Turkish Inventor Ready to License Free Energy Motors and Generators for Production

page: 11
59
<< 8  9  10    12  13  14 >>

log in

join

posted on Jun, 25 2010 @ 09:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by cupocoffee
How do you know it doesn't work, when you haven't tried it?


If you read my previous post you'll know exactly why I won't do it, Bedini is a known scam artist with his DVD enhancer, that's a complete fraud without a doubt. So why would I waste time trying to work on a project from a known con artist.

How do you know that's a complete fraud? Cause the mighty Randi says so?

All these numerous inventors are all liars and con artists and snake-oil salesmen but the mighty Randi's word is gospel, is that how it works?
No not because Randi said so. Because:

People made a claim that they could hear a difference!

Randi said "OK you hear a difference? If you can demonstrate to me that you can really hear a difference I'll give you a million dollars". That's a little different than just saying "because Randi said so", don't you think?. That's called "putting your money where your mouth is" something few people seem willing to do but Randi was.

You may not understand how DVD technology works, but I do, and my understanding is enough to convince me it's a fraud. But I don't expect you to take my word for it, research DVD technology yourself.

But in the meantime, are you saying if you bought Bedini's disc enhancer, and you heard a difference, that you wouldn't take Randi up on his offer to pay you a million dollars? And if not, why not? Most of us aren't that rich that we would turn down a million dollars for such a trivial task, talk about easy money.




posted on Jun, 25 2010 @ 09:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by buddhasystem
If HE's passing this opbvious opportunity to actually build the real perpetual machine, the only reason he does is because his device is crock.


That's no excuse. You are another one who has never even tried building the SG motor even though the schematics have been freely available for years. You jump to conclusions and assume it won't work without even trying the experiment first. How unscientific of you!

And Bedini has made little motors that have run continuously for years, but he says "you can't call this perpetual motion because sooner or later a bearing will wear out or a part will need replacing". Which makes sense. Any machine that has moving parts eventually needs repairs.



posted on Jun, 25 2010 @ 09:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by Arbitrageur

But in the meantime, are you saying if you bought Bedini's disc enhancer, and you heard a difference, that you wouldn't take Randi up on his offer to pay you a million dollars? And if not, why not? Most of us aren't that rich that we would turn down a million dollars for such a trivial task, talk about easy money.


Here's a question, has ANYONE ever actually won the million dollars?

I happen to believe that the Universe is such a wondrous and amazing place that someone somewhere should have won the million dollars by now. For showing psychic powers, or bending a spoon, or levitating, or making a free energy device, whatever.

The fact that NO ONE ever wins makes me very suspicious and I don't trust this Randi guy.

How do you know that he wasn't purposely set up to be some sort of god of skeptics and debunkers everywhere, the great Randi who offers a faux prize that no one can ever possibly win?

And then whenever any of these claims are debated, people go "but if that were true he would have won the JREF prize. He has not won the JREF prize so that is not true". My, how convenient!



posted on Jun, 25 2010 @ 10:06 PM
link   
reply to post by cupocoffee
 



Originally posted by cupocoffee
I happen to believe that the Universe is such a wondrous and amazing place that someone somewhere should have won the million dollars by now. For showing psychic powers, or bending a spoon, or levitating, or making a free energy device, whatever.

How do you know that he wasn't purposely set up to be some sort of god of skeptics and debunkers everywhere, the great Randi who offers a faux prize that no one can ever possibly win?


It's very simple. He doesn't offer the money to anybody.

He only offers the money to people with outrageous claims that he thinks they can't prove.

Like people that say they can hear a difference with Bedini's magical DVD enhancer. They wouldn't even TRY to win it!

If you offer someone a million dollars and they just go scurrying under a rock without even TRYING to prove their claim, it tells me that they are either so rich they couldn't use a million dollars, or they were lying.

Now is the million dollars impossible to win? Well if he only offers the million dollars to people who make claims he thinks are impossible, then it's only impossible to win it based on what Randi's idea of impossible is. If Randi is wrong about what is impossible, he's giving people a chance to prove to him that he's wrong. So yes, if you prove he's wrong about what's impossible, you can win it. But nobody's been able to prove he's wrong so far. Remember Randi is a professional trickster so he's better than most of us at spotting trickery because, well, he knows a lot of tricks.

But regarding the spoon bending etc. if they know what their secret little trick is, they aren't going to embarrass themselves by having Randi expose their trickery, so they don't even try to win the million dollars either.

And I noticed you didn't answer my question about whether YOU would be interested in getting the million dollars for just proving that you could hear the difference with Bedini's DVD enhancer, if you thought you could really hear a difference.

If I thought I could hear a difference, I would sure accept the million dollar challenge, I could use a million dollars. And all I'd have to do is go to Randi's lab and say: That's with the Bedini device...that's without the Bedini device...that's without it,,,that's with it.... OK I proved I can hear the difference, where's my million dollars? Actually I'd have to do more trials than that, to show a good level of statistical accuracy, but you get the idea. How easy can it get?

Actually I really do think I can taste the difference between Coke and Pepsi, too bad he won't give me a million dollars for that!



posted on Jun, 26 2010 @ 06:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by Arbitrageur
It's very simple. He doesn't offer the money to anybody.

He only offers the money to people with outrageous claims that he thinks they can't prove.


Exactly, so he is biased against any participants in the challenge in the first place.




And I noticed you didn't answer my question about whether YOU would be interested in getting the million dollars for just proving that you could hear the difference with Bedini's DVD enhancer, if you thought you could really hear a difference.


Okay, hearing is a subjective experience. If I listen to it and I do hear a difference, how am I supposed to "prove" that to someone else? Especially a professional debunker who's biased against me in the first place?

Maybe that's why no one accepted the challenge. It seems like there were people who said they could hear a difference, but no one could figure out how they're supposed to "prove" that to a professional debunker who's biased against them and doesn't want them to win.

It's a lot like trying to prove that Bedini's energizer works to you and buddhasystem and rnaa. No amount of evidence is ever sufficient, Bedini and Bearden and Friedrich are accused of lying no matter what they say, etc etc.......



posted on Jun, 26 2010 @ 07:18 AM
link   
reply to post by cupocoffee
 


There are indeed a lot of similarities between the two subjects. Both have in common that they are not proven by scientific tests. They both rely on subjective observation, which can not be repeated in a controlled environment. Thats why these kind of subjects are not taken seriously.

[edit on 26-6-2010 by -PLB-]



posted on Jun, 26 2010 @ 10:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by cupocoffee
Okay, hearing is a subjective experience. If I listen to it and I do hear a difference, how am I supposed to "prove" that to someone else? Especially a professional debunker who's biased against me in the first place?


It's easy. Get 300 discs. number them 1-300. Then play a passage from disk 001. Send the disk into a room outside of sight. inside that room, someone either puts the CD into Bedini's device, or doesn't.

Then they take the disc out of the room and play the passage again. you have two buttons in front of you, one is labeled Yes and the other, No.

If you heard a difference push the yes button, if you didn't push the no button.

Repeat for the other 299 discs.

Then see what percentage you were right about, that's not too hard, right?

Now obviously you can guess some right just by random chance, so your percentage accuracy needs to be high enough to prove it wasn't just random chance that allowed you to guess right.


It's a lot like trying to prove that Bedini's energizer works to you and buddhasystem and rnaa. No amount of evidence is ever sufficient, Bedini and Bearden and Friedrich are accused of lying no matter what they say, etc etc.......
No amount of evidence???? What?

You gave me a website to go to. I went to it, and sure enough somebody tested Bedini's SG design, and he is NOT getting over unity with it! The only time he got some odd readings is when one of the components in his circuit burned out, remember this?



That was in 2004 and he said he hasn't been able to duplicate those strange over-unity readings he got when the component burned out since. Is that the "no amount of evidence" you mean?

[edit on 26-6-2010 by Arbitrageur]



posted on Jun, 27 2010 @ 02:41 AM
link   
reply to post by Arbitrageur
 


Looking at that burnt out pot which would be open circuit and the scope traces plus the stated 'short time' the effect was evident, my feeling is that he's simply measured the flywheel effect as the motor ran down to a standstill and nothing more than that. Certainly not anything sensational and capable of shutting down the oil companies.

We skeptics are not immune to positive proof, we've just yet to see anything other than claims.



posted on Jun, 27 2010 @ 06:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by Arbitrageur
It's easy. Get 300 discs. number them 1-300.
...

Repeat for the other 299 discs.

Then see what percentage you were right about, that's not too hard, right?


So a statistic would be considered sufficient evidence?

Then why is it not sufficient evidence in the case of the School-girl motor experiment?

Bedini says that hundreds of people have successfully replicated that motor, and Stirling Allan of PESWiki.com also says that "hundreds, if not thousands of people" have replicated it.



This is an advanced and more useful version of the Bedini_SG, a one-coil open source project that we (PES Network, Inc.) launched with Bedini's permission back in 2004, and which Friedrich took leadership of and developed far beyond what we first launched. Friedrich who has been working closely with Bedini for several years, recently moved to Hayden, Idaho to be able to work directly in Bedini's lab.

I was the first to build the Bedini SG, and my associate, Susan Carter, was the second (to illustrate how easy it is to build). The name "school girl motor" was to illustrate the ease. Hundreds, if not thousands of people have since built that motor or variations thereof, thanks in large part to the work being done by Friedrich.


www.examiner.com...




No amount of evidence???? What?

You gave me a website to go to. I went to it, and sure enough somebody tested Bedini's SG design, and he is NOT getting over unity with it! The only time he got some odd readings is when one of the components in his circuit burned out, remember this?


The last time I checked at peswiki.com they had data from many peoples' replications there, not just one. And don't forget, Bedini also has the Yahoo groups where he has people building these.

But you seem to have picked the most negative one and focused in on it and ignored all the other data. Why?



posted on Jun, 27 2010 @ 07:04 PM
link   
reply to post by cupocoffee
 


Just because they replicated the Motor DOESN'T mean it works
all they have done is copy the design


Also HOW can you say RANDI is biased he challenges people how make extraordinary claims to prove there claims!

So if you claim you can make energy from thin air you have to prove it,
if you claim you can bend spoons using some special power you have to prove it.

Have a look at this

www.youtube.com...



posted on Jun, 27 2010 @ 07:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by wmd_2008
Just because they replicated the Motor DOESN'T mean it works
all they have done is copy the design



FFS


READ the link that I posted.

Clearly Stirling Allan of PESWiki.com believes that it works. And Friedrich, who started out as a member of Allan's "New Energy Congress", clearly believes that it works - he moved to Idaho to work in Bedini's lab full time.

And they have had hundreds of other people replicating it.

READ the article, before you post! The evidence you're looking for is right there!



posted on Jun, 28 2010 @ 10:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by cupocoffee
You are another one who has never even tried building the SG motor even though the schematics have been freely available for years.


This is not the only activity that I consider pointless and not worth undertaking. I do not sing "Hare Krishna" and I don't smoke either.


You jump to conclusions and assume it won't work without even trying the experiment first. How unscientific of you!


I spent more time in physics laboratories than I can conveniently count. So don't "unscientific" me, conservation of energy is something that many of us observed many times over.


And Bedini has made little motors that have run continuously for years, but he says "you can't call this perpetual motion because sooner or later a bearing will wear out or a part will need replacing". Which makes sense. Any machine that has moving parts eventually needs repairs.


I'm OK with wear and tear. But why does he still buy electrical power form his utility company? You would think that a person with a working Horn of Plenty does not need a supermarket. So I call BS on that.



posted on Jun, 28 2010 @ 12:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by buddhasystem
This is not the only activity that I consider pointless and not worth undertaking. I do not sing "Hare Krishna" and I don't smoke either.


And that is where I lose respect for you, your "I already know that won't work so I refuse to even try it" attitude.




I spent more time in physics laboratories than I can conveniently count. So don't "unscientific" me,


Bedini has an experiment that he's getting hundreds or thousands of people to try and many people are getting positive results with it.

You refuse to even try the experiment even though the schematic is freely available and the cost is trivial.

Refusing to even try a simple experiment is unscientific no matter how you slice it.

To me your word on free energy means nothing, regardless of all your credentials, because you refuse to even try the Bedini 101 experiment.

Are you afraid you might be proven wrong?




conservation of energy is something that many of us observed many times over.


Yes, conservation of the kind of energy you can measure with voltmeters and ammeters and oscilloscopes. Not the "Radiant" type of energy that Bedini speaks of, you know nothing of that because you refuse to try any of the experiments.

PS you were asking before, if it works why doesn't he make a "perpetual motion machine".

Bedini SG Self-Runner

Again keep in mind that any machine with moving parts will need repairs eventually so this won't truly run forever, but I believe it's pretty close to what you were asking for.



posted on Jun, 28 2010 @ 01:11 PM
link   
I thought this discussion was about the Turkish inventor. Forget about Randi he is a failed entertainer trying to draw attention. There is a really good article on SCEPCOP about him that was mentioned on another thread on here. How about discussing whether Alperen has the real deal or not. Have they actually scammed anybody yet or not? Convince me.



posted on Jun, 28 2010 @ 02:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by michial
I thought this discussion was about the Turkish inventor.


Agreed, the thread has gotten way off topic. Arbitrageur had said that the inventors should build and sell real units; I just wanted to point out that there are some like Bedini who already are doing that, as well as giving away some designs for free.

It is a good way to spread knowledge and experience and get more people involved with the technology, but ultimately someone has got to get them produced in large numbers. That's where the real problem has always been.



posted on Jun, 28 2010 @ 03:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by cupocoffee

Originally posted by buddhasystem
This is not the only activity that I consider pointless and not worth undertaking. I do not sing "Hare Krishna" and I don't smoke either.


And that is where I lose respect for you, your "I already know that won't work so I refuse to even try it" attitude.


You failed to comprehend what I wrote. Conservation of energy has been established in innumerable experiments, under varying conditions and with different kind of apparatuses. Taking just one more data point for the sake of it is uninteresting.

Remember one definition of insanity? Repeating the same action over and over, expecting a different result. Feel free.



posted on Jun, 28 2010 @ 06:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by buddhasystem
Remember one definition of insanity? Repeating the same action over and over, expecting a different result. Feel free.


But you haven't even tried it once! Let alone over and over!


The fact is, you haven't tried the experiment, so you don't know for certain. There is a chance that Bedini and all his supporters could be right and you could be proven wrong, and that's probably why you refuse to do it.



posted on Jun, 28 2010 @ 10:17 PM
link   
reply to post by cupocoffee
 





But you haven't even tried it once! Let alone over and over!

The fact is, you haven't tried the experiment, so you don't know for certain. There is a chance that Bedini and all his supporters could be right and you could be proven wrong, and that's probably why you refuse to do it.



There is also a chance that I could stick my unprotected hand into a raging fire and not get burned. But I'm not going to do it just because you think it is the scientific thing to do. You should learn this little fact about the scientific method: scientists publish their results in a way that other scientists can replicate them. Once several scientists have replicated the results then other scientists don't have to replicate the same experiment. If Bedini would publish his results and permit others to independently replicate his results, then you wouldn't be having this discussion - whichever way it turned out.

The fact remains that there are zero credible reports of the SG working as Bedini describes, and many of it not working as he describes. When people do build it with good faith and report back with the disappointing results, he claims they are not technically capable of building it (even though Engineers have a great deal more technical expertise than required for a School Girl Science project - see Challenge to Eric Krieg) or don't have the methodology to measure it (even though the methodology of measuring the parameters of a battery under charge and under load is probably one of the siimplest things in Electrical Engineering - Not hearing from John or Peter).

Bedini doesn't let independent labs check his claims under controlled protocols because he is a fraud. There can be no other reason. If his stuff works, it works, and he has nothing to lose and everything to gain by an independent, open, analysis.

You are supporting his fraud by trying to goad people into giving Bedini money. Your entire history of posting in this thread constitutes advertising for Bedini which is against the ATS T&C.



posted on Jun, 29 2010 @ 08:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by rnaa
There is also a chance that I could stick my unprotected hand into a raging fire and not get burned. But I'm not going to do it just because you think it is the scientific thing to do.


That's a poor analogy, there is no danger in building a SG motor, except the danger of losing maybe $100 in parts. If that's too much of a risk for you, you're a chicken.




If Bedini would publish his results and permit others to independently replicate his results, then you wouldn't be having this discussion - whichever way it turned out.


Oh My God. Try doing some research.

Bedini has published his results, he has published two books with Bearden, he has given away the schematics for the SG and other designs for free, he has all sorts of people from PESWiki and the Yahoo groups replicating his results. And now people can replicate the 10-coil energizer as well, they're selling kits with everything necessary for that. Parts, schematics, instructional videos, everything.

I don't know where you got this idea that Bedini won't publish data or let others test and replicate his work, but you're way, way off. Seems like you're just arguing for the sake of arguing.




The fact remains that there are zero credible reports of the SG working as Bedini describes,


If you don't consider people like Bearden and Stirling Allan and Friedrich and Peter Lindemann credible, well I guess that's your choice. After all, anybody that actually TRIES THE EXPERIMENT and takes Bedini's side is just one of his "buddies" who's "in on the scam", right?




Bedini doesn't let independent labs check his claims under controlled protocols


Any independent lab in the world can try replicating one of his freely available designs. And now any independent lab in the world can test out the 10-coil energizer.

The problem is as I said before, no one wants to put their precious credibility on the line. No one wants to step forward and say "Yes, this device appears to just create energy out of thin air. This is an Over Unity device".

Well actually, Bearden does. But now he's just "in on the scam". And Stirling Allan, but I suppose he's just "in on the scam" too......




You are supporting his fraud by trying to goad people into giving Bedini money.


Negative, I'm encouraging people to do the SG motor experiment, and the schematics for it are freely available. That doesn't make Bedini any money.

Obviously people aren't going to spend money on the 10-coil kit if they haven't even done the Bedini-101 experiment.




Your entire history of posting in this thread constitutes advertising for Bedini which is against the ATS T&C.


Arbitrageur asked, why aren't the inventors building and selling real units, like the Atmos clock people did.

I posted the infomercial for the 10-coil energizer just to point out that some inventors, like Bedini, ARE selling real units.

I post in support of Bedini because I feel he makes all the right moves. He publishes books with data and schematics in them, he gives away schematics for free on the web, he gets many people to replicate and test his work, and he sells real units.

If you and buddhasystem and Arbitrageur want to keep trying to debunk and discredit him, I'll keep supporting him. This can go on for another 5 or 10 pages if you guys want, makes no difference to me.



posted on Jun, 29 2010 @ 08:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by cupocoffee
Bedini has ....all sorts of people from PESWiki and the Yahoo groups replicating his results.

Originally posted by rnaa
The fact remains that there are zero credible reports of the SG working as Bedini describes
Even when I go through the replications on Peswiki, the "success" don't seem to demonstrate over unity for very long, just a short time like the one I posted or maybe a little longer, but no extended performance longer than the battery charge would last. And some people don't seem to be following Bedini's advice to start with completely discharged batteries for their test as you suggested they need to for accurate results. And they certainly don't seem to be measuring the total stored power in all of the batteries in controlled trials. One guy did start with one charged battery and two discharged batteries. But nowhere do I see any reason to believe that he didn't start out with 105 amp hours in one battery, and end up with 30 amp hours in each of the 3 batteries which is what you'd get if you just hooked all 3 batteries together without Bedini's SG motor. You don't like the replication I posted, why not post a link to one you think is a "good" one? There is no evidence these folks know how to measure all the variables involved or make controlled experiments like a certified testing lab would.


Originally posted by cupocoffee

Originally posted by wmd_2008
Just because they replicated the Motor DOESN'T mean it works
all they have done is copy the design

FFS


READ the link that I posted.

Clearly Stirling Allan of PESWiki.com believes that it works. And Friedrich, who started out as a member of Allan's "New Energy Congress", clearly believes that it works - he moved to Idaho to work in Bedini's lab full time.

And they have had hundreds of other people replicating it.

READ the article, before you post! The evidence you're looking for is right there!
What does FFS mean?
Are you talking about that examiner.com article you posted? I did read that and it doesn't really prove anything. wmd_2008 is right, 300 people replicating the motor doesn't mean any of them are over unity. Exactly zero people have proven that claim.

Is Friedrich the guy who's getting a substantial share of the profits from selling maybe $100 worth of components for $4000?

pesn.com...

The kits can be purchased through Friedrich's website: PotentialTec.com...
We should take his "unbiased" word for it? For the umpteenth time, we need an independent lab to verify, like when Muller sent his to a lab for testing, but oops, it didn't work either. Bedini probably knows better than to send his to a lab because he already knows it doesn't really do what he claims. If he really thought it works I expect he would have had an independent lab test it like Muller did with his design.


Originally posted by cupocoffee

PS you were asking before, if it works why doesn't he make a "perpetual motion machine".

Bedini SG Self-Runner


Do you even read your own sources? The link you posted written by Friedrich says:


May 17, 2007, Rick Fredrich wrote:

"Replicate at your own risk. I do not believe this setup is more advantageous than a non-self-running setup where the coil instead pulses into another battery and batteries are instead swapped around. I believe the information shared below is thorough in all necessary details if one follows carefully every point. The process is the key not any one replication. I have no interest in leaving this setup as constructed as I have long been satisfied with the results along the lines I describe. I don’t need it to prove to myself any further and I do not believe it is necessary to prove to anyone else. And I don’t care to be some person who shows it to the world as that is not my calling in life."
So basically he's saying "if you are looking for proof this thing works, don't ask me, I took mine apart so I don't have to show it to anybody and I don't need to prove it". And this is the guy you're saying can prove it? He says he can't/won't.

"I do not believe it is necessary to prove to anyone else."??? What? And he has a source of free energy but he's not going to leave it hooked up so he can use it? Even a gullible person has to smell that this stinks.

I hate to hurl ad-hominems against someone I don't even know, but what kind of moron thinks there's no need to prove a free energy machine, especially when he's the guy you send us to for proof?


I'll tell you what kind of guy, he's probably not a moron but a con artist that makes $3900 less Bedini's cut on each kit he sells.

[edit on 29-6-2010 by Arbitrageur]





top topics
 
59
<< 8  9  10    12  13  14 >>

log in

join