On Sat, 26 Aug 2006, Mark Goldes wrote: > That is great news! > > I have not listened to the interview. > > All the more likely they have done what they claim.
If they just published detailed plans and construction info on their website, (and if the device is relatively easy to get working,) there'd be no need for this "jury" stuff. It looks like a publicity stunt, not a legit tactic. On the other hand, their device could be like SMOT, and be extremely difficult to work with. That would be a good reason *not* to just post the plans and let everyone try building it. (The Pons-Fleichman problem also involved a large number of failed replications.) But if secrecy wasn't their philosophy, they could just *say* that they'd otherwise just release everything ...but that their device is finicky. Where FE is concerned, secrecy has always been the major evil in the past. The secrecy keeps onlookers from knowing whether it's a scam. The secrecy sets up a catch-22 for selling OU products or even finding legit investors. And I suspect that if any groups want to suppress the discovery, inventor's secrecy is absolutly critical to successful suppression. Watch closely. We'll see if I'm right again. (((((((((((((((((( ( ( ( ( (O) ) ) ) ) ))))))))))))))))))) William J. Beaty SCIENCE HOBBYIST website billb at amasci com http://amasci.com EE/programmer/sci-exhibits amateur science, hobby projects, sci fair Seattle, WA 425-222-5066 unusual phenomena, tesla coils, weird sci
