It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by Phage
If the technology is suppressed, why is there so much information about it? That's sort of an oxymoron isn't it? The internet is full of free energy devices. There are published patents available (or used to be until the patent office demanded a working model). There is nothing to prevent anyone from making use of them.
Originally posted by FreedomCommander
plus there is a site that gives people designs of Free Energy Generators
Originally posted by john_bmth
Originally posted by Amaterasu
Memories and documentation are hardly "conjecture," sweetheart. So, yes. I have personal experience and documentation. What else can One have when the tech is kept tightly under wraps and One has no other access?
Actually, it is conjecture:
con·jec·ture /kənˈdʒɛktʃər/ Show Spelled [kuhn-jek-cher]
noun, verb, -tured, -tur·ing. –noun
1. the formation or expression of an opinion or theory without sufficient evidence for proof.
2. an opinion or theory so formed or expressed; guess; speculation.
3. Obsolete . the interpretation of signs or omens. –verb (used with object)
4. to conclude or suppose from grounds or evidence insufficient to ensure reliability. –verb (used without object)
5. to form conjectures.
No lack of evidence that electrogravitics was being studied in the 1950's. (Again, read Secrets of Antigravity Propulsion.) Ergo, it is admissible.edit on 5/31/2011 by Amaterasu because: tags
Electrogravitics is a failed hypothesis proposed by Thomas Townsend Brown and Brown's subsequent extensive experimentation and demonstrations of the effect. The term was in widespread use by 1956. The effects of electrogravity have been searched for extensively in countless experiments since the beginning of the 20th century; to date, other than Brown's experiments and the more recent ones reported by R. L. Talley, Eugene Podkletnov, and Giovanni Modanese, no conclusive evidence of electrogravitic signatures has been found. Recently, some investigation has begun in electrohydrodynamics (EHD) or sometimes electro-fluid-dynamics, a counterpart to the well-known magnetohydrodynamics, but these do not seem a priori to be related to Brown's "electrogravitics" .
I am unsure why things MUST be "peer reviewed." Since the system of peer review is biased towards a set world view, new and/or disruptive technology will NOT get positive peer review no matter how valid the work is.
Frankly, I have little faith at all in peer review.
*Sigh* yet again, someone rubbishing peer-review when they have no knowledge or experience of it. Peer-review gave you the computer you are using right now, they internetwork that we are communicating through, the very medicine which has most likely saved you from various fatal diseases, put the satellites into space that allow you to talk on your mobile etc. etc. etc. etc. etc. The old line of "they keep out anything that goes against the status quo" has absolutely no basis whatsoever. Time and time again the status quo has been overthrown by new discoveries that can and have been independently verified (i.e. not internet board conjecture).
Originally posted by notsoperfect
Nokola Tesla invented the free energy device in 1930 to run his Pierce Arrow automobile for a week. It is a very well recorded history. I think his fundamental problem was that he could not convince himself let alone others that such things can be possible even if he performed the feat in reality. He scrapped the whole project after he was criticized by the media that he was performing 'black magic". If he could prove his device with mathemactical detail in fundamental physics, for example, in the theory of Maxwell's electromagnetism, I don't think he would have scrapped it.
He couldn't back up his working device with mathematics by proving why the known theory of electricity and magnetism was wrong and in what way.
This has been the same problem for all of the free energy device researchers. If you can't prove that the fundamental local energy conservation law in physics has been wrong, your device can not be right. And the reason that the law was wrong should also be the cause of your free energy device itself.
It may work but it could be a black magic or a pure coincidence that can not be repeated in real life situation, which means it is useless.
You may not know very well, because there was no fanfare about it, but this mystery has been solved.
Google "Physics of free energy device". It is completely open to the public. There should be huge fan fare about it, but obviously the main stream media is not interested in it. Physics of Free Energy Device
Originally posted by Skyfloating
Anything an actual profit can be made of, you can be sure it wont be suppressed for long. Thats human nature. Thats why I quit believing in all this suppressed science stuff. The world is an extremely competitive place and if something comes along that is better, it will be used.
Originally posted by poet1b
People who dismiss this information off hand without every doing any research choose ignorance.
Originally posted by UnlawfullPriest
reply to post by hawkiye
Going to have to call your bluff, Tesla was not as forgotten as you think. Infact There are several museums that have been around for a long time www.tesla-museum.org.../m&opc=sub2 for example since 1952 or the one in Colorado Springs, CO, which I'm not entirely sure when it was opened but it's been atleast 25 year. Tesla wasn't forgotten by those around him.