It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


I am the Evil one the oil companies want Dead

page: 2
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in


posted on Dec, 21 2007 @ 10:08 AM

Originally posted by Illuminis
As for giving it away free. Really? Would you?

well personally, if i had an idea as revolutionary as you claim then YES WITHOUT A DOUBT I WOULD.

i wouldn't care for the money or even the fame if it would do that much good for the planet, the people or the environment.

i would put everything online (with a few other backup sites on hand to carry the information in case of cough 'accidental loss of the server', announce it somewhere like here where the membership can spread the info and let the webs' viral effect take effect.

if its genuine and it works then you don't have to worry about fame or fortune as word will spread that it was YOU that put it there (and charge per interview afterwards) and if you earn nothing from it - SO WHAT? it's not like your earning a bean from your idea at the moment is it?

sorry if i sound a tad harsh but in my opinion you should put up or shut up about you wonderful invention and stop making excuses about your claim to care for the invention but not the wealth from it.

posted on Dec, 21 2007 @ 10:48 AM
reply to post by justyc


posted on Dec, 21 2007 @ 11:02 AM
We all know electric cars could've been made a long time ago. Problem is, electric cars don't use gasoline..That means the companies can't bleed every mile we drive. They have extrapolated to the fact that if the car uses electricity, and electricity can come free from something like a solar panel, thats not gonna do them any good. Its not whats good for humanity and the earth, its what puts the most money into their pockets, hoping people won't realize there's so much better alternatives. If Tesla did it 100 years ago, we can too. Now they are trying to make these stupid fuel cells that we would have to fill up. Yes fill up at a local station..which charges you. They know full well we could just use water, but they can't charge us for water, so they're trying to invent a way to charge us..

posted on Dec, 21 2007 @ 11:04 AM
And you thing automakers dont want a car that goes forever for free. Do you have any idea of what your trying to say. As a retired fuel systems Engineer from the worlds largest automaker if it worked you too would be retired and no they wouldn't buy it then hide it thats an urban legend. I'm calling just another hoax.


posted on Dec, 21 2007 @ 11:12 AM
The sad part is that the average joe has no idea and just accepts what the car and oil companies tell him.

I can't believe what a scam these hybrid vehicles are! Subsidize the farmer to grow corn for fuel that again keeps us dependent on oil and guess what? You pay more at the pump and now more at the supermarket.

Even a simple propane conversion would save us a fortune on fuel and maintenance but not enough fueling stations. Does anyone know how much natural gas is just blown off into the atmosphere? I grew up near oil fields in NWPA and at every oil jack was a pipe sticking out of the ground that just exhausted gas into the air. One of my friends decided to run lines from these pipes into his house. I can still remember him heating his entire house for free from this wasted gas.

Everything about big oil burns me up! And big auto is not far behind!

posted on Dec, 21 2007 @ 11:15 AM

Originally posted by mikellmikell
And you thing automakers dont want a car that goes forever for free.

Dude, I don't believe one word of that statement!

posted on Dec, 21 2007 @ 11:15 AM
I'm sure if you just "give it away" someone will snatch it up patent it and throw it in a vault. Thus defeating the purpose. Regardless of how you get it out there it is going to get buried. You can not force car companies to make them.

posted on Dec, 21 2007 @ 11:22 AM
I think you are a hoaxer.

You say that your patents are being stolen as it is. You say that auto manufacturers won't accept your terms. So instead of helping anyone by just releasing your information for free to the public, you would rather hold onto them and not make a penny. Why? Just so you can try to drum up some sympathy on some conspiracy forums?

Seems pretty ridiculous to me.

posted on Dec, 21 2007 @ 11:34 AM
I will meet your demands right now, I have the money and an investor with plenty of development money to:

1) Make this private enough to retain rights
2) Make it public enough for it not to disappear.

I have spoken with him and if you can deliver the working proto-type as you have mentioned was part of the deal. I can meet your demands today. We can even double your per unit fee.

posted on Dec, 21 2007 @ 11:36 AM
Ethanol and Methanol are as little as $.97 a gallon. If the government made a mandate where all manufactures have to offer flex fuel cars it will drive down the price of oil. Oil has no competition and OPEC is bankrupting America by driving up the price of oil. I was listening to C to C and an aerospace engineer came up with this idea.

Brazil has done it and they are benefiting from much lower gas prices because people have the option to buy ethanol or gas, which ever is cheaper. It’s the only way to beat OPEC. Gas prices are causing everything in the U.S. to go up in price, only to further sink the U.S. dollar. $10 does not buy you what it did five years ago. All our goods are transported, and fuel is used, higher fuel price, higher price for the goods.

The conversion is very cheap, new fuel line and reprogramming of engine computer. The cost to the car maker, $150-$200. The government can make a law that all cars sold in the U.S. are flex fuel. If would be worth the consumer paying $500 more for a car if gas prices go down $1 per gallon. Think of all the money you will save. Corn doesn’t work but you can make ethanol and methanol out of almost any organic matter.

Do you own a Ford or Chrysler? Check your owners manual because they have quietly been make flex fuel cars for years. If you can find an ethanol fuel pump you can save big money. My buddy just bought a Mitsubishi Raider and all he needs to do is have the dealer make a simple inexpensive change and he can reap the benefits of alternative fuel and save himself up to $2 a gallon.

If you own a gas station and only 3% of the cars in the U.S. run on ethanol why would spend the money to have a dedicated gas pump? The government needs to push for more flex fuel cars and we can truly be energy independent and free ourselves from the grip of OPEC and kooky interests in the Middle East. Maybe then the price of goods will go down a little bit and investors will feel a little bit better and the stock market will start to recover.

To bad an oil baron is at the helm of our country. Hydrogen is a joke and he knows it. Do any of you want to drive around with a 5000 pound per square inch tank of hydrogen under your bum?

This does not have much to do with this thread, but I thought I could bring forth a very tangible solution to oil. I bought a motorcycle that gets 50 miles per gallon. For $13.67 I can go 250 miles. That does not work because all the oil companies can do is just cut back production. They need competition, they have a monopoly.

posted on Dec, 21 2007 @ 12:02 PM
reply to post by jojoKnowsBest

Will E85 Save Me Money?

At its current price per gallon, E85 doesn't save you money, and it might cost you more. E85 typically sells for 10 to 30 cents less per gallon than gasoline, depending on your region. However, E85 produces 72 percent as much energy per gallon as gasoline, so you burn more of it per mile.

For example, the flex-fuel Chevrolet Impala equipped with a 3.5-liter V-6 engine gets an EPA-estimated 23/31 mpg (city/highway) on gasoline and 16/21 mpg when burning E85. The acceleration is pretty much the same, but the car's range is shortened. In other words, you'll be filling the tank more often when using E85.

Do the math and you'll discover that E85 must be priced roughly 28 percent less than gas just to break even. For example, if gasoline is $3 per gallon, E85 would have to be priced below $2.16 per gallon.

posted on Dec, 21 2007 @ 12:29 PM
Illuminis I don't think you will get rich even if you invent a car that runs on nothing. Let's say you get the money build a few, you sell 1,2..10, then someone will post the functioning principle on the internet.
Just my opinion

posted on Dec, 21 2007 @ 12:58 PM

Make me one and I'll write you a check on the spot. I'm not kidding. Tack on all the licensing fees you want. Put a lock on the hood, weld it shut, whatever will satisfy your need for security. I'll sign a non-disclosure agreement, contractual fiduciary, and surety bond to operate the vehicle according to your wishes. I'll even let you retain ownership and agree to give the car back to you, for free, when/if it breaks down or wears out. Anything else?

Will, say, $15K be enough? U2U me with details, documents, and when and where to pick the car up (at my own expense, of course), and we'll get this thing rolling.

Ready? Well.... I'm waiting... Seriously.... Hello? OK, how about $20K? Will that do it?

Um... I'll let you guys know if I hear from him...

[edit on 12/21/2007 by Outrageo]

posted on Dec, 21 2007 @ 01:03 PM
I don't understand why you simply wouldn't start you own car company.

It's very simple...Henery Ford started with one idea. Why can't you?

It's not that hard...just pool together investors with your idea and you'll have more money than you know what to do with to create your car.

I've raised millions of dollars for my projects through investors. They are dying to give you money so they can get a return on their money!

If you can make them for the price you mention, I'll take 2.

Now stop messing around and do something to change the world with your idea.

posted on Dec, 21 2007 @ 01:03 PM
There are two offers on the table but no OP. Hmmm, I wonder.....


posted on Dec, 21 2007 @ 01:30 PM
Without raining on everyone's parade about electric cars, they actually pollute worse than or as bad as petroleum based auto's.

We talked about it on ATS many times. The process of making the batteries and the materials they need for the batteries are extremely toxic and sterilize entire regions mining these materials. I have seen the results in Sudbury Ontario myself, very very sad.

Building a Toyota Prius causes more environmental damage than a Hummer that is on the road for three times longer than a Prius. As already noted, the Prius is partly driven by a battery which contains nickel. The nickel is mined and smelted at a plant in Sudbury, Ontario. This plant has caused so much environmental damage to the surrounding environment that NASA has used the ‘dead zone’ around the plant to test moon rovers. The area around the plant is devoid of any life for miles.

Here at ATS we deny ignorance and I will not go through life with rosed colored glasses on.

Electric cars are almost useless in cold climates too because of the battery life expectancy.

The Batteries are still the issue and I would be the first in line to buy an Auto if they could solve power storage source issues.

[edit on 21-12-2007 by Realtruth]

posted on Dec, 21 2007 @ 01:53 PM
reply to post by Realtruth

What about these newly developed batteries?

Toshiba Introduces New 10 Year--Quick Charge Industrial Battery

Toshiba will begin selling the SCiB quick charge-10 year battery in March, 2008. This industrial battery increases safety, versatility in power source and qualifies as environmentally sensitive.

Toshiba has developed a battery that can be recharged in five minutes with a lifespan of 10 years. Toshiba has trademarked the new accumulator, the SCiB. The new quick charge-Super Charge ion Battery will go to market in March, 2008. Initially, the SCiB distribution will focus on the industrial equipment sector.


An additional feature of the SCiB is its ability to run at extremely cold temperatures. Toshiba warrants that the SCiB can work efficiently in minus 30 C which is minus 22 F. This is a welcomed attraction for many areas of the world where frigid temperatures are a factor.

Please visit the link provided for the complete story.

Seems to have covered all the issues you brought up.

posted on Dec, 21 2007 @ 01:58 PM
I don't really get your problem. What does a patent cost? Sure it costs something to make it correct (you need a professional) but also not the world. Patents are there to protecting inventions and payable for individuals.

If you know it works, Patent it and then put it open. Hench, if then there is no one in the world that has interest into this than I guess your idea is simple not really working.

Originally posted by Illuminis
Yes it is true what you read on the gore website among others. I have developed the design for the self charging electric car.

A link would be welcome.

Here are the hard facts:

Originally posted by Illuminis
1, The car is self charging during use. If it was dropped off and then

Ok. And you don't want to tell use where the energy it charges from comes from?
Tell us at least one thing. Is it correct to say it drags the energy from a known and existing source or is this incorrect?

Oh and the human can just sit in the car or do he/she have to deliever the energy by pedaling for example. (just to sure exclude this

Originally posted by Illuminis
2. It still must be plugged in at night to condition the batteries when not in uselike all electric cars.

Batteries? Classical Batteries (More correct Accumulators) stores the energie useually longer than an hour without a load. So I guess it must be eighter different sort of Batteries. (forexample high capacity capacitors) or the 1 hour next human limit isn't connectted to the Batteries. But in the last case I wonder if you can not use the stored energie in the Batteries then to restart it. Hmm or are this Batteries keeping that system alive for the 1 hour and are then empty? Where does this energy go to then? Is this the energy then you drag the energy later from? A little pointless then.

Is there a raw 'description' how it works on any website? if so a link would be welcomen.

Originally posted by Illuminis
3. It is not a scalable technology. It will run a two or 4 passenger commuter car at the maximum, and works best in aerodynamic sports car

not scaleable ..hmmm most is scaleable. Really not scaleable or not well scaleable?

Originally posted by Illuminis
So why didn't they jump at the chance to get the next greatest thing in human existance? They refused to meet my demands and wanted to purchase and mothball it till oil was almost gone and all the profit was made.

At the moment I more think they refused it because they think it is not really working the way you think it should.

Originally posted by Illuminis
Am I bitter? well yes and no. I work from home so driving is a pretty low priority on my list. The cash would be nice but i'm not really into a lot of materialism any more. I guess they cheated you folks huh?

Although I like reading news like this on ats I am not sure what motivated you to post this here. Most of us like to have information with links or pictures or anything we can work with.

But you just say you invented something cool, didn't patent it (till now) and therefore you will give us nothing to verify anything that could put a light into if you just tell us a story or if what you say is true and your idea really working.
Then what worth does it have to post this for you and us next to the obvious that we all like to talk a lot about things that doesnt run well in the world? Is there something to expect comming from you in regards of the invention (that would be of interest to me)
or do you only want to talk about here that the oil compagny hates you? (that's of no interest to me)
No offensive, just my thoughts here. I don't get where this thread is meant to lead.

[edit on 21-12-2007 by g210b]

[edit on 21-12-2007 by g210b]

posted on Dec, 21 2007 @ 02:01 PM

Originally posted by Illuminis
What were my demands? ... Patents remaining in my name. ... license fee per unit under a 4 year agreement after that I would option the sale of the patent ...

Originally posted by Illuminis
They prefer to buy the patents outright with no license. This is about 4 years in. ...Tried to be very fair in licensing, with option.

The patent system is basically a deal between inventors and the government.

In exchange for a 20 year monopoly you have to reveal all of the details of your invention in a public document. There is no such thing as a "secret" patent unless the government has stepped in for reasons of national security (e.g. military applications and nuclear technology).

All patents are given an application number on the date of filling and a patent number on the date of issue. All patents are published 18 months after the application date. International patent fillings though the PCT or through WIPO are given an international filing number and 18 months later an international publication number.

You can avoid having your ATS account banned for hoaxing by providing us with any of these numbers.


posted on Dec, 21 2007 @ 02:03 PM
Electric car, my Aunt Fanny. There are plenty of electric cars out there, and hybrids are partially electric, using the small gasoline engine to charge the batteries. Nobody's putting a stop to electric cars except consumers, who find them woefully underpowered, slow, deadly dangerous in crashes, and worst of all, unsexy.

Charges itself while it drives? What's it got, a sail? Even the Toyota Prius uses its motor/generator to recharge the batteries as it coasts. No new technology there.

And yeah, gas is expensive, but what's my electric bill going to look like after charging my car all night?

I don't see why the oil companies would want the OP dead. Everything he's offering is already available on the open market.

new topics

top topics

<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in