Re: Electrostatic Induction

On Dec 10, 12:04 am, "Don Kelly" <d...@xxxxxxx> wrote:
"Benj" <bjac...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message

I believe this was my point!
------
So why didn't you make it?
---

I DID make it! But your problem was you wanted me to make it in an all-
inclusive absolutist sense. I, of course, would not do this.

-------
Note "saying" that such a source exists doesn't mean that it does exist.
Because "saying so" is different that "proving so". You missed my point.
--------------

No, you missed my point. You said (and let's be very careful here)
that there was absolutely no indication or evidence that such a source
existed. You apparently expected me to accept that as proof that no
such source does or even could exist. First off, your premise is
wrong. I SAY there are indications in the data that "suggest" that
such a source COULD exist. Note that I have NOT stated that I have
"proof" that such sources exist. However, I will say, that I DO have
"proof" that such "suggestive data" does exist. You have categorically
stated that such "suggestive data" does not exist. Well, that well may
be in your case because data that suggests one thing to one person may
not suggest anything at all to another. But that does sort get beyond
the realm of science, does it not?

----
Do you have evidence of a valid claim? How do you tell the difference
between real and bogus if you don't have independent tests? Press
conferences? Testimonials?
I do agree Keely proves nothing.
. ----------

How do you "prove" that such things "do not" or even worse "cannot"
exist? Peer-reviewed literature? Debunker books? What "everybody
knows"?

Look. There are two things. There is Science and there is Politics.
Science is all about the search for truth. The search for truth
should never be hampered and restricted by "political correctness"!
And then there is politics. Politics is all about perception which is
to say lies! The basic idea is to use lies to get everyone to perceive
you a certain way so they'll grant some of THEIR power to the
politician! Of course there may be SOME truth in politics, but
generally even that is "spun" toward the perception the politician is
trying to create. In other words even truth is "bent" to further the
political goal.

So what has this to do with things? Easy. Science and Politics are
polar opposites. "Debunking" is where politics shows it's ugly head in
science. "Well, I haven't read any of Jefimenko's books, but he is
clearly a nutcase kook professor, who went bad after he got tenure,
who publishes from his basement, and has nothing but wild ideas that
no peer-reviewed journal would publish!" Easy to see that THAT
statement is PURE POLITICS! No truth there. It's all "spun". "On page
xxy of his textbook Jefimenko incorrectly derives the equation for
retarded potential the correct equation is..." THAT is science. Truth.
Easily tested and backed up and has meaning for the subject in
question.

The bottom line is that IF you are willing to let "debunkers" tell you
how to do your science and what to "think" then you have sold yourself
out. If you start parroting lines that "everybody knows are true"
instead of discussing observations and measurements as well as
theories unrestricted by political correctness, you aren't doing
science anymore. The search for truth has been prostituted upon the
altar of political perception. It's really that simple!

TOTAL BULL***! You have NO idea of the power available to manipulate
new ideas, especially new ideas with major social impact. You act as
if you never heard of classified information! Give ME a break!

------
sure but anyone can spread an idea around the world before it can be
classified in the US. Give ME a break too. There is also the problem of
deciding what to classify and suppress after it is known-it doesn't work.
You want to know how to build a dirty bomb- no problem -the information is
out there. I don't know what your problem is
-------

My problem is that you seem to think that government and those in
power are both dumb and ineffective! I tell you truly. THEY ARE
NEITHER! Pointing out that there are difficulties in keeping secrets
doesn't say that they can't be kept. I don't care if "everybody knows"
governments can't keep secrets. I don't know that, so I guess the
statement about "everybody" is a lie. Oh, that puts it into the realm
of politics, not science, doesn't it? Listen, those in power are
smart, clever, driven, have limitless power and virtually zero moral
values. If THOSE people can't keep a secret nobody can!

-----------
I have seen no data that comes close to convincing me of some undiscovered
and uninvestigated knowledge. Some things have raised questions but, as it
has been with you, the flaws show up on further study. If some such data
exists and is shown to exist, then the possibilities are open. I do not
claim that there is no possibility of some unknown source as I don't know
all. However, without such evidence, please allow me to be skeptical, rather
than naive.
-----------

I am not saying you should "believe". We can reserve that sort of
thing for religion and the theory of Evolution. I am not saying you
should not be "skeptical". "Skeptical" questions EVERYTHING to see if
it is true! You are demanding PROOF that I have some undiscovered
free energy source when you KNOW I have none. You are putting words
in my mouth (political trick) by implying that I have said that I
believe there to be such a source and it exists. In truth I have said
something subtly different. I have said there is evidence out there
that suggests such a source MIGHT exist. YOU KNOW this statement to be
true! Therefore, all "debunking" which boldly states that
conservation of energy "proves" that free-energy devices are all
frauds are simply lies which places them firmly in the realm of
political actions! We have already resolved this issue.

Your problem is a common one in science. It is the failure of the "A"
student. How does one achieve an "A" in some class? One must take in
everything the professor says, store it away and be able to
regurgitate it with complete accuracy on command. Oh, but wait! What
if the professor is a moron and everything he says is wrong? What if
that theory of physics or E&M you worked so hard to memorize is just
so much error? Basically it means that you have to abdicate science
to get that "A". A friend of mine who had a moron for a math teacher
noted that there are three ways to do a problem: The Right way, The
wrong way and "Gornell's way"! Needless to say to get your "A" you had
better be using "Gornell's way"! The search for truth degenerates into
a blind acceptance of whatever "authority" says! So you stand there
not ready to be skeptical, but rather to deny anything that
"authority" tells you to deny!!! That is NOT science! A REAL scientist
would be a man like Charles Fort. Now THERE was a "skeptic"! The
problem with the "A" student is eventually they forget that they
sucked in all that nonsense just to nail that grade and eventually
they think it all actually makes sense.

-------
The problem appears to be more a case of the "inventor" not wanting
something to be investigated. How many have brought things forward in any
more than press conferences. Also, does this isolated group in Switzerland
use their machine to supply their energy needs, even to the running of a
small radio? Give some meat, not conspiracy theories which actually set
back science more than government or big business suppression.
--------

My point is not to discuss the Swiss energy machine although it has
been investigated to a degree. However, one must come to grips with
the political side of things here. When "debunkers" hover around it
means that there are those with vested political interests in
DISPROVING whatever it is. Inventors of such devices have seen enough
history of previous inventors (you can go read it yourself) to be more
than a little careful of what they do. This of course plays right into
"debunker" hands. The end result is that all the big splashy highly
hyped media hoopla are almost guaranteed to be at best misguided
mistakes and at worst deliberate frauds. Which again plays right into
the hands of "debunkers". You don't know much about the "science" of
"dubunking" do you?

----------
Thanks for the other side of the argument. You have a point. It appears to
be partially valid in that we are using stored energy from the past- a self
limiting process. I'll give it a bit more thought than you have given
about the other point that some have presented (and I mentioned). By the
way, -passing thought- if such "free energy" was available would we limit
our usage to the present level or would we go hog wild?
------------

I knew you'd get around to this point, and although I tried to avoid
answering it, yeah, anyone who is mindful of history probably has to
come down on the side of "hog wild"! I must say, however, given the
fact that the Cold War somehow did not end with the Earth as a
radioactive wasteland tends to give me at least a LITTLE hope!

-----
I really don't think that you are here to convince me of anything. So far
you haven't come close to doing so. You are handwaving. Have you said
anything useful other than what is apparent- "don't close your mind "? I
don't see it. I am not closing my mind but I am not simply accepting things
willy-nilly. I want some solid evidence and I am not getting it.
That IS using my mind and training- asking "why?" and "how?" and"show me?"

I am saying MUCH more than "don't close you mind", although I am
saying that too. I am saying that there is much more evidence out
there for MANY wonders than you can imagine! But you have to practice
SCIENCE, the search for truth. You can't restrict where you are
allowed to look for it! And you especially can't voluntarily restrict
yourself because some "authority" has you believing that this and so
is "nonsense" and anyone who admits of the possibility is a "loon".
Truth is out there where you FIND it, not just where the establishment
tells you it can only be found!

------
There could be, I don't know, but aliens impregnating farm girls or
delighting in making crop circles for no purpose doesn't give me much faith
in them. Crop circles do exist (as well as girls who are looking for an
explanation for their parents) You forgot Nazca lines and the fact that the
length of one side of the great pyramid is "exactly" 1/42,543,202.002 (or
some such number as given by Von Daniken) times as long as the average
distance from the earth to the sun.
-----

Much better answer than I expected but not as good as it could be!
Answer: Yes, UFOs clearly exist! UFO=Unidentified Flying Object. But
what a GIVEN UFO is, is another question altogether! Careful exacting
definitions are important in Science! Fuzzy vague definitions are
important in politics! But standard "debunking" technique is not to
address the exact question but to CHANGE the question to push it into
the realm of ridiculous or "apparently ridiculous" where it can be
made fun of and the argument that "everybody knows" it's bunk can be
made. Needless to say this is politics easily proved as invalid
scientific arguments given that once "everybody knew" the earth was
flat! (Hey, ANYBODY could SEE it was flat! Anyone who said differently
was obviously insane! ETc. ETc.)

Obviously they are operated by superior intelligences who delight in
intraspecies sex, like juvenile stunts and make sure that more hype than
fact is present- maybe they are the real developers of "overunity" devices.
Aren't we lucky that they came all this way from outside our solar system to
play games. Do you think that they have been hired by the tabloids?

Do you have any OTHER actual data to back up your tabloid assertions?
Please note the fact that it's in a tabloid doesn't make the data
false! Didn't you ever see "Men in Black"? Tabloids are where you can
get the REAL data about aliens because they aren't restricted in what
they can say by those in power because they are already pre-debunked!

We could carry this on but there is probably no point.
Let's agree to disagree.

Actually, I don't think we really do disagree. It's just that I've
looked at more of this data than you have! And I am saying that I
don't care that "everybody knows" the sun goes around the earth, I say
there are strong indications that somehow, it just MIGHT be the other
way round. The purpose of SCIENCE is to find out which is true. The
purpose of POLITICS is to promote the idea that gives you the most
support among and power over the people. Each of us gets to choose
which effort we wish to join. Choose wisely!

.