It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.

 

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

 

This is insane.

page: 1
1
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 26 2008 @ 12:32 PM
link   
What is it with free energy that makes people utter insane claims about it? Lets just start with one particular claim that aggravates me. That would be 'with free energy people in power of energy resources would lose control'.

Who on earth believes something like this could be true? This claim goes on to state that those with resources actually buy new inventions and bury them in safes far, far away, never to be used or opened.

Goverments, too, must be involved in this cover up because they would lose power and all hell would break lose. This is also perhaps the stupidest claim ever made.

If you do think about these things a little, it does not take long to realize that with free energy you would have almost infinte power over every single industry that uses energy. Free energy does not mean that there wolud be nobody to control it, quite the opposite. With practically unlimited energy (because its free), you would also have unlimited power to weapons, which would mean that there would be VERY strict controls about who is allowed to actually produce free energy and who is not.

This means several things. For one, there would always be somebody in control, somebody in power. That somebody, be it company or goverment, woiuld also get an insane amount of money out of selling that energy. It doesn't really matter if it is free for them, they can still charge you and you would have no real alternatives within fifty years or so. This makes insane profits. You could knock out almost every single comptetitor out of market, as you would have total control for that technology, and after that charge whatever you want. That's absolute power, all because of free energy.

Now, give me a goverment who does not want such power if available?
You may also want to give me an oil company that would not want such power?




posted on Apr, 26 2008 @ 01:23 PM
link   
You bring up a very good point, even if free energy devices were commercially available to everyone the companies could still charge massively for the sale and upkeep of these machines, and their power could be limited so homes can only generate a certain amount and the rest must be bought from the grid.

I'm sure the government could find a way to justify this citing that it would be 'dangerous' for people to generate all their own power.

Personally, I think if this technology exists it should be made available ASAP, but really I can't see that happening in the unstable economic climate since it's so energy driven.



posted on Apr, 26 2008 @ 01:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by rawsom
What is it with free energy that makes people utter insane claims about it?


It isn't insane, they just fail to see why if they can come up with something why no one takes their or anyone else's theories seriously enough to help propogate and support them.

Trust me, i know about insanity.

I know that trying to show people a way forward is not insanity.

[edit on 26-4-2008 by Anti-Tyrant]



posted on Apr, 26 2008 @ 01:32 PM
link   
reply to post by rawsom
 


this has nothing to do with free energy, free food, free water, free healthcare, free anything...it all has to do with control. nothing else matters, control is "the holy grail".



posted on Apr, 26 2008 @ 01:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by jimmyx
reply to post by rawsom
 


this has nothing to do with free energy, free food, free water, free healthcare, free anything...it all has to do with control. nothing else matters, control is "the holy grail".


I can understand that, but with such a resource you would get exactly that. Control. It requires power over it but that is easily arranged in today's world. Power usually also means control, and so it does in this case.

The point is that even if such a power plant could be built, you or anybody else for that matter would get that for free. you would have to pay. It does not matter how little you would have to pay, because after all other alternatives are out of the market, you can pretty much ask any price you want. Everybody and everything that uses energy would after that have to pay.

Free to produce does not equal to free to use.

You would also still have all other costs involved. Upkeep, payrolls, the electric grid..

I want to repeat myself. If you can get unlimited energy to weapons, that means absolute control over whatever it is that gives you such energy. It means no free energy for regular people. It is as simple as that.

And no, I do not believe that matchbox size free energy device is the only kind of device possible. I'm all in for a huge power plant, because that's propably exactlty what's needed.



posted on Apr, 26 2008 @ 01:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by Anti-Tyrant
I know that trying to show people a way forward is not insanity.


I support clean energy, I want my environment to be safe, clean and to have resources for children to use in generations to come. I support showing a way forward.

But what I do not support are opinions that simply aren't based on reality. Only way for your way to be possibe is to actually show somebody a device that actually *works*.

All things considered, if we ever master fusion energy well enough, we at that point have practically everything that free energy is all about. They say that it will take fifty years for them to do it. The new reactor will be built in France, and goverments did not want to try and stop them.



posted on Apr, 26 2008 @ 02:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by rawsom
But what I do not support are opinions that simply aren't based on reality. Only way for your way to be possibe is to actually show somebody a device that actually *works*.



The idea is to spur people into helping out, to get them to help make a device that theoretically should work.

Many people who have these rather unfounded (but delightful) claims don't see why people refuse to help them make their theories work.

This is perhaps the aspect of insanity you speak of, but i wouldn't call it insanity.

I'd be more inclined to call it intellectually secure, and that the people who say that "It'll never work" are unaware of the fact that they are cutting off discussion into something that is indeed, a way forwards.



posted on Apr, 26 2008 @ 02:13 PM
link   
You have raised a good argument, but you haven't covered alot of ground. At the moment, just say, the government has this tech, therefore they get all the power THEY need, while still charging us through the teeth for it, they are having their cake AND eating it!!

At the moment, the fuel cost is 'justifiable' (AT THE LOOSEST SENSE OF THE WORD!!), they have to find it, they have to dig for it, they have to process it, they have to bag it and tag it, then they have to transport all of this around the world, THAT is where the cost comes from and each 'stage', they'll add a little fee for them doing it, so they cover their expense and more (alot more..).

If they openly admit to having free energy, then sure, they'll charge us for the machine, 5k, 10k? would you complain, power your house and car the rest of your life. Problem is, they wouldn't be able to make a reliable income from it, we pay monthly, daily for fuel, billions of people around the world, this is a constant source of income for them. If they were to release something which is only a one time payment, what happen when all people have them (or majority)?

This is not even mentioning that at the moment, alot of scientist are not dedicating time to this, as they don't see it viable, nothing to do with them, just their opinion. If it was announced that this is viable and not just that, but extremely effective, then everyone would jump on the preverbial bandwagon, soon there would be other people developing this, therefore driving down the price due to competitive marketing.

This would be better for the good of humanity, but not so good for the wallet of 'THEM'.

This is, what I believe, a large part of it, and not even covering many of the not so major points, or I could be completely wrong


thanks. EMM



posted on Apr, 27 2008 @ 12:13 AM
link   
reply to post by rawsom
 


Woah, are you serious here.

The reality of truly Free Energy would change the equation so greatly as to be unpredictable at best.

Free Energy, like, I have a simple machine that can power my house, would mean the utilities company would not make any money, infrastructure crumbles, loss of jobs, Bankrupcy.

A shift of power



posted on Apr, 27 2008 @ 12:31 AM
link   
reply to post by rawsom
 


Hahahahahahahahaha you're speaking to the master of alternative energy resources.

I'm the "Real Yoda" from ATS mix.


The free energy is inevitable, it created you and me. Do the math.

IN FACT,


I can actually enstate I was in contact with an ex-CIA agent that personally disclosed to me that free energy is one hundered percent possible and is being conducted secretly by the United States for manipulation of gravity.

But, take it with a grain of salt.

=)

[edit on 27-4-2008 by TheRealYoda7]



posted on Apr, 27 2008 @ 01:02 AM
link   
Solar power is sorta free energy. Some people rely on it. It doesn't give them the best weaponry on Earth.

Also, if companies or governments tried to charge insane amounts of money for free energy, then I think there would be a lot of pissed off people. A low, consistent, monthly service charge would probably be acceptable to most people.



posted on Apr, 27 2008 @ 01:08 AM
link   

Originally posted by TheRealYoda7...that free energy is one hundered percent possible and is being conducted secretly by the United States for manipulation of gravity.


Ah, yes.

You know it, I know it, but what's changin'?

Well?



posted on Apr, 27 2008 @ 01:08 AM
link   
Free energy? I cant even find a free lunch. Einstein said matter is energy right? Is matter "free" Wouldnt "free energy" also assume the concept of "free matter" which basically means we are talking alchemy right? In the 21 fricking century? And you folks are still looking for the freaking philosophers stone?
Really?



posted on Apr, 27 2008 @ 02:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by Anti-Tyrant
The idea is to spur people into helping out, to get them to help make a device that theoretically should work.

Many people who have these rather unfounded (but delightful) claims don't see why people refuse to help them make their theories work.

This is perhaps the aspect of insanity you speak of, but i wouldn't call it insanity.

My subject and topic for it was just written so because I wanted to get feelings reflected in a particular way. It worked. Replies show this. However, I am serious about my arguments. What I do mean about this 'insanity' of a sort is that, about free energy, people tend to believe at least one of the following things.

Free energy means it is free for everybody to use.
Free energy means it would not cost a dime for anybody to use it.
.. means it would not matter how much energy we use in devices, because it does not cost anything.
.. means that there would be no control over that energy source.
.. means there would be no costs over producing it.

I do not expect anybody to quickly realize every single aspect and thought about impact or reality of thought impact within context of free energy. It just isn't possible for a single person, that's why groups of people are given jobs to think effect of revolutionary breakthroughts. Its just that even when this is well realized, supporters of free energy tend to ignore every other opinion that does not let you grap our moon from the sky to be placed above a fireplace in the living room next door.



I'd be more inclined to call it intellectually secure, and that the people who say that "It'll never work" are unaware of the fact that they are cutting off discussion into something that is indeed, a way forwards.

I can see that effect, but should we really cut all discussion that disagrees?



posted on Apr, 27 2008 @ 02:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by FreshDuck
reply to post by rawsom
 


Woah, are you serious here.

Yes, but I have no 100% certainty that I am actually right about this as well. I don't mind being wrong, but I would really like to know for certain which arguments are in fact true and what kind of resolution to the effect of free energy that will bring.



The reality of truly Free Energy would change the equation so greatly as to be unpredictable at best.

Free Energy, like, I have a simple machine that can power my house, would mean the utilities company would not make any money, infrastructure crumbles, loss of jobs, Bankrupcy.


I see your point well enough, but does it not ring a bell when somebody says an oil company bought an free energy device and buried it? That doesn't make any sense, as they would have the power needed themselves. Its just that why bury a device which does not drain your power away but instead gives you more?

Another thing to ponder is that most of oil is not produced to get energy, but other chemicals instead. Plastics, different kinds of volatile oils not meant for burning and so on.. The amount of usages for oil is immense, and energy is only a minority of that usage.

Even if we get free electricity we would not see most oil companies going bankcrupt, as oil would still be needed to produce all the other things that aren't exactly production of energy.



posted on Apr, 27 2008 @ 02:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by ElectroMagnetic Multivers
At the moment, the fuel cost is 'justifiable' (AT THE LOOSEST SENSE OF THE WORD!!), they have to find it, they have to dig for it, they have to process it, they have to bag it and tag it, then they have to transport all of this around the world, THAT is where the cost comes from and each 'stage', they'll add a little fee for them doing it, so they cover their expense and more (alot more..).

With cost of getting raw material drawn out of equation, most other costs would still be there when some free energy is created. Getting those materials is propably most of costs involved, but still, there would be somebody to send a bill.



If they were to release something which is only a one time payment, what happen when all people have them (or majority)?

Does such device really last forever? As it goes with modern electronics, those are engineered so that they will break sooner rather than later. It doesn't make any sense to build a TV which lasts for 30 years, but from business perspective making one which lasts maximum of 10 does. That way you can sell three times the amount of TV's.

Anyway, such payment would indeed be quite problematic. I cannot give you an answer for that until I get to know what kind of device or power plant would create that free energy. Does it have moving parts that get wear and tear, are materials needed stable forever and for how long and so on.



If it was announced that this is viable and not just that, but extremely effective, then everyone would jump on the preverbial bandwagon, soon there would be other people developing this, therefore driving down the price due to competitive marketing.

This did not pop into my mind yesterday when I thought about this subject
So, whenever something succeeds, everybody else knows it is possible and then will find a way to do it. So it goes with nuclear weapons as well, mechanisms and physics can be figured out without exact documentation..



posted on Apr, 27 2008 @ 03:03 AM
link   

Originally posted by GrayFox
Solar power is sorta free energy. Some people rely on it. It doesn't give them the best weaponry on Earth.

Not the best weaponry, just one hell of an amount of energy to use. That must cause some severe increasements in power of such weapons. You cannot produce enough energy with solar panels, but with free energy devices you should be able to produce immense amounts of it.

This all depends on the device itself. We also need to know how much of energy can be produced freely. We do not know that.



posted on Apr, 27 2008 @ 03:23 AM
link   
Nothing insane about it what so ever. Free energy exists, but every step of the way greedy people take control and yes they are in bed with the government because the government enjoys the tax revenue and there's dirty individuals in our government who assist the corporations and then later find themselves working for them.

Well, we do have FREE energy where I live, but that free energy comes at a price.

We built DAMS and as long as it rains and snows regularly the energy is free. Unless you consider the cost it took to build those dams and the cost to maintain them and the cost to maintain the lines and the rest of the infrastructure to get it to your home. Although somehow that real cost has been multiplied by some criminals along the way.

It was once closer to free until our government sold the lines and management to private corporations and now they resell the power from our dams to us at the other end. A little shell game you see.

Of course we destroyed many salmon stocks building the Dams, but then we grow many crops in the desert to feed half the planet because of them.

I suppose if we had efficient enough solar panels we could call it free energy unless you consider the cost to build, maintain and replace every 20-30 years.

Then again the oil is free to those who pump it out of the ground - it ain't like god sends them a bill every year, but again they do have to find it, pump it, transport it, wage war to keep control of it, and refine it and there's a cost plus profit associated with that.

We can definitely do better than were doing, but it will never be completely free, but then if we all supplied our own power at least we could dump some of the parasites and taxman feeding off our monthly bills.

Water is free too unless you consider storing it, transporting it and testing it to make sure its safe to use, and we all pay the guys who put it in convenient bottles for us store as well.

Once we all start driving electric cars and they can't collect any more gas taxes guess what, they'll GPS your millage and charge you accordingly for your use.

Is there some inventions that could take single families off the grid or have neighborhoods have their own grid - well yes no doubt about it, but that is a threat to our current infrastructure and taxation system and so yes its logical that they buy the competition - just like Microsoft does - but then we could live without computers couldn't we?

Free, nothing is ever completely free.


[edit on 27-4-2008 by verylowfrequency]



posted on Apr, 27 2008 @ 05:49 AM
link   
It's as simple as this, not enough of humanity has an ethical base to harness infinite power. We have not matured as a race to even inspire the mere thought of unity, let alone endless energy.

All in due time.


XL5

posted on Apr, 27 2008 @ 05:54 AM
link   
Most generators and transformers are easy to understand and somewhat easy to build given the right tools or alot of time and will. I personally think a free energy device would be very simple to make as long as you have the knowledge.

What ever the case is though, if the oil companies sold free energy units, they would not have the power after some one took it appart and found out how it worked. They would just have to have one person post the plans and a start-up company makes one even better or people force them self to become smart enough to make one that will outlive them.

Its the reason hydrogen is being pushed more then full electric. Hydrogen storage and use is alot more complex then a normal fully eleclric car, its also still a "gas". A full electric car has 3 main parts: battery, controller and motor, if you replace the weakest link (the battery) with a free energy device, you would only need to replace tires, steering suspension, brushes and bearings. At that point, none of the main parts would break and people could keep the car for 80years or untill the frame rusted out, then it would just be a somewhat simple retrofit to swap out the 3 parts.

You can't really have power over ideas unless no one knows about it.



new topics

top topics



 
1
<<   2 >>

log in

join