Energy Solutions THEY don't want you to know about

page: 1
38
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
+10 more 
posted on Aug, 28 2012 @ 04:35 PM
link   
Footage from DECADES AGO!!!!.........

Methernitha Testatika free energy machine

 
Newman's Magnetic motor
video.google.com...
 
Documentary segment on John Searl


here is a recent video produced to explain Sealr's Machine to accompany the video above


you can also see a documentary on John Searl at johnsearlstory.com...

This car runs on water, DECADES ago!

 
of course the inventor died mysteriously in a car accident, ironic huh, or not?

what about this contraption put together since 1950, and still generating energy... 
 
uk.ibtimes.com...
 

huh? let me think why we never heard of any of this??!! this is a tough one, isn't it?! 

Free Energy Another Inconvenient Truth


More recently in Australia and the US a couple of random news stories on free energy came out and they are basically a repeat of the old stories, and on top of it you are made to believe this is all so "revolutionary?!" Do you see any similarities between the stories below and the decades old stories above??!! do you feel we are going around in circles here??!! 

Sky news: Free Energy Electric Magnetic Power Generator
www.metacafe.com...




Fox News: Free Energy Magnet Machine



 
Water powered engine


H2O Car - Water Powered Car

 



speaking of a "water powered car", major car companies want you to believe that cutting edge means a car that runs on hydrogen from fuel cells instead of plain water, just to make you believe you need to stop at their hydrogen pumping stations to pump hydrogen into your car instead of just fueling it with PLAIN water! (news story about GM and Shell's first hydrogen pump - www.msnbc.msn.com... )  Plus, they want you to believe the car costs a gazillion dollars to make and that they haven't figured out how to make it "viable"!!! That way you won't be expecting this tech anytime soon. What a joke!

Top Gear - talking about hydrogen fuel cells

 


By the way, remember the electric cars introduced SEVERAL years ago (actually the first electric car came out Between 1832 and 1839, look it up). They were poised to make a huge impact in the industry. Yet of course, you know what happened. Now a handful of companies have reintroducing a few models into the market as if it is all a revolutionary and novel idea. Give me a break!

Watch: "Who killed the electric car?" available on Netflix



All of this must be seen in the context that besides the new "revolutionary" plug-in electric and the truly revolutionary water powered cars we also already have:

Air Powered Vehicles!

 
Waste to Fuel A Future to our World

 
Electric Car with Magnet Engine
www.clip4e.com... .
 
British scientists 'invent artificial petrol'
www.dailymail.co.uk...

With new ones including a engine that transforms heat into electricity that could power cars or even cities


NOT TO MENTION that tech was developed and owned by the major car companies to at least have cars run hundreds of miles PER gallon FOR DECADES. Just watch the documentary "GASSHOLE" on Netflix.

ALSO not to mention that the Diesel engine was ORINIGANLLY designed to run on Peanut Oil/BioDiesel, meaning that EVERY Diesel enegine that powers trucks, major plants, huge machinery etc could ALL run on Bio-Diesel from plancton farms for example TOMORROW with NO modifications (watch the documentary FUEL on Netflix). And btw, Henry Ford had originally had all of his cars run on Ethanol/Alcohol, until the Prohibition came in, which was lifted about the same time Ford gave in to using GAS. Coincidence perhaps? You be the judge.

plus check this new tech being developed:
 
Top 5 Exotic Free Energy Technologies
peswiki.com...

Researchers develop reactor to make fuel from sunlight
www.guardian.co.uk...
 
Paint-On Solar Cells Developed
www.opednews.com...
 
Jeff Bezos Invests $19.5 Million in General Fusion's Nuclear Technology
www.popsci.com...


Now as far as more mass energy production techs, here is what is out in the open and somewhat in the light of mass awareness:

Tapping tidal currents for power
uk.reuters.com...

Florida's Clean Energy and Ocean Energy Technology


PS 10 Solar thermal power station


Wind energy in west Texas

 
Wind Becomes Spain's Biggest Energy Source
www.renewableenergyworld.com...

Russia’s Hot Beach gets geothermal boost
rt.com...


Electricity Out of Thin Air Could Be The Next Big Power Source
www.popsci.com...
 


And here is what is NOT in the awareness of the public and thus NOT being discussed and yet is something you MUST know in regards to an alternative to uranium and plutonium based nuclear power plants:

Obama could kill fossil fuels overnight with a nuclear dash for thorium
www.telegraph.co.uk...  
 
and check out this 60 minute piece on the Bloom Box Technology already being tested in California:
 
Alternative Energy: The Bloom Box
www.cbsnews.com...

 
and what about the good old Cold Fusion:
 
Cold Fusion getting hot with 10kw heater prepping for market
pesn.com...
what about this promising new concept below:

Electricity Collected from the Air Could Become the Newest Alternative Energy Source
www.sciencedaily.com... 
 

In conclusion, below is a final example of a possible free energy technology that was suppressed 100 years ago!!!  Suppressed because JP Morgan could not put a meter on it so he could charge people for it!!!

Nikola Tesla - Free Energy

 
And we have not even approached the subject of what other even more advanced free energy technologies the private military industrial complex have probably, not to say surely, been hiding for decades.... in a future post perhaps
 

Documentaries:
Fuel (available on Netflix)
2012: Time for Change (available on Netflix)
Gasshole (available on Netflix)
Who killed the electric car (available on Netflix)
John Searl Story (johnsearlstory.com...)
Thrive (watch for free www.thrivemovement.com...)

PLUS there are several amazing little machines on youtube created by people like you and me.
edit on 28-8-2012 by betheflow because: grammar




posted on Aug, 28 2012 @ 04:51 PM
link   
Each and every one of these devices has been debunked.

A good start for understanding why they will not work would be the wikipedia entries on perpetual motion machines, and water fueled cars. Perpetual motion defies the very laws of physics, and converting water to hydrogen and oxygen, as needed to power hydrogen cars uses more power then is released in the process.



posted on Aug, 28 2012 @ 04:57 PM
link   
reply to post by betheflow
 


What you didn't point out though is those cars run on CLEAN water, not salt water.

Clean water is drying up fast than our oil reserves. Not sure how that would help anybody...,



posted on Aug, 28 2012 @ 05:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by nightbringr
Each and every one of these devices has been debunked.

A good start for understanding why they will not work would be the wikipedia entries on perpetual motion machines, and water fueled cars. Perpetual motion defies the very laws of physics, and converting water to hydrogen and oxygen, as needed to power hydrogen cars uses more power then is released in the process.



All i hear is empty words no illustrating ?? you say every one of these devices has been debunked. ??

can you please illustrate and illuminate me sir??



posted on Aug, 28 2012 @ 05:09 PM
link   


Patent

PDF

edit on 28-8-2012 by AldrinAlden because: **



posted on Aug, 28 2012 @ 05:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by nightbringr
Each and every one of these devices has been debunked.

Perpetual motion defies the very laws of physics,
And what exactly do think the universe is? Planets? moons? Stars? Galaxies? Asteroids? etc...are ALL moving perpetually...the universe itself and everything within it is one giant perpetual motion machine. Absolutely NOTHING is "at rest" or "motionless"...

the "LAWS OF PHYSICS" he says...



and converting water to hydrogen and oxygen, as needed to power hydrogen cars uses more power then is released in the process.[/p]

Gas is a much more difficult "energy" source to attain and attaining that resource itself costs energy and reduces the "efficiency" of it, it has to be accounted for. Water however is much much easier to obtain and is much much more prevalent than oil is. The energy saved from not having to build, maintain, deploy, and decommission the oil infrastructure as it ages is massive...

edit on 28-8-2012 by Sly1one because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 28 2012 @ 05:37 PM
link   
s & flag for this bud i have seen some of those but a few are new to me me thinks that one of the posters should look up stan myer



posted on Aug, 28 2012 @ 05:44 PM
link   
reply to post by Sly1one
 


As far as the planets rotating and everything in motion you're right. But even space isn't a perfect vacuum, and while it may appear to us that things are continuing as they always have, they are in fact not. Again,I urge you to read up on perpetual motion machines and why they violate the laws of physics. Smarter people than you or I have proven these things. I understand one day these things may be disproven in the future, but currently it stands. If your a particle physicist and have a new theory on this, i'm sure people would love to see it, as you will surely win a Nobel prize.

And yes, I agree water would be a great source of energy, but until we learn to extract that energy efficiently, its useless.
edit on 28-8-2012 by nightbringr because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 28 2012 @ 05:50 PM
link   
Inability to create energy from nothing is, perhaps, impossible. However... when have you ever seen, experienced, or interacted in any way with "nothing"? I'd argue that we could build what appears to be a free energy device, simply because we didn't know to look for the thing that it interacts with. Think Luminiferous Aether... the hypothetical medium through which light waves travel (You'll all say "That's been proven not to exist!", but I say... "No... it may have been proven not to exist in the form that we expect... but it's very difficult to prove something you can't see, can't measure, and don't know how to interact with doesn't exist.")

I'd say some of those energy sources have perhaps been debunked... but I doubt all have. Were any of them actually billed as "generating power... out of nothing at all"? (Then I worded it that way because of the song that is suddenly in my head.) Or were they some complex mumbo-jumbo that no one bothers to revisit because "it's been debunked"? And why should we take someone else's word on this? All science seems to be built on the failures of those before us. Do those failures need to be carried forth without question?

I've wanted a project for some time. Maybe this could be it. I'd like to see what's wrong with these designs. I'd like to build whatever devices (at least the hopeful ones) have been hyped in the past as free energy, or cheap energy devices, and see for myself.



posted on Aug, 28 2012 @ 05:50 PM
link   
ignore the flat earthers they can't see past their nose! If it hasn't been peer reviewed but some bought and paid for academia cultists and published in their journal it couldn't possibly work in their minds. The Wright Brothers were soaring over the heads of same pin heads while they proclaimed it impossible.



posted on Aug, 28 2012 @ 06:18 PM
link   
I do love the fact the way all of these things are so easily obtainable, if you have the money to test them it shouldn't
take to many of us to try one or two we should all try to find a reasonably intelligent one of us to build some prototypes...
I am about tech savvy as a potato so I vote anyone but me



posted on Aug, 28 2012 @ 10:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by hawkiye
The Wright Brothers were soaring over the heads of same pin heads while they proclaimed it impossible.
Yeah for maybe a year.

Not for the decades the OP is claiming, citing decades old technologies, er, um scams.

By the way not everything in the OP is a scam. Tidal energy can be tapped.

What bothers me is the lack of critical thinking that lumps feasible technologies together with technologies that are not only not feasible, but have been shown to be so. There are a few interesting real technologies in the OP that are lost among the BS fake claims.

Regarding the claim that they don't want us to know about these, that's funny. With all these conspiracy theories about killing inventors and suppression, how can people believe those stories of suppression are true, and still think TPTB couldn't shut down some websites or delete some youtube videos? The logic is so inconsistent it's hilarious.
edit on 28-8-2012 by Arbitrageur because: clarification



posted on Aug, 28 2012 @ 11:43 PM
link   
Also just to point this out but Peswiki's top 5 technologies are all either shaping up to be or already semi proven to be scams.

Take Plasmerg for instance. they are accepting investor money left and right but several people have toured their facility and there is no provision anywhere for engine test stands or load cells which you'd need to bring a new plasma engine to market for sure.

And then there's Rossi..... Well somehow he's claiming to get tens or hundreds of times more power out of nickel hydrogen reactions than anyone else is even HOPING TO GET IN THE FUTURE. Now if you're really interested in nickel hydrogen reactions I'd watch a little company called Brillouin energy they are much more realistic and down to earth.

I'm not saying everything you listed is a scam but what I am saying is you sure threw in a lot of bad apples with the good.



posted on Aug, 29 2012 @ 12:02 AM
link   
The energy devices that power navel vessels are classified and would seem to be highly efficient and safeish. The energy device that powers the mars curiosity is rather remarkable, and even more remarkable because it has been around for some time but is classified too. But we have nuclear power so we should all be happy, as we have expensive, toxic, steam engines only marginally different then we had 100 years ago all over the planet, hopefully one is right by you giving you wildly dangerous steam generated electrons.



posted on Aug, 29 2012 @ 12:32 AM
link   
Some of the links you posted have been debunked but there are just as many that have been proven true. I have personally experimented with HHO generators and even installed one in my truck but by no means has it replaced gas. HHO is the one I am most interested in if manufacturers would incorporate them into car designs they would be able to greatly increase fuel millage for cars.

Here is a link to a high school student that incorporated HHO generation with a gas engine that could get 800 mpg.


800 MPG
ATS THREAD ON VIDEO



posted on Aug, 29 2012 @ 01:01 AM
link   
reply to post by betheflow
 


Excellent post. SNF.

Surely we did not forget about Leonardo da Vinci's design of a self propelled 'car'. Even though there are challenges to his design, surely, some centuries later, somewhere, someone is smart enough to make his idea work.

(That is, if they, TPTB really wanted to find a solution to our problem.)
Me thinx not, me lovies. If they allowed free energy to see the light of commercial day, the sun would set forever on their mean controlling greedy dark heads. As we all know....


Unlike Henry Ford's Model T in the early 1900s, Leonardo's car wasn't designed for mass-production. It wasn't truly a passenger car, since it didn't even have a seat. The vehicle was actually designed as a special attraction for Renaissance festivals, meant to instill wonder and awe in attendees. Like many of Leonardo's sketches, however, the car remained on paper throughout his lifetime -- we can only speculate that the machine was either considered too dangerous to operate or the inventor didn't have adequate materials to build it.

Leonardo drew out his plans for the world's first self-propelled vehicle.



Galluzzi and a team of engineers spent four months designing a digital model to make sure they knew the machine would work. Leonardo's designs called for a car 5 feet 6 inches long (1.68 meters) and 4 feet 11 inches wide (1.49 meters), which they built. However, the designers in Florence worried about the machine being too dangerous -- once a brake is released, it can travel for about 130 feet (40 meters) -- so they built an additional one-third scale model for testing and demonstration.

In 2004, Paolo Galluzzi, director of the Institute and Museum of the History of Science in Florence, Italy, oversaw a project to finally build a working model of Leonardo's invention. Although there were several attempts to build the car during the 20th century, each one had failed due to unclear instructions in Leonardo's sketches. Experts originally believed two leaf springs, the simplest form of the spring typically used for automotive suspensions, somehow powered the vehicle. Closer inspection eventually revealed the power came from bigger, coiled springs located in tambours, cylindrical drum-like casings, inside the


The machine works like a robot or a wind-up toy simply by rotating the wheels opposite of their intended direction, which winds up the springs inside and gives it power. The frame and many of the car's clockwork-like mechanisms, such as cogs, were made from five different types of wood.



The car also has programmable steering, which is achieved by arranging wooden blocks between gears at pre-set locations, and, oddly enough, it can only turn right. Still, Leonardo must have once again been looking forward to Florence's one-way streets. Although the contraption was allegedly designed for entertainment, Galluzzi's model proved not only that Leonardo's car worked, but the Renaissance man was centuries ahead with yet another influential invention.


Link to article



posted on Aug, 29 2012 @ 07:27 AM
link   
reply to post by UnlimitedSky
 


That is a vehicle powered by a springwork. No "free energy" in this thing. You have to power it up, then it stores that energy in the springwork which will release it like in your wristwatch (provided you have an old one with, you could guess I think, springworks in it).



posted on Aug, 29 2012 @ 07:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by nightbringr
Each and every one of these devices has been debunked.

A good start for understanding why they will not work would be the wikipedia entries on perpetual motion machines, and water fueled cars. Perpetual motion defies the very laws of physics, and converting water to hydrogen and oxygen, as needed to power hydrogen cars uses more power then is released in the process.




The word is shelved not debunked.

These ideas have been shelved. They have not been explored or developed because there are some fairly wealthy and powerful groups that don't want them. First are the (owners of ) energy companies mining coal and gas. They buy these patents and then let them languish on the shelves.

There is collusion among the automobile makers and the energy companies. They will not allow new technology to surface, gain popularity or be used while there is a drop of gas left on the planet. The fuel companies are more powerful than the automakers who simply do not want to go to the expense of retrofitting assembly lines and changing the way they have existed for years.



posted on Aug, 29 2012 @ 08:16 AM
link   

Originally posted by Arbitrageur

Originally posted by hawkiye
The Wright Brothers were soaring over the heads of same pin heads while they proclaimed it impossible.
Yeah for maybe a year.

Not for the decades the OP is claiming, citing decades old technologies, er, um scams.

By the way not everything in the OP is a scam. Tidal energy can be tapped.

What bothers me is the lack of critical thinking that lumps feasible technologies together with technologies that are not only not feasible, but have been shown to be so. There are a few interesting real technologies in the OP that are lost among the BS fake claims.

Regarding the claim that they don't want us to know about these, that's funny. With all these conspiracy theories about killing inventors and suppression, how can people believe those stories of suppression are true, and still think TPTB couldn't shut down some websites or delete some youtube videos? The logic is so inconsistent it's hilarious.
edit on 28-8-2012 by Arbitrageur because: clarification


While i agree that most often these "technologies" are little nothing more than Rube Goldberg meets Troll Science, I would also agree that there are viable solutions that have been either wholly ignored, or covered up. I have asked for years why nanogenerators on a carbon nano substrate would not make a building material that could power that which it comprises. Barium Titanate "levers" have increased the durability and output of nanogenerators to a point where it would be hard to imagine it being a truly nonviable approach to energy. All you do is just build things, wire it in to pull the small currents, and then run through a capacitor before dispersing into whatever it is powering.

Regardless, it is a known that once something hits the web, it is everywhere You can't cover up the information, even if you shut down the website or take down the video.



posted on Aug, 29 2012 @ 08:39 AM
link   
Good post, but you are spinning your wheels here. The invention secrecy act of 1951 gives the government the right to take any invention they see as a threat to national security. So there you have it, built right into the system. This crushes any and all innovations which could give you clean abundant energy or fuel. Americans don't have the right to invent and build energy devices which could benefit everyone on the planet, and that's the law. Unless the inventor develops their device in total secrecy, and then fully and freely discloses the building plans across the internet, it will never happen.





new topics

top topics



 
38
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join