If they aren't going to allow people to scientifically verify their claims then they deserve the riducle and their so called "Demonstation" will be worthless.
There are any number of ways to fake what they plan to do. High density batteries hidden away or there are numerous ways to burn fuel and generate electricity that are totaly silent or nearly silent, any one of these could be hidden inside the car where you can't find it unless you were allowed to examine the vehicle in detail. Some of them might even fit inside the battery cases and/or their "mystery" box. Their claims of turning this idea over to the public domain don't jive with their "cloak and dagger" secrecy. They compare themselves to Dean Kamen and his Segway, yet when Dean publically released the Segway he included a complete explanation of how it worked including diagrams and photos of the interior. These charlatans refuse to provide even the barest explanation of how it works. Their claim that someone would steal their idea away from a simple desciption is hogwash, especially considering their claims that they spent over $500,000 and 17 years of work developing it from a simple idea to a working device. I haven't heard anything from them yet that isn't standard fare for charlatans and con-men, the more they say the more they sound like hucksters. If these guys don't want to be treated like charlatans then they shouldn't act like charlatans. One last thought, they claim that they will establish new electric vehicle records... I'll bet they haven't contacted ANY official or even semi-offical body to verify the record, not even Ripley's. Christopher Robison wrote: >As happened to at least one other person on this list, I received a message >from Littlefield today. > >Why he takes messages from a list and doesn't keep the replies on the list, I'm >not sure.... > >Also puzzling me is that he doesn't seem to realize that he and Tilley >themselves are the reason for our pessimism, if not our skepticism. >Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof -- naturally we all have a >right to be skeptical in the face of such a contradiction to our understanding >of how things work. But it's the inconsistent information coming from Tilley >and Littlefield and Littlefield's abrasive attitude that has earned [at least] >my pessimism, along with their insistence on our belief in their system with no >understanding of its operation whatsoever. > >To the examples I've given before, I'll add Google (because I read an article >about them today)... They too have a magical formula upon which their business >is based (their PageRank algorithm). Of course they won't explain how the whole >thing works, and we don't expect them to. But they don't pretend it's some >magical black box -- they do divulge the basics, that it depends on a few key >factors like link popularity, age, etc. > >All said though, on this issue I still consider myself a skeptic rather than a >nay-sayer. I'm willing to keep an open mind about it, in spite of the extreme >impression of dishonesty that I get from their communications. > >I won't be able to make it there, but I'm hoping someone will be able to give >us all a full report of the miracle. =) > > --chris > > > > > > >----- Forwarded message from Doug Littlefield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ----- > Date: Thu, 29 Aug 2002 12:27:13 -0400 > From: Doug Littlefield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Reply-To: Doug Littlefield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: RE: Electric DeLorean Test Date - response > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >Hello Christopher: > >Show up with your meter....we ENCOURAGE knowledgible people to test >the batteries after the drive. However, IF we are right be prepared to sign >a document saying what you saw and how you tested the batteries. That's >only fair isn't it ? > >You see we aren't afraid of ridicule and have the courage of our convictions, >right our wrong, we are affording all of you "naysayers" a "free shot" at us on >September 7th.......bring rotten eggs and a large helping of Crow, you'll get >to use one or the other. I think you'd agree that such an open, public >demonstration either is bred of some amount of confidence .... or sheer >stupidity, what have we to gain if it's not true ? > >Should we fail I guess you'll have the knowledge that you were right... >IF we succeed I suspect none of you will admit you were wrong however. > >Sincerely, > >Doug Littlefield >Tilley Foundation Inc. > > >----- End forwarded message ----- > > > >------------------------------------------------------------------------ > >* LP8.2: HTML/Attachments detected, removed from message * >
