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.
Amazon Warehouse Deals ! Now even more Deep Discounts ! Check out these great prices on slightly used or just opened once only items.I always buy my gadgets via these great Warehouse deals ! Highly recommended ! Many thanks for supporting OverUnity.com this way.

User Menu

Plug Heater

Powerbox

Smartbox

3D Solar

3D Solar Panels

DC2DC converter

Micro JouleThief

FireMatch

FireMatch

CCKnife

CCKnife

CCTool

CCTool

Magpi Magazine

Magpi Magazine Free Rasberry Pi Magazine

Battery Recondition

Battery Recondition

Arduino

Ultracaps

YT Subscribe

Gravity Machines

Tesla-Ebook

Magnet Secrets

Lindemann Video

Navigation

Products

Products

WaterMotor kit

Statistics

  • *Total Members: 83391
  • *Latest: JaneRyan

  • *Total Posts: 509744
  • *Total Topics: 15193
  • *Online Today: 44
  • *Most Online: 103
(December 19, 2006, 11:27:19 PM)
  • *Users: 4
  • *Guests: 10
  • *Total: 14

Author Topic: The fate of Harold Aspden  (Read 37052 times)

Offline CompuTutor

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 438
Re: The fate of Harold Aspden
« Reply #15 on: February 19, 2011, 07:39:15 AM »
For seeing the sunshine, don't look at obscurantism.
 :)

Are you serious, dude, wow

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: The fate of Harold Aspden
« Reply #15 on: February 19, 2011, 07:39:15 AM »

Offline exnihiloest

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 716
Re: The fake of Harold Aspden
« Reply #16 on: February 19, 2011, 11:35:12 AM »
FFS, the guy has a stroke and you want to grandstand. You really are a low life pompous git.

Insults don't change anything about crackpots verbiage whose uselessness and void is obviously not detected by unskilled people.
Those who measure the truth of theories with the sickness of their authors, are simply absolute jerks.


Offline exnihiloest

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 716
Re: The fate of Harold Aspden
« Reply #17 on: February 19, 2011, 11:50:12 AM »
Are you serious, dude, wow

No confirmed observation of anomalies, no prediction of new facts, no experiments that work.
It looks like science, it has words from science, it has the taste of science, but it's not science.


Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: The fate of Harold Aspden
« Reply #17 on: February 19, 2011, 11:50:12 AM »
Sponsored links:




Offline Ted Ewert

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 48
Re: The fake of Harold Aspden
« Reply #18 on: February 19, 2011, 05:55:54 PM »
http://haroldaspden.com/index.htm

It is stated:
"Harold Aspden is a brilliant theoretical physicist, electrical engineer and inventor".
Unfortunately his theory is not supported by a single one duplicable working experiment, with expected results differing from what conventional science predicts.
If you have experimented like me his resonant double-capacitor or tri-axial capacitor, you must have come to the conclusion that he is a crackpot. Like Bearden: not physics but overdone verbiage in fuzzy layman terms, no accuracy, no quantified fact, nothing to observe.
I also have to agree here. Anyone who publicly formulates a theory or design should have a working model to back his claims up. Why can't guys like Bearden, Aspden and Lindemann display a simple working model of their "overunity" theories? They claim to have impressive academic credentials, and years of study and experience in the field, but somehow fail to deliver the goods.
If these guys are really who they claim to be, where's the proof? If a guy can write a book and get it published, he can certainly build a small working model of his theories. Bearden claims the MEG works, but that's BS. I've built a lot of MEGS and none of them work. The MEG is a red herring. I haven't heard of anyone else getting one to work either, except Nauden, which I find highly suspicious.
I've also tried to get Aspden's theories to work without any success. These guys are all talk and no substance. If you doubt me try and get one of their theories to actually work.
If I ever claim that something works you can be damn sure I've built and tested it first. I'll have pictures, diagrams or a video, and a full explanation of exactly what I've done. I will also be happy to answer questions or to assist anyone who wants to try and replicate my claims. That's how it should be. Anything less is unacceptable.
We should never be reluctant to demand proof of any claim.

Ted

Offline WilbyInebriated

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3143
Re: The fake of Harold Aspden
« Reply #19 on: February 19, 2011, 06:59:07 PM »
We should never be reluctant to demand proof of any claim.

Ted
demanding makes you sounds a bit like an impetuous child, requesting would be more appropriate. that being said, there are far too few people even requesting proof of lindemann, bearden, etc. and that is why they are still in business and will continue to be...

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: The fake of Harold Aspden
« Reply #19 on: February 19, 2011, 06:59:07 PM »
Sponsored links:




Offline Ted Ewert

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 48
Re: The fake of Harold Aspden
« Reply #20 on: February 19, 2011, 09:01:02 PM »
demanding makes you sounds a bit like an impetuous child, requesting would be more appropriate. that being said, there are far too few people even requesting proof of lindemann, bearden, etc. and that is why they are still in business and will continue to be...
The point is that these clowns are frauds and need to be exposed. They baffle people with their BS by using vague technical jargon and acting like they're exposing some big secret. The reality is that they aren't revealing anything of value. They won't tell you how to build a device which generates any meaningful amount of energy. They won't explain to you how to produce any real power with all that "energy from the vacuum". All they do is produce copious quantities of BS from the vacuum, which they then turn around and sell in books and DVDs. It's all crap yet these guys are revered and respected in the community.
I can say this because I got sucked in too, initially. The difference is that I actually built a lot of their devices, and tried out their theories, and found out that even though they sounded good, they didn't work at all. I spent a lot of time and money to find out the hard way that these guys are phonies.
No, I don't think demanding proof is impetuous or childish at all. With all the con men and disinformation in this field it's the least we can do.

Offline exnihiloest

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 716
Re: The fake of Harold Aspden
« Reply #21 on: February 20, 2011, 12:26:44 PM »
demanding makes you sounds a bit like an impetuous child, requesting would be more appropriate.
...

It sounds like a speech of a priest reproaching to his flock of asking a proof of god:
"My childish sons, you must believe and keep faith. In order your faith not to be deceived, don't ask questions, don't demand evidence, don't use your mind, don't use reason, remain blind!"  ;D

Hey guys, we are not in a sect!


Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: The fake of Harold Aspden
« Reply #21 on: February 20, 2011, 12:26:44 PM »
Sponsored links:




Offline FatBird

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1186
Re: The fate of Harold Aspden
« Reply #22 on: February 20, 2011, 02:02:46 PM »
Excellent Points Ted.

I sure know what you mean.

.

Offline WilbyInebriated

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3143
Re: The fake of Harold Aspden
« Reply #23 on: February 20, 2011, 03:11:51 PM »
It sounds like a speech of a priest reproaching to his flock of asking a proof of god:
"My childish sons, you must believe and keep faith. In order your faith not to be deceived, don't ask questions, don't demand evidence, don't use your mind, don't use reason, remain blind!"  ;D

Hey guys, we are not in a sect!
your response does not address my post whatsoever... ::) i never said anything about "keeping the faith" or "don't ask questions" or "don't use reason, remain blind" this is nothing but pure hyperbole wrapped up in a nice red herring. i said, "demanding makes you sound like an impetuous child". that being said, go ahead demand all day and all night, see if you put them out of business... ::)

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: The fake of Harold Aspden
« Reply #23 on: February 20, 2011, 03:11:51 PM »
3D Solar Panels

Offline exnihiloest

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 716
Re: The fake of Harold Aspden
« Reply #24 on: February 21, 2011, 08:54:00 AM »
your response does not address my post whatsoever... ::)
...

It does.
The emptiness of experimental observations in favor of Aspen's theories leads to conclude that he has theories that explain...  no facts!
By confusing a critical mind asking for evidence, with caprices, you ignore what is scientific methodology and I'm afraid that you are not conscious of the religious mood of your behavior.


Offline WilbyInebriated

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3143
Re: The fake of Harold Aspden
« Reply #25 on: February 22, 2011, 01:38:25 AM »
It does.
The emptiness of experimental observations in favor of Aspen's theories leads to conclude that he has theories that explain...  no facts!
By confusing a critical mind asking for evidence, with caprices, you ignore what is scientific methodology and I'm afraid that you are not conscious of the religious mood of your behavior.
no, it doesn't... ::)
i said. and i quote: "demanding makes you sounds a bit like an impetuous child, requesting would be more appropriate." and you are going off on something irrelevant to what i posted, while quoting me. ::) ie: i am not talking about his theories, whatever your opinion is on them. i am talking about the simple fact that demanding anything from anyone makes you sound a bit like an impetuous child...

furthermore, my post had no "religious mood" to it whatsoever... i never mentioned religion in any form at all. that is just more of your patently false hyperbole. ::)

tu stultus es. q.e.d.

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: The fake of Harold Aspden
« Reply #25 on: February 22, 2011, 01:38:25 AM »
3D Solar Panels

Offline exnihiloest

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 716
Re: The fake of Harold Aspden
« Reply #26 on: February 22, 2011, 09:41:34 AM »
...
i am talking about the simple fact that demanding anything from anyone makes you sound a bit like an impetuous child...
...

Your remark was off topic. And it is exactly what I said: you are confusing the scientific method requiring evidence, with reactions of "impetuous child".
Normally we would not even have to ask evidence. It should be already provided in the theory, as we can see it when we read Einstein's 1905 paper about relativity. It is the difference between a genius like Einstein and a crackpot like Aspden.
If you see a scientist requiring evidence, as an "impetuous child", the problem is on your side. It is not a "fact" but just a biased view and a subjective and psychological digression. To put it in bold doesn't change anything. Evidence requirement is the only way to make progress in science.
All progress comes from questions, even from scientists themselves. To ask proofs doesn't make the enquirer an "impetious child". We have not to accept what is asserted as a religious indisputable matter.
Science succeeds in convincing the skeptics thanks to experimental and logical evidence. If people as Aspden, Bearden and others totally fail, having only unskilled people as followers, the reason is that they don't make science but gibberish.


Offline WilbyInebriated

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3143
Re: The fake of Harold Aspden
« Reply #27 on: February 22, 2011, 11:07:43 AM »
Your remark was off topic. And it is exactly what I said: you are confusing the scientific method requiring evidence, with reactions of "impetuous child".
Normally we would not even have to ask evidence. It should be already provided in the theory, as we can see it when we read Einstein's 1905 paper about relativity. It is the difference between a genius like Einstein and a crackpot like Aspden.
If you see a scientist requiring evidence, as an "impetuous child", the problem is on your side. It is not a "fact" but just a biased view and a subjective and psychological digression. To put it in bold doesn't change anything. Evidence requirement is the only way to make progress in science.
All progress comes from questions, even from scientists themselves. To ask proofs doesn't make the enquirer an "impetious child". We have not to accept what is asserted as a religious indisputable matter.
Science succeeds in convincing the skeptics thanks to experimental and logical evidence. If people as Aspden, Bearden and others totally fail, having only unskilled people as followers, the reason is that they don't make science but gibberish.
no, it was not. i responded to a specific comment by ted... i wasn't even speaking to you moron. i haven't confused anything with the scientific method... i have merely stated that demanding anything makes you sound like an impetuous child, which it does. if you don't like it, go cry to your mommy... ::) in point of fact, scientific method has no "requirement" for demanding... if evidences are not forthwith, the idea or theory is usually dismissed. which, by the way is something you can't seem to manage or you wouldn't be going on and on about bearden, aspden, et al... ::) tu stultus es... q.e.d.

you weren't taking about "asking" for proof... you were talking about demanding it... ::) again tu stultus es... q.e.d.

as an aside, einstein wasn't a genius, he was a plagiarist. and his theory is wrong...

Offline exnihiloest

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 716
Re: The fake of Harold Aspden
« Reply #28 on: February 23, 2011, 09:38:17 AM »
no, it was not. i responded to a specific comment by ted... i wasn't even speaking to you moron. i haven't confused anything with the scientific method... i have merely stated that demanding anything makes you sound like an impetuous child, which it does. if you don't like it, go cry to your mommy... ::) in point of fact, scientific method has no "requirement" for demanding... if evidences are not forthwith, the idea or theory is usually dismissed. which, by the way is something you can't seem to manage or you wouldn't be going on and on about bearden, aspden, et al... ::) tu stultus es... q.e.d.

you weren't taking about "asking" for proof... you were talking about demanding it... ::) again tu stultus es... q.e.d.

blah blah blah

Quote
as an aside, einstein wasn't a genius, he was a plagiarist.

Therefore you ignore not only the scientific methodology, but also science history...

Quote
and his theory is wrong...

...and science.
When I read your mention about Einstein, I got the mental image of a pug pissing at the foot of a cathedral.


Offline WilbyInebriated

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3143
Re: The fake of Harold Aspden
« Reply #29 on: February 23, 2011, 09:47:31 AM »
blah blah blah
you respond with a logical fallacy... imagine that. ::)

Therefore you ignore not only the scientific methodology, but also science history...

...and science.
actually you might want to look at history... ::) and the still outstanding refutations of einstein. it's a hypothesis, nothing more. it hasn't been proven. it is a popular hypothesis simply because eddington put his authority and gravitas behind it... ::)

When I read your mention about Einstein, I got the mental image of a pug pissing at the foot of a cathedral.
and when i read your deification of einstein, i had the mental image of a precocious blind fool presuming to be an authority... ::)

rutherford knew it (relativity) was nonsense...

and see c.l. poor. in 1922,'26 & '30 he gave unassailable refutations of the claims of eddington. i.e., that observations of the 1919 south american solar eclipse confirmed einstein's predicted gravitational attraction of light. (poor also documents a similar situation existing with the 1922 west australian eclipse and the claims of campbell & trumpler.)

and herbert dingle's (former president of the r.a.s.) 'science at the crossroads'. that book alone is sufficient to refute the whole gamut of einstein's relativity, both the theory itself and the presumed observational and experimental evidence for it.

and louis essen (he refutes the claim that atomic clocks flown around the world confirmed einstein's "shortening of time" with motion, and he invented the atomic clock...) he stated 1) "einstein's theory of relativity is invalidated by its internal errors", 2) "einstein's use of a thought experiment, together with his ignorance of experimental techniques, gave a result which fooled himself and generations of scientists", 3) "claims frequently made that the theory is supported by experimental evidence do not withstand a close scrutiny"; and in closing he remarks, "insofar as the theory is thought to explain the result of the michelson-morley experiment i am inclined to agree with soddy that it is a swindle; and i do not think rutherford would have regarded it as a joke [as said in 1954] had he realised how it would retard the rational development of science".

ad infinitum, ad nauseam... ::)
« Last Edit: February 23, 2011, 10:38:38 AM by WilbyInebriated »

 

OneLink