Originally posted by MajorDisaster
There are conventions and things you can go to where inventors demonstrate this sort of stuff. The TeslaTech convention and things like that
If you got the impression that i thought these technologies/ideas where unproven i apologise as i must certainly do not have to see to believe.
theoretical aspects i am familiar with are more than enough for me to rarely dismiss these claims out of hand or at all and my ciriticism is aimed at
how apparently easily and consistently these inventions can be kept from the markets by the ignorance and arrogance of their inventors.
Inventors who claim that they will have everything 'up and running ' 'soon' should be dismissed as they are either very arrogant ( Assuming they
know what their up against) or some bad mixture of naivety and ignorance.
Either way i am sick of inventors who give the whole field a bad name due to their very large character flaws.
Hope that clears up my views!
Originally posted by FatherLukeDuke
So this guy has invented Combustion Engine 2.0 yet he can't get any funding?
I wont comment on this specific invention because i just don't know that much about it. Since i know that you are in fact referring to these
'inventions' in general i will point out that this is a capitalist system where the profit ( or rather the control ) motive reigns supreme. As
proved by various experiments with electric vehicle's it isn't only the fuel/oil majors that takes a significant knock but more so the car
manufacturers and car industry in general that suffers for massive reduced maintenance and after service costs.
If he had what he says he had then he would be sitting back and watching the car manufacturers in an insane bidding war to buy the patent - he
would get 10s of billions and be world famous. This invention would save GM at a stroke.
How would this save GM when you can sell one car in ten year term instead of three or four? They can't even make a profit on the ten year term so how
on god's earth will they make it on the one? As for the buying up the patent why bother when no major auto maker will touch revolutionary
technologies that will reduce their profit margins? You know what sort of pressure and legal action to force this industry to install safety belts and
similar safety measures?
The "Big Oil" supression angle is just nonsense. I posted most of this on another thread, but it's worth repeating:
Well it must be nonsense because clearly your too smart to be taken in by a scam perpetuated for more than a century by a industry worth hundreds of
"There are 33 major car companies, and a ton of minor ones, from all over the world. It's one of the most competitive industries on the
planet but you are trying to tell me that every single one is controlled by the oil industry? So who controls Volkswagan? Who controls Toyota? Who
controls Hyundai or Suzuki or the Shanghai Automotive industry Coporation?
As i explained these technologies are in themselves seriously disruptive to the auto industry as it stands, given how their profit frequently comes
from after sales services, most of those auto makers would not survive the transition being in the financial trouble that they have been in for the
Why do all these companies from every corner of the planet allow themselves to be controlled by oil companies and lose billions of dollars (or
go bankrupt) in the process? What's in it for them?
The oil companies do not control everything and they could in fact more readily make the transition to the new standard as they are involved in a far
larger array of industrial activities than are the car manufacturers. For my part i don't believe that the oil industry men or car manufacturer
CEO's decided on these policies as much as they realise that there are higher powers than themselves that they would do well not to cross. If that is
not something you can accept you could at least consider my prior arguments that this industry is in no shape for such a reform and wont allow smaller
manufacturers to undercut them.
Fuel effeciency of the main selling points for many of the cars in Europe and Asia, and increasingly so in the US. Here in the UK over 50% of
new cars sold are diesel - do you think this is because of there smooth quite running or because they are fuel effecient? Car adverts put their MPG in
big bold lettering as a selling point and often play on the fact you hardly ever have to fill them up. Have a look round Tokoyo or Paris or Milan -
people are driving tiny fuel effecient cars.
Which are still prone to the same wear and tear as regular cars hence the fact that the transition is happening at all. When people campaign for a end
to the draft of males for unnecessary wars those who stand to gain doesn't give up on war but instead allow women to join the service and make a few
generals; so what if we half of the tremendous pollution caused by regular polluting transportation? They are allowing change on THEIR terms and
that's why they are not so easily going to allow electric vehicles back on the roads after getting them off the roads a century ago.
Why do we have cars like the Prius or the Smart car? Or how about all the specialist firms that only work on technologies to reduce fuel
consumption? Zytec are one such company who are currently working on an ultra-effecient
electric car with Smart. Are they controlled by the oil industry too? There a loads of these companies about. How does that work again?
Well it doesn't work perfectly for the oil and car industries as their business model devastates the world the rest of the people on it needs for
their survival. They are doing the best they can to maintain the power they have but obvious being outnumbered as they are they can't prevent ALL
moves against their interest. Why is it that your acceptance of such a conspiracy depends on totally incompetent inventors and supremely brilliant
conspirators that can stem the tide of human invention and progress for all eternity? Isn't that the type of fundamentalist belief you seem to be
BMW are currently advertising a car that automatically switches the engine on and off when in traffic - specifically to save fuel. The oil
industry let this one through again?
And kings sometimes pardoned some of their nobles who stepped out of line in the interest of maintaining the general system of patronage and rule by
the few. Why can humans in general cooperate to bring about change for the better and why then this belief that these industries ( who are for the
most part operated by people who have no idea what interest they are serving on the larger scale) can not be and are not slowly succumbing to the
pressure of the popular will? Why the belief in their ultimate victory when we now have such things as minimum wages and social security?
I think you just don't have much faith in the people of the world and thus not much in yourself.
Here in London there is a congestion charge based on how polluting your vehicle is - the most polluting are charged at £30 ($60) a day!
Electric cars pay nothing. Yet of course the oil industry controls all this. "
No, they do not control everything but what they can and do they apply rigorously to further their interest hence the fact that we are getting these
engines and electric technologies now and not fifty or a hundred years ago when they were invented. The circular logic you are applying will always
have you defending those with power against both your and the rest of humanities best interest.
Oil companies wouldn't give a carp even if they could do anything about it anyway - a petrol engine effecient as claimed would just make it
affordable enough for another billion Chinese and Indians to run cars and burn through more oil.
Which is why i don't have to get stuck on the oil companies and can instead see the large picture where those who have gained fast fortunes trough
the capitalist system are using it's agents ( nation states and their corporations ) to protect the system from the overwhelming majority of the 6.5
billion people on Earth who are far worse off for it. Capitalism in their eye's is a system by which they can accumulate profit/wealth which
corresponds directly with economic power and power over others they must have to protect their ill gotten goods. This is why progress is fought at
every turn and why we electric cars are making a desperately slow comeback after a century of orchestrated neglect.
In closing they can't do everything as they like all the time but they can and do try to channel poplar pressure for change into avenue's they
believe they can control hence small 'efficient' IC cars instead of fully electric one's. When they have held up the tide as long as they can they
will transition to electric cars but make them overwhelming expensive ( claiming technology implementation problems never admitting that they spent
little resources to make it better) and the whole process tortuously slow. When they can no longer maintain that charade they will get more and more
efficient and by this time they may have already shifted a good deal of their capitol into the nuclear or other power 'generation' industries so
that they can tax you as best they can for as long as they can. Maybe one day we will see self contained vacuum energy powered cars ( such as Tesla
built more than century ago) but I'm not holding my breath.
[edit on 28-1-2009 by StellarX]