300 percent is a ratio on input to output, not a quantity. The quantity might be small and it suggests it is (the video)
On Sat, Oct 2, 2010 at 9:19 AM, peatbog <[email protected]> wrote: > > You are assuming that the labs would openly receive and report, > > in fact they do claim to have given it to testing labs and they > > got positive results but didn't want to be named. > > They claimed to have shown it to several academics who agreed > there was an 'anomaly' but would not allow their names to be > associated with it. > > > > That makes sense, since a lab would be rubbished for reporting > > such. > > It makes sense if all they saw was an ambiguous excess of energy. > Why would they go out on a limb for something that might have a > dozen conventional explanations? > > But if I ran a testing lab and came across 300 percent OU, not > some rinky-dink ambiguous excess, and tested the bejesus out of > it, and finally came to believe that it really was 300 percent OU, > I would shout it to the skies; it would be a bonanza of publicity > for my lab. I would want to be closely associated with it. > > > And what president would collapse the oil industry like that, > > certainly not Americas previous president, probably very few of > > them at all. > > If the president or prime minister didn't want to collapse it, > then the inventors would be happy to, if only because it would > make them multi-billionaires and ensure that they would be > remembered for centuries. > > > > > > Secondly I think it has to do with them not have got it to > > produce truly convincing amounts of energy even if the ratio of > > input-output is OU. > > That's not what the engineers said. They claim that there is 300 > percent OU. How can you construe that to mean that it is not > producing 'truly convincing amounts of energy'? 300 percent OU is > not convincing? > > But aside from the amazing claims of the three engineers, > everything points to a scam or monumental self-delusion: People > with 300 percent OU don't muck around with some half-baked > skdb. > > You notice the engineers didn't claim to have closed the loop, > even with 300 percent OU. None of these amazing schemes are ever > able to do that. > > > > > Now I am still skeptical of this crowd, but your scenario is > > innocent and child like. > >
