Re: Hydrogen car
http://durangoherald.com/asp-bin/article_generation.asp?article_type=eartharticle_path=/earth/earth050505.htm I don't think he understands his own invention. Obviously, it's the solar panel that provides the energy. ---On a commercial level, you're actually combusting hydrogen, Hinton said, so a solar panel would not be necessary. ---During the six-week project, Hinton learned basic electrolysis and a little physics. ---It's interesting to me that you can use water as fuel, he said. Craig Haynie (Houston)
RE: 1997 - 2005 the missing SMOT years
... BLP has tantalizing results reported by _one_ lab and an outlandish theory to explain these results which nobody else has ever achieved AFAIK. I wrote to the team at Penn State, several years ago, who had replicated one of Mill's excess heat experiments under contract. They replied that they were under an agreement not to comment on the experiment, but they did make it clear that they were astonished at the result. Craig Haynie (Houston)
Re: 1997 - 2005 the missing SMOT years
Have you seen this?: http://www.reidarfinsrud.no/sider/mobile/foto.html Wow. Notice that the magnets are moving at 90d angles from the motion of the ball in each cycle, in the movie clip. Reminds me of the SMOT. Of course, if it really is a perpetual motion machine, then this'll be the biggest thing since Relativity, and I'll have to apologize to Greg. (I really don't want to do that.) Craig Haynie (Houston)
RE: Searching for issue # 13/14, March - June 1997 of Infinite Energy magazine
Any help would be appreciated as when I asked Jed Rothwell for assistance I was told to Go to Hell. Guess he was having a bad day. You know, I don't think he was having a bad day, as that was my immediate response, as well. You are a con-man. You are one because you were adamant about having achieved a complete roll-around for several hours, back in 1997. And now, after having said that you had video-taped it, had numerous witnesses, after dropping off the face of the Earth before delivering your promised test machines, you claim no recollection of some of the basic aspects of that achievement, have none of the evidence that you previously had boasted, and you have no explanation as to why you failed to live up to your obligations to those who paid you for your SMOT test devices. You are a con-man, and if not, at the very least, you are a liar. The sad thing is, the SMOT devices that you promised your customers was never supposed to be OU. It was only supposed to be something that others could use when testing your ideas. It could have been the very thing that you now show in your videos, being built for about $10. Craig Haynie (Houston)
