0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Also - you and Vern are clearly mainstream scientists with mainstream training? It's amusing to see typical mainstream reaction. Vern pretends he sees nothing ananomalous in a co-efficient of performance in excess of 1. He also makes a determined effort to ignore the results in that paper that show zero discharge from the supply. He needs to skip past the 'mesh current' analysis that not only show signature waveforms that are anamolous but they also defy Kirchhoff's Law. Then he makes no reference to his multiple posts on multiple threads where he dismisses the possibility of the circuit producing COP greater anything at all. And all such comments made with that dismissive arrogant certainty that comes with a mainstream mindset indulging in mainstream bigotry.Then we have you Bored chemist. You read the paper - clearly have little if any idea as to what is bing presented - you pretend to know best - try to advise us as to how we should do waveform analysis and power integration analysis which clearly is not part of your training skills - then you take a stab at a comment - that best implies insufficiencies in the paper - and then you post this 'YAWN' for public consumption.Nice. Really nice. An appropriate reaction from the archaic mindset. I'm still battling to find constructive input from contributors on this thread. Thus far I see nothing but sad attempts at assumed superiority. Where is the genuine and appropriate surprise and interest. Must one upturn known paradigms just for you guys to explain that you knew this all along? How curious. Why then did you not endorse my previous claim - while there were still no replications? EDIT - BenV - I apologise for this vitriolic thread. But I'd remind you that no-one came to my rescue - and I posted on this forum in good faith that there was some real and genuine interest in new science and new theories. If there is no real interest why this forum topic? Or is it that the contributors - historically - were only those who used us poor victims as fodder for their egos? Perhaps this can now change? Perhaps there are those readers who are more constructive if less contributive? Just wish I knew. I'm glad that Sophicentaur is not as active.
[]Hello Mr. Scientist. [] I keep checking out your link and see a rather strange earnest fellow - pretending to sing under water - and telling us that we're a 'shining light'? Also see a strange lady shrouded in all kinds of billious material that wafts around the place with a life of its own. Then the only reference to DrZion seems to be a gentleman who recommends breast augmentation for ladies - and seems to have done some startling work on that lady that floats around the place with that gentleman. Then there are all those bubbles. Apparently an inexhaustible supply of wind - that, from what I can see, mostly come from the mouth of the gentleman while he sings?...if that is singing?Not entirely sure of the relevance of all this? But delighted to view whatever you recommend. I would prefer some good music though. It may give this thread some interest. LOL.
Hi Mr. ScientistLove MEATLOAF and loved Total Eclipse of the Heart. Really nice choices. Thanks for that. I'd love to know the relevance of DRZion? And I'd quite like to know your interest in this thread - assuming there is any?
My interest is equally the same magnanimity i choose to reply in any thread.
And why should I want to change the facts simply to make the experimental results more appealing. Surely the evidence should stand on its own?