Cold Fusion #1 Claims NASA Chief!

page: 2
74
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join

posted on Jun, 2 2011 @ 07:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by OnlyLove
reply to post by Arken
 




Found this video, thought it would be relevant



Very relevant!

Thanks!
Stars for you!




posted on Jun, 2 2011 @ 08:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by 8311-XHT
reply to post by phishyblankwaters
 


Plus.. believe it or not.. but I have some inside info that proved to me the US had antigrav at a very advanced state by the late 60s and because of the book The Hunt for Zero Point by Nick Cook it documented where this tech came from. I have no doubt it came from Schauberger. Schauberger's work was also verified by TTBrown's work.


Yes, Schauberger's work was very important for the Nazis. My inside info that confirms Yours - that the US had antigravity even BEFORE the late 1960's - comes from My father, who was a CalTech grad in electrical engineering and who worked for one of the foremost aerospace contractors in the 1950's. He would come home and try to teach His toddler (Me) how electrogravitics (EG) worked, what it did, and what the world I would be growing up in would look like. EG could create antigravity and overunity, and My father said the world I would be growing up in would see cars that flew, houses and even cities that floated, and plenty of energy for all We might want.

In late 1959, early 1960, My father came home late one night from work and woke Me up. He explained that "They want it secret for now." That was when EG was pulled into black ops.


One thing I am completely certain of though is that our gov has had antigravity since at least WWII and it originated from Schauberger and TTBrown.


TTBrown (with Biefield) was the "father" of electrogravitics. So You are fully correct on this score, too. [smile]

EDIT to add: A couple of very good books to read include SS Brotherhood of the Bell and Secrets of Antigravity Propulsion.
edit on 6/2/2011 by Amaterasu because: add



posted on Jun, 2 2011 @ 08:56 PM
link   
reply to post by Amaterasu
 


Amazing info... thank you for posting! Schauberger made his discovery from watching fish and observing water and vortices and other natural phenomena. It appears that fish can gather these charges and contian them to create an electrogravitic potential. I also heard of a Russian bug scientist that claimed to make an antigravity craft with some rare(endangered) insect bodies/chitin.

I am unsure if this Russian bug scientist was legit.. but I found a weird connection.. it turns out the Egytpians had a section of their great Giza pyramid Aabove the king chamber filled with insect bodies. If this Russian bug scientist was legit II think whoever built those pyramids understood electrogravitics, too. But there was no way for bigs to get into that portion of the pyramid.. they must have been there for some purpose to aid the operation of the pyramid - see christopher Dunn..



posted on Jun, 2 2011 @ 09:18 PM
link   
reply to post by 8311-XHT
 


Most welcome. [smile]

I did not hear of the Russian scientist and the bugs. Nor that the Pyramid had bugs anywhere inside! Do You have links?



posted on Jun, 2 2011 @ 09:44 PM
link   
Gosh, it only took, what, 40 years for science to stop laughing at the feasibility of cold fusion ?

Ah well, better late than never I guess.



posted on Jun, 2 2011 @ 10:09 PM
link   
The use of Fusion to fuel Power Stations is still Low Tech.
All they want to do, is what the current low tech Nuclear Power station do........Heat water to steam, then drive the turbine. A job currently done much cheaper, and less pollutive than Nuclear, via coal and natural gas.

Heating water to produce steam, to drive a turbine, looses massive amounts of energy.

What is needed is a direct propulsion system to drive the turbine directly....................

And they already do it!!!..................Its called Gas Turbines.

Basically it is a Natural gas powered "Jet Engines" that are directly linked to the Electrical producing turbines, without the wasteful need to heat massive amounts of water, and all the associated problems etc etc.

Country's that have large Natural Gas supplies, Like the USA, could easily use this tech, without dirty nuclear furnaces.

The coal reserves can be turned into liquid oil and more natural gas, those processes are already known.
All the Rubbish dumps produce methane, that could power the turbines. Recycled food and plants scraps, even paper, can be used to make Ethanol etc, to power the Turbines.

Unfortunately, once again...the Sheeple are controlled, by the large corporations who are already on the gravy train and dont want to stop.
edit on 2-6-2011 by gort51 because: cant spell



posted on Jun, 2 2011 @ 10:49 PM
link   
reply to post by Arbitrageur
 


trolololol



posted on Jun, 2 2011 @ 10:49 PM
link   
reply to post by Arken
 


I fail to see how this is cold fusion. he's simply saying that the way of the future is low energy nuclear reactions, which is true. That could mean anything, from a laser-based reaction, to a resonance frequency based Tesla thing, to a cold fusion thing. Nothing seems suppressed to me, unless you think its a good idea to release half-finished work to companies. Great job with BP, eh?

Let them do what they're trained to do. They will release it when its ready and then we will be on our way.

Besides, if we work with resonance frequencies, then cold fusion isn't even worth it. You might as well learn the frequencies of quarks to change them to anti quarks and generate cold antimatter reactions. F cold fusion, there's your future.
edit on 2-6-2011 by Gorman91 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 2 2011 @ 11:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by Arken



It is quite refreshing to hear such positive statements, in support of cold fusion, from a mainstream, credible, and respected scientist!


Thanks for posting!
I will read more into this!
Star and Flag



posted on Jun, 3 2011 @ 12:06 AM
link   
So wait...these scientists have been actively supressing development of a technology because they didn't like the grammar being used?

seriously? 20 years of listening to them dismiss and ignore this because they didn't like the wording? how many wars? how many terrorist cells? how much blood spilled on oil because some twats didn't like the wording?

great..glad they came around...now, can we execute some of them for being such $@^&ing @#$% $#@%^#s? lets see if screams of corporate scientists give off any fusion...grrr

but anyhow, good news...get it rolling, and perhaps we can simply let the luddies drift away into obscurity verses demand charges get pressed, or them dragged through the streets to answer for their crimes...

ok, feeling a bit passionate about this...will just smile and be happy that the overlords allowed us a scrap of technology to wow over. thanks my lords...thank you for the crust of bread.



posted on Jun, 3 2011 @ 12:08 AM
link   

Originally posted by Gorman91
reply to post by Arken
 


I fail to see how this is cold fusion. he's simply saying that the way of the future is low energy nuclear reactions, which is true.


low energy...aka, not superheating...cold..

nuclear reaction...aka, fusion

toe-may-toe
toe-mah-toe
edit on 3-6-2011 by unicomsol because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 3 2011 @ 12:20 AM
link   
reply to post by unicomsol
 


low energy is low activation energy ( i think at least). The energy required to start a process. That does not necessarily mean heat. I mean, a nuclear reaction at a few hundred degrees could be considered cold if its got low energy requirements.



posted on Jun, 3 2011 @ 12:25 AM
link   
reply to post by zarp3333
 


Sorry...I just can't imagine that and it's a shame because every fiber in me wants to. A world that works because everyone is on the same page and the mission is obviously for the good of all? Nah!...But boy how I wish!!!



posted on Jun, 3 2011 @ 12:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by Gorman91
reply to post by unicomsol
 


low energy is low activation energy ( i think at least). The energy required to start a process. That does not necessarily mean heat. I mean, a nuclear reaction at a few hundred degrees could be considered cold if its got low energy requirements.


Yes, thats the actual point...and the definition overall of cold fusion.

they are simply trying to reword things so they don't seem like arses...putting a bunch of words to say exactly that...cold fusion.

frankly, they can call it kitten power if they want...just get the crap studied and inventions come from it asap...get us off oil. we can then split the hairs later about how cold fusion is no longer called cold fusion because it embarasses some. we don't need another 20 years of intellectuals trying to win a debate point...we need the technology to become mainstream.

With unlimited clean power, there is nothing out of our reach. suddenly moon bases, martian cities, under ocean nations, center earth citys, etc...all of that becomes wide open...overpopulation gets redefined to hundreds of billions due to endless hydroponic farms under the earth, or in space, etc...and the longer these arses bicker about the names, the longer we deal in luddite hell.



posted on Jun, 3 2011 @ 12:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by minkmouse
reply to post by zarp3333
 


Sorry...I just can't imagine that and it's a shame because every fiber in me wants to. A world that works because everyone is on the same page and the mission is obviously for the good of all? Nah!...But boy how I wish!!!


My cynical side agrees with you sadly.

Toss this on top of the mountain of technology that will never see the light of day because the corporations don't want it.
We have congress fighting to give oil companys tax breaks...oil companys...the most successful and profitable corporations on the planet and ever in history...and we give them welfare because...because our entire political system is completely purchased by them...and openly at that.

I expect no change until its developed by some anonymous guy in a basement somewhere and the information spread over the net like wildfire to where everyone can create their own devices. until then, every government on earth will do as they always have done...supress technology to keep their fat payoff's coming. Should a government decide to buck the powers and do whats right, they will, in my opinion, become defacto leaders of the world and rightfully so.



posted on Jun, 3 2011 @ 12:44 AM
link   
reply to post by unicomsol
 


I'm afraid cold fusion would neither start what you said nor end our dependencies on oil. Fusion is an awkward technology, because by the time it's functional, we as a species will already be on anti matter or something else. Also it would not be endless nor would it be clean. It would require heat management systems. Fact is fusion generates heat. It always does and it always will. The only way it works is the output of energy between two nuclei so that they become co-dependent on each other for stability. Without that taking out of energy, it doesn't happen. IE, that energy has to go somewhere, and it will go in the form of heat. Now the thing is, fusion is already theoretically obsolete. With the advent of nano-technology, and the discovery of ever smaller parts of the atomic makeup of life, the simple fact is we have already discovered far better opportunities. Like what I sad earlier. Changing the flavor of a quark through frequencies, or something smaller than it within, in order to generate antimatter. That's just one example. Fusion was a theory when it was born and it will be a half-baked failure when it dies. We, as a species, have already seen beyond it.

It's like with the idea of "generation ships". The idea of putting people on a fast space ship that's not faster than light and sending it off to some place to colonize. It's only a theory, and by the time it could be put to practice it would already be obsolete, considering Earth WILL have an FTL ship within 100 years.

Some technology, no matter how much hope you put into it, simply is not ever going to get anywhere.



posted on Jun, 3 2011 @ 12:50 AM
link   

Originally posted by Gorman91
We, as a species, have already seen beyond it.


We have seen beyond it, sure...we are discussing zero point energy and all sorts.

but keep in mind, we are only allowed to have obsolete technology anyhow. we are still using the bloody combustion engine as our main engine

it was invented in 1807...yes, we have parked in front of our homes a 200+ year old technology. I will gladly upgrade to a 40 year old technology.

I like how your thinking btw. cold fusion is not a wonderful and new innovation...there are drawbacks as you listed, waste, etc...however, given what we use today, its a massive leap.



posted on Jun, 3 2011 @ 12:51 AM
link   
If there's something I'm good at in life it's being a cynic. Even if this technology were developed and brought into the mainstream of life, I believe nothing would change for us on the billing side. We'd be converted, adapted to the 'New Way" We'd then be sold the ticket of "How beneficial it was to the environment". Yet it would be expensive to install this massive new infrastructure and more taxation would be needed. Sadly I think the teat we suck for oil is attached to an animal who's legs are sturdy yet. I guess the upside is that it would be good for the planet so the corrupt values we hold so dear could be perpetuated for many moons to come, and that's the upside. I think that flat tire I got today has really put a spark under my cynical side.



posted on Jun, 3 2011 @ 01:19 AM
link   
reply to post by unicomsol
 


Oh, but even a fusion or fission nuclear engine in your car would be essentially a combustion engine, just with steam and nuclear fire rather than dinosaur blood and fire. In many ways it's a step back, but is that necessarily a bad thing? If you want a car that's the future, let me give you an example of an experiment. Take some bucky ball magnets or some circle-shaped equivalent. Take one and put it under your desk (allow no more than an inch to separate it from the desk top. Now take another collection of magnets, or just one cylinder one, and spin it on the top. Assuming you have the poles lined up, you will notice that the magnet on the top will continuously spin at an enormous amount of time compared to no magnets, or misaligned ones. This is the future for your car. A properly made electromagnetic engine is special because rather than burn things to go, it holds onto inputed energy and keeps going. Aligned correctly, an EM engine can go on for miles on just a little inputed energy. Because it holds onto the energy, not explode, push a turbine, then release it as heat.

Great thing is that you can build it yourself. But nobody wants to, and it's probably patented by some losers who don't want anything but money. But I say screw 'em. I'll go driving in my EM engine whenever I feel like.
edit on 3-6-2011 by Gorman91 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 3 2011 @ 01:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by Gorman91
reply to post by Arken
 


I fail to see how this is cold fusion. he's simply saying that the way of the future is low energy nuclear reactions, which is true. That could mean anything, from a laser-based reaction, to a resonance frequency based Tesla thing, to a cold fusion thing. Nothing seems suppressed to me, unless you think its a good idea to release half-finished work to companies. Great job with BP, eh?


Consider this if You don't believe They suppress energy options: My father, a CalTech grad in electrical engineering, worked for one of the foremost aerospace contractors in the 1950's through the mid 80's. I was born in 1957, and have memories back to about one year old. My dad would come home from work everyday excited by what He was working on. He would try to teach Me about how electrogravitics worked. He told me what it could do and what the world I would be growing up in would look like. Electrogravitics creates antigravity and overunity - and the world I live in today looks NOTHING like what He described: Cars flying. Houses and cities floating. Plenty of energy for all Our desires.

Oh... And one night He came home late from work and woke Me up to tell Me We couldn't talk about electrogravitics anymore - "They want it secret for now." That was late 1959, early 1960. And that is when electrogravitics went into black ops.

He never mentioned it again.

But I know that what is out there being used now is unnecessary. So is cold fusion or laser-based reactions. We aren't using electrogravitics because it's suppressed.





new topics

top topics



 
74
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join