I won't be able to post the particulars as they're copying us on EF.com and predating their posts.

Could we see some evidence of this? There is a private thread there that does not show up. The part about "predating" a post is practically impossible, if not difficult. Are you reading too much into all this?

And while I'm on the subject I'd remind you that Admin at EF.com - or specifically Aaron - is more than co-operating with their intentions as he has buried my own thread which had some marginal prominence being in a 'top 20' reference.  He ditched this top 20 reference the minute they banned me.  Now the only mention is to a MOSFET HEATING circuit which is precisely my own circuit but with absolutely no reference to me as the initiator.  The implication being that this is now Harvey's and Glen's discovery.

Also.  Harvey went to some lengths to explain that Glen never replicated our earlier experiment, this based on the fact that Glen only achieved COP>4 where we reached COP >17.  But his reasoning here is difficult to follow - quite apart from which  the actual COP on that replication measured COP>7. 

Then too, Harvey has littered that thread with some intensely partial refences to the 'dangers' in the technology - coupled with some exotic calculations of energy that are laughably inaccurate and others that are entirely incorrect - or non-classical - or 'flawed' is probably a better way to describe them.  All of them now claiming to a zero benefit in the technology.  And while he posts these concerns and these calculations, liberally,  it seems that, nonetheless, they are continuing to explore the technology and keep that thread in full view in the opening chapters of the forum - so to speak - highlighted for all to study with full frontal focus.  Just too many contradictions to incline one to any sense of credibility.  And all that coupled with the inevitable 'private messaging' that they both indulge - where they advise the general public that I'm intellectually bereft and compulsively unable to tell the truth.

So.  Yes.  I'm inclined to believe that with the combined force of Aaron's skills on the internet and with their own vested interests in this technology - that there would certainly be the motivation to 'alter' the facts - and even the wherewithall.  But I have no PROOF.  It's not a mistake that I'll make again.

Regards,
Rosemary
http://www.scribd.com/doc/33937867/IF-I-WAS-A-TROLL

skcusitrah/hartisucks, you really don't know much about forum code and how it stores information in a database do you? 'predating' is as simple as you... you simply edit the timestamp in the database.  sql is NOT difficult, nor impossible.
ie: 'UPDATE table_name SET column1=value, column2=value2,...WHERE some_column=some_value'

A hack such as wilbyinebriated may be able to edit the date on a post, but it's not likely the EF admin went to such trouble. For what? Speculating that they did is almost laughable. And your layman poster would not have this access.

A hack such as wilbyinebriated may be able to edit the date on a post, but it's not likely the EF admin went to such trouble. For what? Speculating that they did is almost laughable. And your layman poster would not have this access.

We'll never know skcusitrah.  You may very well be as right as wrong.  But don't accuse either Harvey or Glen of being 'laymen' posters.  In any event, the simple point is that the question is irrelevant provided I keep the details of the resistor and the housing to ourselves - as required.  I really don't think that there's any aspect of this simple technology that can still be 'claimed' or 'patented'.  But I also think it's as well to exercise a little caution.  It's not happy experience to firstly disclose my technology to the public - then have it replicated  - and then hear that the replicators now consider it their discovery.  Why?  Why do they want this ownership?  Unless they intend some kind of intellectual property rights. 

But DO NOT assume that EF.Com Admin are not actively assisting in this effort to lose association of my name with that technology.  They most CERTAINLY are.  That worries me more than Glen or Harvey.  The more so as the evidence is that they've rather co-operated in 'losing' ALL the work that I've done, or 'burying' it.  But - there could possibly be a motive.  Aaron subscribes to the electron currrent flow and I suspect his books are based on this.  I know he presumes to teach the public on matters scientific.  In any event I think I was too much in the face of Bedini followers and such like and there's no question the theses are diametrically opposed.  I've got emails on record where Aaron has advised me that I 'had no right' to reference the thesis in our 'paper'.  Why he should see fit to comment is beyond me.  But that seemed to be a privotal complaint. 

But Guys, doesn't all this strike you as odd?  We have two forums - apparently dedicated to OU technology.  And we have at least one over unity technology that stands up to the most stringent scrutiny based, as it is, on equally stringent measurment protocols.  But I read on both threads the fact that notwithstanding this, the vast majority of the members here consider that OU has NEVER been breached.  I read things like 'show me proof'.  Or.  'There is absolutely no evidence'.  Whole threads dedicated to discussions on 'whether it can be achieved' - or others with partial explanations why perpetual motion can NEVER allow more energy into a system.  It's everywhere.  It's as if this entire dedicated year of disclosure and replication on this technology was also entirely a waste of time.  It would have been so nice if there had - at least - been some 'public' acknowledgement on these forums.  The joke of it is that the interest has now spread to the public and mainstream that there is more tangible evidence of interest there than here.  Has this over unity drive now served its purpose and spent it's own energy?  A spent force?  I certainly hope not.  It's still much needed - on so many levels.  But it would be as well to 'lead' the acknowledgement of evidence - rather than otherwise.  Else - these forums will become a 'bigger' joke than mainstream's early refusal to look at the evidence.

Kind regards,
Rosemary

Most people die trying to get a patent, other people just sell their products adding the words "Patent Pending".

Jesus

Most people die trying to get a patent, other people just sell their products adding the words "Patent Pending".

Jesus

I don't think you can add just like that 'Patent Pending' without actually filing for a patent.

Change the date of this post by a month then.

Until this happens, these two are only blowing hot air like usual.

i love it when people who have no clue about a technology (php code and sql databases) presume to tell those of us who have a clue, about how said tech works...

your second sentence is a logical fallacy.

edit: i can set up a forum, you can create yourself an account, then make a post and i will change the post date...