaction behaving very similar to cold fusion.
I keep a tight track on progress reports and so far I have not seen any rock solid
evidence on a successful cold fusion result. (Being replicated and confirmed that is)

If I'm wrong on this please direct me to a successful cold fusion experiment that is
replicated and confirmed by validated universities or other serious research groups.

jibbguy · « **Reply #258 on:** October 05, 2009, 06:52:06 PM »

Lol there are over 120 successful Studies and Papers of them (last year when i checked anyway, prolly more now). Why direct you there, so you can just piss on them with absolutely nothing to back you?

Find them yourself, They certainly exist

Do something besides sneer for once.

You cant pull that shit here, these are highly regarded professors with impeccable records for scientific accuracy... They make naysayers blowing bubbles out of their ass look like stuttering retards.

If you "don't like it" that they have verified the effect over a hundred times, and that it also removes radiation from nearby metals that are radioactive, or that it can transmute elements (lol show us a law of Chemistry that accounts for that), too friggin bad, and frankly, no one cares.

We've had it with the likes of you.... Show us something besides "no", or bugger off.

tagor · « **Reply #259 on:** October 05, 2009, 06:57:05 PM »

Quote from: YeahRight on October 05, 2009, 05:57:31 PM

I don't believe there have been any suppression involved in the case of Cold Fusion.
When reported it was replicated over and over by universities but it is so extremely
hard to successfully run a cold fusion setup. And I'm not yet sure the new progress
really is cold fusion or just some other reaction behaving very similar to cold fusion.
I keep a tight track on progress reports and so far I have not seen any rock solid
evidence on a successful cold fusion result. (Being replicated and confirmed that is)

If I'm wrong on this please direct me to a successful cold fusion experiment that is
replicated and confirmed by validated universities or other serious research groups.

now there is a lot of replication and easy to replicate
but with a lot of money for the component
and very little money for the experimenters !!

teslaalset · « **Reply #260 on:** October 05, 2009, 08:11:55 PM »

Guys, can you stay on topic?
Cold fusion is discussed elsewhere in this forum
Thanks.

YeahRight · « **Reply #261 on:** October 05, 2009, 09:25:35 PM »

Now you are rude. When did it become bad manners to question unverified results?
I asked you to direct me to a validated study of cold fusion and you behave like a 12 year old puberty boy.
I looked through the so called evidence you refer to and there is still no validated and confirmed
reports on 100% working cold fusion without the slightest doubt. You seem to believe cold fusion is
an everyday science 'working good' at this moment and confirmed with real proof and data.

You should respond nicely when asked for evidence but instead you react erratic just like a FE fanatic.

Here's one of the latest CF reports but this is still not evidence, just hopes based on early test results.
http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5j2QobOQnlULUZ7oalSRUVjnlHjng
But this report doesn't matter as long as no others can replicate the process in a repeatable way.

Quote from: jibbguy on October 05, 2009, 06:52:06 PM

Lol there are over 120 successful Studies and Papers of them (last year when i checked anyway, prolly more now). Why direct you there, so you can just piss on them with absolutely nothing to back you?

Find them yourself, They certainly exist Do something besides sneer for once.

You cant pull that shit here, these are highly regarded professors with impeccable records for scientific accuracy... They make naysayers blowing bubbles out of their ass look like stuttering retards.

If you "don't like it" that they have verified the effect over a hundred times, and that it also removes radiation from nearby metals that are radioactive, or that it can transmute elements (lol show us a law of Chemistry that accounts for that), too friggin bad, and frankly, no one cares.

We've had it with the likes of you.... Show us something besides "no", or bugger off.

jibbguy · « **Reply #262 on:** October 05, 2009, 10:08:01 PM »

Lol "Google news" reports.. hehehe that is NOT what people mean when they say "Google it"

And that mainstream powder puff article proves what again? Nothing at all. It certainly does not cover your previous statements. Do you have a Paper to cite that debunks it?

Why waste time on this? I won't

Ive done the research, published my findings a year before the Navy announcement or Sixty Minutes program. If you haven't seen it, too friggin bad, im not the "JibWiki". I am always glad to post links for those legitimately interested in learning.. But as i said before, you can bugger off now for all i care... Go make a new forum name maybe and re-invent yourself as someone that is worth listening to, cause you've shown us what you are with your first posts here (those that haven't seen them yet, forum "Search" his name and read them).

Rudeness comes to those who deserve it. Lol you guys always act shocked when someone won't take your crap online. And it's always hilarious, when these "people" who come on with the ad hominem and derision attacks, try the "how terribly rude" complaints when they get it thrown back at them: Only done more effectively

This forum is for study and learning of shared interests, and if you come here to piss on us, YOU WILL GET WET, because thats what happens when you piss up a rope.

YeahRight · « **Reply #263 on:** October 05, 2009, 10:52:16 PM »

The link was just Citing the US Navy laboratory and there is nothing wrong by that.
If you are so sure of Cold Fusion evidence, then you better hand over some real proof to support
your claims. Unless you can do that instead of all the whining, then there is no real proof.

C'mon. Give me some real proof on 100% certified cold fusion. This is the only thing I ask from you.
I bet you can't do this!

jibbguy · « **Reply #264 on:** October 05, 2009, 11:20:32 PM »

Lol you are being absurd... Hehehe you post the first garbage that comes up in a search, and act like you've proved the existence of Atlantis.

Besides, there is nothing we could post that wouldn't get attacked as "crap", because that is what you do. Now, that certainly wouldn't change any minds around here, but, that is the case nonetheless.

So forget it. I've got a better idea:

You explain to us, with research and links, why 120 Peer-Reviewed Published Papers.. Nearly ALL of them done outside of the U.S., on successful replications of LENR (thats the number as of 2008, there are more now)... "Are crap and don't prove anything".

http://www.lenr-canr.org/FilesAlphabetical.htm

Have fun.

hartiberlin · « **Reply #265 on:** October 05, 2009, 11:37:36 PM »

Please stay ontopic with the ALI MEG device .

Please post comments about cold fusion into this topic thread.
Thanks.

Regards, Stefan. (admin)

YeahRight · « **Reply #266 on:** October 05, 2009, 11:38:25 PM »

Great. Lot's of reading.

I'll have a look and give my verdict on eventual cold fusion success.

mscoffman · « **Reply #267 on:** October 06, 2009, 05:06:18 PM »

Quote from: YeahRight on October 05, 2009, 11:38:25 PM

Great. Lot's of reading.
I'll have a look and give my verdict on eventual cold fusion success.

Here is the best one;

http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/StringhamRcavitationb.pdf

If you can understand what he is talking about, each sentence says
something important...and...he is not saying "maybe". Extra heat
energy actually begins to interfere with his experiment. This
is real deal, except he doesn't talk about the details of the
physics, nor does he talk much about the full range of target
materials in this paper.

:S:MarkSCoffman

YeahRight · « **Reply #268 on:** October 06, 2009, 08:31:45 PM »

I've been reading a lot of these reports and I'm still being ambivalent on actual CF.
There is a great need for lots of more progress before the final decision can be made.
Now, the end of CF talk. Let's return to Ali's motion less generation of electric power.

FatBird · « **Reply #269 on:** October 12, 2009, 01:50:09 AM »

Ali, PLEASE talk to us.

Anything new?

What are you presently working on?

.

News:

User Menu

Author Topic: New invention of motion less generation of electric power (Read 350881 times)

teslaalset

Re: New invention of motion less generation of electric power

jibbguy

Re: New invention of motion less generation of electric power

YeahRight

Re: New invention of motion less generation of electric power

jibbguy

Re: New invention of motion less generation of electric power

tagor

Re: New invention of motion less generation of electric power

teslaalset

Re: New invention of motion less generation of electric power

YeahRight

Re: New invention of motion less generation of electric power

jibbguy

Re: New invention of motion less generation of electric power

YeahRight

Re: New invention of motion less generation of electric power

jibbguy

Re: New invention of motion less generation of electric power

hartiberlin

Re: New invention of motion less generation of electric power

YeahRight

Re: New invention of motion less generation of electric power

mscoffman

Re: New invention of motion less generation of electric power

YeahRight

Re: New invention of motion less generation of electric power

FatBird

Re: New invention of motion less generation of electric power