Why is there no Main Stream Media reporting the Rossi/Focardi E-Cat

page: 3
294
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join

posted on Mar, 3 2011 @ 09:56 AM
link   
This isn't a game changer. This is equivalent to making a move that places the other side's king in check. Remember, all it takes to change that is... making a move.

You want a game changer? How about something that produces a ton of energy, requires no fuel, and you can eat it without any ill effects?




posted on Mar, 3 2011 @ 10:00 AM
link   
Free energy will raise your taxes though. They have already invented some pseudo taxes to replace the loss in CO2 tax here in Denmark.

translate.google.dk...
edit on 3-3-2011 by conar because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 3 2011 @ 11:14 AM
link   
Has this e-CAT ever been demonstrated to be scaled up?

We see a lot of these 'free' energy devices that simply fail when built up to commercial applications. And for the last time can we eliminate the FREE from free energy devises? You have to build the machine, supply the raw material fuel, generate, store, and transmit the energy and none of that is FREE!

I don't see how this will work in a car. A steam car engine?!



posted on Mar, 3 2011 @ 11:30 AM
link   

Originally posted by Illustronic
Has this e-CAT ever been demonstrated to be scaled up?

We see a lot of these 'free' energy devices that simply fail when built up to commercial applications. And for the last time can we eliminate the FREE from free energy devises? You have to build the machine, supply the raw material fuel, generate, store, and transmit the energy and none of that is FREE!

I don't see how this will work in a car. A steam car engine?!



Even Rossi says they have been hesitant to do so. If they can scale them enough to just run everything on an individual level (car, light, tv, phone, etc) then there would be no need for power plants or centralized reactors as everything would have its own power source.

This could be as simple as having every new product come with life-time energy supply. Introducing it that way would also cushion the blow to the oil market as it would let them scale back and reinvest in other things slowly instead of just having the rug pulled out. Not that I feel sorry for them



posted on Mar, 3 2011 @ 11:31 AM
link   
Instead of complaining on a conspiracy theory website while don't we all join up and email/call all of our local new stations about this? Surely ONE will do a story on it and who knows.. it might spread from there.

Can about someone lead in the direction where I can find the most information on this possible to put together an email that we could all cut/paste to our local stations?



posted on Mar, 3 2011 @ 11:38 AM
link   
reply to post by kneverr
 


I might have found the video valuable info if I knew what the
heck they were saying..
edit on 3-3-2011 by imawlinn because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 3 2011 @ 11:40 AM
link   
There is really too many comments to reply to here.

If free energy came out tomorrow and replaced oil and gas fuel, the oil companies would not have to tear down all their infrastructure. FYI There are thousands upon thousands of products made from crude. Things that unlimited energy could not touch because it is simply not in the same category.

Organic and Inorganic solvents. Plastics. Lubricating oils, waxes, polishes, etc. The list goes on and on.

And the truth is, is that if energy was available near free, the oil companies could jack their rates on everything else they produce and there would be an economic shift. It happens all the time in business. It wouldn't be the end of an industry, it would be a change in current market values and product values.




Only if it is not available to the masses. And nothing will cost anything once free energy is widespread.


That's ridiculous. Nothing would cost anything? So we have unlimited food supply because we have unlimited energy? This is an absurd statement. You still have to produce food, you still have to produce clothing, people still have to administer paper work. There are still jobs and therefore there is still money. Jobs = Money, If you want insight into this just walk around the US or Canada. Everything is about consumption. Take energy out of the game and people would just buy more useless crap than they already do.




...electrogravitics...


I did a few online searches and I found people passing off ion lifters (charged aluminum foil) as electrogravitics. Maybe you can direct me to a legitimate source of electrogravitics. Something real without five pages of "Don King-esque intelligence speak" attached to it.



You're talking about technology, inventions that use energy. I'm talking energy production itself.


Inventions have lowered the costs of many, many things in history. So the two go hand in hand. And this is an invention that lowers the cost of something. Not really unconnected.



Maybe because Rossi is a convicted fraudster? He was sent to jail in the 90s for some energy product related scam, and seems to be an all round shady character.


Big surprise. I did quick search, apparently the argument on the other side is: "The government shut him down because they didn't want him to succeed."

I agree with you. Many fraudsters out there. Met one personally that told me about his grandiose energy production plans and suggested I invest. Also told me about other investments schemes that triggered warnings from the FBI website when I google searched them. lol.

Here Here and Here




Not only would they have to dismantle a complex system of doing business which they are already familiar with, in favor of something completely new and different


The way corporations operate these days is not so black and white. They are set up to make money on just about anything. Hence why GE is considered a financial company as opposed to an electronics manufacturer. Read about the days of Milken and the Drexel scandal. People were creating businesses out of thin air and consolidating, merging companies together that were complete opposites.

Milken Book




and if it really were 'free energy'...then they would have a hell of a time figuring out how to make a profit. In other words, it would be a HUGE risk


This isn't the case. There are so many types of business that have been created out of thin air. There are also things that should cost nothing that cost way too much. Business is much trickier than how it has been outlined in this thread.



but his money was riding on DC, so he ridiculed Tesla's AC at every opportunity


They were competing, yes. There are many processes in current business that compete with each other. There are many options that are favoured as it stands now. But there is a huge profit potential with no cost energy. Not just by energy industries, but by industry that pays a fortune for energy.

Case in point. A large size fabrication shop can spend up and over 200k a month on hyrdo bills. There are people in think tanks trying to reduce cost at these places. If energy companies themselves didn't try to usurp "free energy" there are a thousand other fields that would want it.



...that it would actually HELP to stabilize those countries? Of course it wouldn't.....if anything it would make them desperate, and probably cause more anti-american sentiment than ever before.


Terrorism started when other nations started invading these countries for their resources. Lol.



I can understand your skepticism; however, has anyone ever completed a study on what costs might be involved for an oil company to decommission all of its infrastructure (in order to start pursuing a new form of energy production?) I'm thinking that while they were busy wrapping up all their previous interests (rigs, pipelines etc) and shifting their marketing focus, we'd see other start-ups & lateral diversification from companies coming in and 'stealing the glory'.


I don't think you guys understand how many products are made from fossil fuels. It's in just about anything we consume. Energy production is really just the tip of the iceberg.

And no, they would not have to tear down their infrastructure. They may have to make modifications, yes.



Even Rossi says they have been hesitant to do so. If they can scale them enough to just run everything on an individual level (car, light, tv, phone, etc) then there would be no need for power plants or centralized reactors as everything would have its own power source.


This is absurd. People will not want mini-reactors in their homes. And if you did this, you still create a giant industry with maintenance, installation and insurance. You are going to create a billion or so reactors and put them in every home, apartment building, business, etc? This is science fiction. Energy is centralized for a reason, whether it be free or paid for.

There are certain systems that work de-centralized, solar and thermal to be exact. As far as "cold fusion" or something that generates superheated steam, it's not happening. People would want it centralized, normal people, without tinfoil hats.



posted on Mar, 3 2011 @ 12:06 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Mar, 3 2011 @ 12:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by boncho

This is absurd. People will not want mini-reactors in their homes. And if you did this, you still create a giant industry with maintenance, installation and insurance. You are going to create a billion or so reactors and put them in every home, apartment building, business, etc? This is science fiction. Energy is centralized for a reason, whether it be free or paid for.



Exactly. An entirely new industry providing jobs and monopolies. That's exactly why they would take that approach.



posted on Mar, 3 2011 @ 12:47 PM
link   
reply to post by Cuervo
 


To add to that, if you ask anyone with a shred of business-savvy, "What would you do with energy that cost near nothing to produce?", they would salivate over it.

Look at how much T-Boone Pickens spent trying to turn water into the next profitable commodity. Commodities cost money because they are controlled. And something free can still be controlled.

Think about the energy consumption of major industries. (Steel being the highest because of the energy used in welding and other processes) There are places that use millions of dollars worth of energy in a months time. These places aren't going to run off a DIY kit bought off the internet. And the profit potential of developing a system that can supply them with energy that costs nothing to make is so lucrative that it hurts my brain to think about how rich you could be off just supplying them alone.

Even with monopolised coal, oil and gas market, the companies are always looking for ways to wring extra money out of their consumers. No cost energy would send profit margins to the moon. Quite literally.

The idea that all this technology is suppressed usually comes with links to DIY kits and other crap that involves selling books of some kind or ads for colloidal silver. The truth is, is if it worked like people have been saying for the past 50 years, there would be people setting them up themselves, but, that would last only as long as it takes for a major corporation to monopolize the process.

Look at the history of Facebook and Google and so many other good ideas that started grass roots and turned into major players. Look at UV filtration systems in India. The people making them did so successfully, and when an attempt to suppress them happened it became a public incident. That's because the technology actually worked. When things tend to work for real people tend to back up the invention.



posted on Mar, 3 2011 @ 12:51 PM
link   
reply to post by coolhanddan
 


*ahem*

Because it's unproven crap. There's no evidence to show that it works and the media doesn't want egg on their face like they did back around in the 90's. Hell, Rossi and Focardi both don't even know how it works, they claim that it simply does. They didn't bother publishing their scientific paper in a proper journal and instead founded their own so they wouldn't have to face proper review.

Again, crap. Poop. Bovine fecal matter.



posted on Mar, 3 2011 @ 12:53 PM
link   
Well if TPTB weren't waiting for us to get destroyed by the upcoming cataclysm they would release all this suppressed technology. Letting the masses rebuild at this point with the new tech would be counter productive to their corrupt global agenda focused on ridding the world of 80% of it's human population.

S+F



posted on Mar, 3 2011 @ 01:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by conar
Free energy will raise your taxes though. They have already invented some pseudo taxes to replace the loss in CO2 tax here in Denmark.


I contend that free energy will be the death-knoll for taxes, as money vanishes. Finally, we will have only death to tackle.



posted on Mar, 3 2011 @ 01:18 PM
link   
reply to post by Amaterasu
 


How does money vanish? Money does not vanish. Money is a representation of goods and services and there will always be goods and services as long as people are functioning: eating, pooping, travelling, dressing themselves etc.

This isn't the Venus project, the world is not going to rid itself of money.

I am not saying changes shouldn't be made to the monetary system, just that it will never go away.

CASE IN POINT: Research some prisons and the economic systems that develop inside of them. In some, stamps are used as money because they can be sold later on on the outside. And economies within the institutions have used anything from cigarettes, to drugs, to potato chips as currency.

Sorry, people use money, it's in our nature to put value on things, this will not disappear.



posted on Mar, 3 2011 @ 01:20 PM
link   
reply to post by Phenomium
 


There is no MSM reportng because there is, as yet, no confirmation by disinterested third parties. Many in the established physics community think that they know all the answers and do not need this new physics raining on their parade. In fact, when we examine what we know of the atomic nucleus, we find that we have just enough knowledge to make reactors and bombs. That knowledge was as a result of clobbering nuclei with particles of >10 KeV energies. We don't know what happens when we have an interaction of 2eV or less, 5000 times less energetic. The rules for gamma emissions may no longer apply at these low energies.
If the schedue holds, there should be a 1 MW thermal plant operating in Athens, Greece by October. Nothing succeeds like success and the MSM will cover it then.

ETA: No energy is free. The market will determine the prices and the difference will be whom we are paying. A transition to the ECat will likely take decades but the advantages over solar, nuclear, wind, etc. are obvious.
edit on 3/3/2011 by pteridine because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 3 2011 @ 01:30 PM
link   
People act like its shocking that "mainstream" media isn't reporting on something informitive and educational. The story is not sensational or cannot be sensationalized in any way. Mainstream america does not care or understand stuff like this. You can tell because the news outlets report on american idol and surviver and jersey shore more than stuff that's germain or important to everyday life. The american masses don't want to learn about cold fusion anymore than they want to miss this weeks dancing with the stars. If people wanted information, there wouldn't be much of a need for sites like ats.



posted on Mar, 3 2011 @ 01:57 PM
link   
reply to post by madnessinmysoul
 


Madnessinmysoul,

You are correct sir, I can confirm he has a hand in the journal that he is running this E-CAT papers through, very suspicious.

No peer reviewed to date but working for 18 hour demonstration is hard to retort unless the demo was a fraud.


I agree with another poster that we will find out when Greece has the first one up and running and someone else can confirm/make money.

I understand from another poster that feeling are hurt when scientist jump the gun so to speak and throw their idea on all of us without confirmation from a few labs to replicate this event and agree but Rossi may have a reason for this as well.

Rossi does not have humanity on his radar, like some would like to think, the paycheck is in the mail and he is waiting for it, those are the fact as I see them. Many different ways to approach this if he was go release this for the good of the human race.

I ebayed nano nickel, about a ten dollars a gram and in the test very little was used to provide that power so this is cheap if true, but I seem to be falling into the same problem the MSM has had reporting this, "if its true" I guess is needed until we all think there is no question this works and I guess more proof would require that so the jury is out.

I can not find mischievous actions from anyone that could suppress this to date, so unless we can find a connection I have to fall back on madnessinmysoul and others reasoning until further proof................



posted on Mar, 3 2011 @ 01:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by boncho
reply to post by Amaterasu
 


How does money vanish? Money does not vanish. Money is a representation of goods and services and there will always be goods and services as long as people are functioning: eating, pooping, travelling, dressing themselves etc.


No... Money is a representation of energy expended. The farmer does not charge for his vegetables. He charges for the energy to till, plant, care for, harvest and transport the veggies. The sun, seed, water, land is freely there. Money was developed to account for the energy expended. With infinite energy comes infinite money - which has no social application.


This isn't the Venus project, the world is not going to rid itself of money.


No, you're right. This isn't.


I am not saying changes shouldn't be made to the monetary system, just that it will never go away.


Sure it will. With infinite energy, money will be worth an infinitely small amount, and not worth the effort to go through the trouble of messing with.


CASE IN POINT: Research some prisons and the economic systems that develop inside of them. In some, stamps are used as money because they can be sold later on on the outside. And economies within the institutions have used anything from cigarettes, to drugs, to potato chips as currency.

Sorry, people use money, it's in our nature to put value on things, this will not disappear.


You are comparing finite energy systems with one of infinite energy. Any past system is a scarcity paradigm, and infinite energy ushers in the first abundance paradigm Humanity has every known. Surely we will place value on things, but without money, it will be the reputation of the producer that will define his/her "wealth."



posted on Mar, 3 2011 @ 02:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by imawlinn
reply to post by kneverr
 


I might have found the video valuable info if I knew what the
heck they were saying..
edit on 3-3-2011 by imawlinn because: (no reason given)


There's a subtitled version of the video floating about YT somewhere.

I watched it, but didn't download it, otherwise i'd have upped it here.

Have a search about on YT, it's there somewhere.

They're Italians btw.



posted on Mar, 3 2011 @ 02:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by pteridine
ETA: No energy is free. The market will determine the prices and the difference will be whom we are paying. A transition to the ECat will likely take decades but the advantages over solar, nuclear, wind, etc. are obvious.


Agreed that the initial development of the sources such as the plenum energy ("dark" energy/zero point energy/etc.) will be sold. But unlike such things such as hydropower, solar power, coal, etc., plenum energy can be extracted anywhere, anytime. And since it is scale invariant, can have devices of most any size built, a simple toaster-sized box could power one's house. Cost (initially)? About $200, I might guess.

I am unsure about the ECat and its abilities, but I am certain of electrogravitics and what we can do with that.





new topics
top topics
 
294
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join