Re: [Vo]: Steorn.net
In reply to Terry Blanton's message of Mon, 28 Aug 2006 19:38:51 -0400: Hi, [snip] Here's a closeup of the Steorn test rig. It is unclear whether it includes the actual overunity device: http://www.geocities.com/terry1094/Steorn_test_rig.jpg Now if only it were a movie, with the rig on a glass table, visible in its entirety, and with no human near it. :) Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://users.bigpond.net.au/rvanspaa/ Competition provides the motivation, Cooperation provides the means.
Re: [Vo]: Steorn.net
On Sun, 27 Aug 2006, John Berry wrote: Maybe you missed the part where they have useful patented security technology? Do you really think that running a scam is a good way to get your current technology picked up? And for that matter their careers as scientists and or designers would be over. Now THAT'S a good point. I was imagining a possible scam where either the money was big enough to be worth a sudden move to Brazil regardless of the cost to their careers... or it's a scame where they keep the game up forever, always taking in more investors, but always being on the verge of having an OU device to release. What have they put on the line? Several useful technologies they bothered to Patent. Their names. Their Careers and business. Scams hinge on money, so the possibility of a scam is proportional to their efforts to attract large investors, minus the costs to themselves. If they've honestly said no to huge dollar amounts in the past, and are waiting for results of their challenge, then it's probably *not* a scam. So you believe that it's already over, this isn't a part of the scam, the scam is over this is just to keep the current investors off their back until they can bother buying plane tickets? If free energy and investors are both relevant, then bzt!... assume that a scam is a real possibility. If there are plenty of unknowns involved (e.g. we don't know if they've already raked in large dollar amounts) then a scam is still possible unless we know better. I see it as a spectrum. For known honest inventors, the ends of the spectrum extend between it's real on one end, and it's a mistake on the other. Where the level of honesty is unknown, then add a second axis to the possibilities, going between scam versus real-or-mistake. But considering (I assume we both agree) that Free Energy is real we simply have to consider which is more likely, that this is 1: Some people honestly think they have FE but don't, 2: Some people honestly think they have FE and they do, 3: An elaborate hoax to fool current investors into believing they are going to get their monies worth. Lol! I wrote the earlier stuff before reading down to this point. As for FE, if it were fairly easy to accomplish, then we'd have had it for decades, perhaps centuries. I suspect that it's difficult, but also that anyone who is successful will almost automatically go down a path which silences the discovery. I think Jed's term was own worst enemy syndrome. 2 makes sense the only issue is that they are going about it in a way that Jed, you and I think is not really sensible but it's not totally absurd it has been effective advertisement and Mark Godles agrees with it so it's not a method that couldn't be used by inventors of a genuine FE device. It *could* be entirely real.Until more information comes in, the true status is somewhere between scam and genuine and measurement error (on a 3-axis graph!) I suppose this is possible but IMO this goes beyond reasonable suspicion. I would have little sympathy for any investor who would invest in someone that they can see is flatly lying to everyone but them. But that's a classic scammer strategy! Play to their ego, and just tell your rich victim that the general public doesn't have access to the secret investment opportunity being offered. It is true that testing in the jury members own lab (and certainly in 12 of them) in various countries the chance of some exotic power transmission is so low as to fully discount, it appears from their statements the jury will test it in their own labs independently and one thing seemed to indicate they will construct or at least be able to construct the device under test themselves. If they drop the secrecy and give over all info to the jury, then the probability of scam goes way down. That's exactly what they said they are doing. I saw that they were going to have skeptics test their device. That's different than handing the devices over. (But I haven't read everything on their site yet.) (( ( ( ( ((O)) ) ) ) ))) William J. BeatySCIENCE HOBBYIST website billb at amasci com http://amasci.com EE/programmer/sci-exhibits amateur science, hobby projects, sci fair Seattle, WA 425-222-5066unusual phenomena, tesla coils, weird sci
Re: [Vo]: Steorn.net
In reply to William Beaty's message of Mon, 28 Aug 2006 13:36:37 -0700 (PDT): Hi, [snip] It *could* be entirely real.Until more information comes in, the true status is somewhere between scam and genuine and measurement error (on a 3-axis graph!) [snip] Given that they claim to already have a device that not only self-sustains, but puts out excess power to boot, I think measurement error is already ruled out. IOW it's either a scam, or it's real. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://users.bigpond.net.au/rvanspaa/ Competition provides the motivation, Cooperation provides the means.
Re: [Vo]: Steorn.net
On 8/28/06, Robin van Spaandonk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Given that they claim to already have a device that not only self-sustains, but puts out excess power to boot, I think measurement error is already ruled out. IOW it's either a scam, or it's real. Here's a closeup of the Steorn test rig. It is unclear whether it includes the actual overunity device: http://www.geocities.com/terry1094/Steorn_test_rig.jpg Terry
Re: [Vo]: Steorn.net
On 8/28/06, Terry Blanton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Here's a closeup of the Steorn test rig. It is unclear whether it includes the actual overunity device: http://www.geocities.com/terry1094/Steorn_test_rig.jpg Sean McCarthy was on FoxNews: http://www.foxnews.com/cavuto/ Click on Endless Energy Supply Terry
Re: [Vo]: Steorn.net
On 8/26/06, John Berry [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: There are indicators against this being a scam though, Not a scam; but, a well chiseled lead-in to the next season of Lost. Do you remember the magnetic effect in the last episode? eg Terry
Re: [Vo]: Steorn.net
William Beaty wrote: But maybe Jed is right, and these people are just incompetent. I vote for fraud, since incompetence usually has different earmarks. Here's the scam-detector list I put up on my site: Free Energy links, scams http://amasci.com/freenrg/fnrg.html I agree. The Steorn.net thing does fit the scam profile. Sigh . . . - Jed
Re: [Vo]: Steorn.net
There are indicators against this being a scam though, first the fact that they have already patented useful (security) technology, have millions of dollars, investors and if they are shown as pulling off a scam they will be totally sunk.(scammers would be unlikely to put so much on the line, well not on the line but more correctly sacrificed) Also they are not asking for any investment this side of verification by a Jury of 12 so they would need to somehow fool or rig the jury unless they want to be asking for investment after the jury of 12 have decleared it doesn't work. Given these facts while I think the 'scientific verification' route is foolish I don't think scam really adds up.On 8/27/06, William Beaty [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:On Fri, 18 Aug 2006, Jed Rothwell wrote: This is very sad. I do not understand the mindset of inventors who do this kind of thing, and say, . . . until this thing is validated by science we won't be doing anything commercial with it . . . That is nonsense. Inventors often say this, but they are wrong, and they have missed the point. Or three points:But steorn has all the earmarks of a free-energy scam.Suppose the wholething is dishonest.In that case their mindset makes perfect sense. Suppose they have nothing, but they want the investment dollars to floodin.They certainly can't demonstrate their device openly (such as bysending out replicas for independant testing.Or by just SELLING their devices.)If it's a scam, then they're going about it in the same waywhich has worked time and again.They must never take a simple, honest,up-front approach.They must always keep us guessing.(They cannot do otherwise!)We can wait forever yet never see any evidence that's simple,solid, and trustworthy.How many successful Dennis Lees does it take before lots other peoplefollow in Lees footsteps?And reap his same rewards? And it's SO EASY to show that your'e not a scammer.Just build a bunch ofFE devices.Then sell them.But maybe Jed is right, and these people are just incompetent.I vote forfraud, since incompetence usually has different earmarks.Here's the scam-detector list I put up on my site: Free Energy links, scams http://amasci.com/freenrg/fnrg.html(( ( (( ((O)) )) ) ))) William J. BeatySCIENCE HOBBYIST websitebillb at amasci com http://amasci.comEE/programmer/sci-exhibits amateur science, hobby projects, sci fair Seattle, WA425-222-5066unusual phenomena, tesla coils, weird sci
Re: [Vo]: Steorn.net
On Sun, 27 Aug 2006, John Berry wrote: There are indicators against this being a scam though, first the fact that they have already patented useful (security) technology, have millions of dollars, investors and if they are shown as pulling off a scam they will be totally sunk. Why? If the FTC walks in, the people behind it will probably already be on a plane out of the country. If they already have investors money in their hands, it would be hard for them to be sunk. (scammers would be unlikely to put so much on the line, well not on the line but more correctly sacrificed) What have they put on the line? Effort, of course, but all con games take effort. Some of them take lots of organizing. This would pose no problem if the rewards were large. Also they are not asking for any investment this side of verification by a Jury of 12 so they would need to somehow fool or rig the jury unless they want to be asking for investment after the jury of 12 have decleared it doesn't work. I'm assuming that they have scored enormous amounts of investment already. The latest publicity ploy could of course be legit. Or it could be part of the scam. They could easily be taking investors, yet loudly announcing that they will not. Or they could be taking new funding from their current investors, while not accepting new invesTORS (just accepting new investMENT.) Time will tell.I hope. If its a scam, and they just suddenly drop out of sight, would we even hear about it? Given these facts while I think the 'scientific verification' route is foolish I don't think scam really adds up. Scientific verification is worthless unless they hand over their secrets for independant testing. Having people come onto their turf is more a trick of stage magic. If you went in and tested their devices, would you be *certain* that there was no exotic energy transmission method powering it? Heh. Sufficiently advanced power transmission is indistiguishable from Overunity. Now if they're going to hand over devices two twelve skeptics, that's different. (( ( ( ( ((O)) ) ) ) ))) William J. BeatySCIENCE HOBBYIST website billb at amasci com http://amasci.com EE/programmer/sci-exhibits amateur science, hobby projects, sci fair Seattle, WA 425-222-5066unusual phenomena, tesla coils, weird sci
Re: [Vo]: Steorn.net
On 8/27/06, William Beaty [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Sun, 27 Aug 2006, John Berry wrote: There are indicators against this being a scam though, first the fact that they have already patented useful (security) technology, have millions of dollars, investors and if they are shown as pulling off a scam they will be totally sunk.Why?If the FTC walks in, the people behind it will probably already be on aplane out of the country. If they already have investors money in theirhands, it would be hard for them to be sunk. Maybe you missed the part where they have useful patented security technology?Do you really think that running a scam is a good way to get your current technology picked up?And for that matter their careers as scientists and or designers would be over. (scammers would be unlikely to put so much on the line, well not on the line but more correctly sacrificed) What have they put on the line?Several useful technologies they bothered to Patent.Their names.Their Careers and business. Effort, of course, but all con gamestake effort. Some of them take lots of organizing. This would pose noproblem if the rewards were large. Also they are not asking for any investment this side of verification by a Jury of 12 so they would need to somehow fool or rig the jury unless they want to be asking for investment after the jury of 12 have decleared it doesn't work.I'm assuming that they have scored enormous amounts of investment already. So you believe that it's already over, this isn't a part of the scam, the scam is over this is just to keep the current investors off their back until they can bother buying plane tickets?Perhaps they weren't ready to pack everything immediately and this is a delayed getaway for the lazy? But considering (I assume we both agree) that Free Energy is real we simply have to consider which is more likely, that this is 1: Some people honestly think they have FE but don't, 2: Some people honestly think they have FE and they do, 3: An elaborate hoax to fool current investors into believing they are going to get their monies worth. Now considering that 1 assumes they are truthful it is unlikely the effect is so effective as to convince so many scientists (them and others who have tested it) although i fear that it isn't closed loop yet. 2 makes sense the only issue is that they are going about it in a way that Jed, you and I think is not really sensible but it's not totally absurd it has been effective advertisement and Mark Godles agrees with it so it's not a method that couldn't be used by inventors of a genuine FE device. Also my only issue is that I believe the step is unnecessary and I have less faith in the general scientific community than them, but it is a method I would expect those who encountered FE out of chance discovery or who otherwise are closer to convention to try and do. However I am very interested if you can make the argument for a con more plausible than you so far have, if this is a scam it's early detection will help save the FE community from further bad press when it is discovered. The latest publicity ploy could of course be legit.Or it could be partof the scam. They could easily be taking investors, yet loudly announcing that they will not.I suppose this is possible but IMO this goes beyond reasonable suspicion.I would have little sympathy for any investor who would invest in someone that they can see is flatly lying to everyone but them. Or they could be taking new funding fromtheir current investors This can't be discounted, though it is an easy question to ask and if they publicly state no then the investors would know they are lying. , while not accepting new invesTORS (just acceptingnew investMENT.)Time will tell.I hope. If its a scam, and they just suddenly dropout of sight, would we even hear about it? Given these facts while I think the 'scientific verification' route is foolish I don't think scam really adds up.Scientific verification is worthless unless they hand over their secretsfor independant testing.They will either be giving people working devices or at the very least plans, either way I don't see it's likely they will keep many secrets from the jury. Having people come onto their turf is more atrick of stage magic. If you went in and tested their devices, would you be *certain* that there was no exotic energy transmission method poweringit?It is true that testing in the jury members own lab (and certainly in 12 of them) in various countries the chance of some exotic power transmission is so low as to fully discount, it appears from their statements the jury will test it in their own labs independently and one thing seemed to indicate they will construct or at least be able to construct the device under test themselves. Heh.Sufficiently advanced power transmission is indistiguishable from Overunity.Yes, but almost as useful too. (almost) Now if they're going to hand over devices two twelve skeptics, that's different.That's exactly what
[Vo]: Steorn.net
I think it's www.steorn.net
Re: [Vo]: Steorn.net
On 8/18/06, Zell, Chris [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I think it's www.steorn.net Yeah, it made Reuters: http://today.reuters.com/news/articlenews.aspx?type=scienceNewsstoryID=2006-08-17T231302Z_01_L17772156_RTRUKOC_0_US-TECHNOLOGY-ENERGY.xmlWTmodLoc=NewsHome-C3-scienceNews-2 http://tinyurl.com/hcfw7 Terry
Re: [Vo]: Steorn.net
Terry Blanton wrote: On 8/18/06, Zell, Chris [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I think it's www.steorn.net Yeah, it made Reuters: This is very sad. I do not understand the mindset of inventors who do this kind of thing, and say, . . . until this thing is validated by science we won't be doing anything commercial with it . . . That is nonsense. Inventors often say this, but they are wrong, and they have missed the point. Or three points: 1. Science is not a monolithic institution. There is no one single source of validation, and no unity of opinion. 2. As things stand, mainstream science institutions and researchers will never look at this gadget or validate it. Even if one did, he would never admit to himself or anyone else that what he saw was real. That simply will not happen and anyone who thinks he can trigger such an event with an advertisement in a newspaper is a pathetic fool. 3. You do not need science to validate something like this; you need a dozen or so good engineers. If the people with this gadget could convince 10 or 20 people on this list that the machine is real beyond any doubt, word would soon spread and someone with money would show up at their door. In the first phase, you need only convince your friends and people who are inclined to be sympathetic. You can ignore your enemies until later. - Jed
Re: [Vo]: Steorn.net
Terry Blanton wrote: On 8/18/06, Zell, Chris [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I think it's www.steorn.net Yeah, it made Reuters: http://today.reuters.com/news/articlenews.aspx?type=scienceNewsstoryID=2006-0 8-17T231302Z_01_L17772156_RTRUKOC_0_US-TECHNOLOGY-ENERGY.xmlWTmodLoc=NewsHome -C3-scienceNews-2 http://tinyurl.com/hcfw7 Terry The advertisement in the Economist can be downloaded here: http://www.steorn.net/en/downloads.aspx?p=6 Harry
Re: [Vo]: Steorn.net
On 8/18/06, Zell, Chris [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I think it's www.steorn.net Grimer is still on the international filter list. --- Grimer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2006 18:48:32 +0100 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Grimer [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [Vo]: Steorn.net At 11:01 am 18/08/2006 -0500, Zell wrote: I think it's www.steorn.net It was. I've has a look at their website and they seem pretty plausible. Let's hope they have made the breakthrough in harnessing the Beta-atmosphere magnetic wind. I shall certainly follow developments with full attention. They seem to be taking the path that Jed recommends - which is good. Cheers, Frank Grimer P.S. This was bounced from Vortex so I'm sending it via you Terry - and thanks very much for the patent. It seems well written and easy to understand. I've down loaded it an will scutinize it with interest. Frank
