PDA

View Full Version : raaaid's latest free energy post??



WB_Outlaw
04-26-2007, 05:46 AM
What happened to raaaid's float powered "free energy" allegations? I was kind of looking forward to that one.


--Outlaw.

Pirschjaeger
04-26-2007, 06:16 AM
He couldn't afford his electricity bill. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/51.gif

DKoor
04-26-2007, 06:19 AM
I wish that raaaid pwns you all with Tesla's rays.

Capt.LoneRanger
04-26-2007, 06:20 AM
Teslas won't be usefull for him, as there are no tesla-generators working like fluids.

Pirschjaeger
04-26-2007, 06:26 AM
Eeeeeeeeew! Testi rays? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif

Capt.LoneRanger
04-26-2007, 06:32 AM
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/shady.gif

Pirschjaeger
04-26-2007, 06:43 AM
Sorry http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-sad.gif

raaaid
04-26-2007, 06:58 AM
my last idea like all ive had for free enrgy is wrong but i get the urge to tell it when i think i found something, it helps me to think

as you cover and uncover the cilinder the level lowers so slightly it cant be seen experimentally, only on the paper

i dont believe free energy is posible but i do believe the same guys who caused irak will do anything to make sure such thing would never see day light if it existed

theres only one idea which i didnt find wrong quite soon and that is my inertial thruster, ill build it as soon as i get the money

Capt.LoneRanger
04-26-2007, 07:04 AM
Don't stop thinking in new ways, raaaid. Just do some recherche when thinking about them and, well, even if it is less amusing, don't post them as facts. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/10.gif

WWSpinDry
04-26-2007, 08:28 AM
Originally posted by raaaid:
... the same guys who caused irak ...
Wait ... wasn't that Churchill?

Capt.LoneRanger
04-26-2007, 08:44 AM
Originally posted by WWSpinDry:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by raaaid:
... the same guys who caused irak ...
Wait ... wasn't that Churchill? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yes, he caused Irak in 1920/21 AFAIK.

LEBillfish
04-26-2007, 09:43 AM
Here ya go raaaid, free energy.....


http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v707/Kaytoo/energy.jpg

DKoor
04-26-2007, 09:53 AM
I guess this must be some geek internet thingy about free energy theory.... I don't know much about physics, but then again it doesn't take much to burst their bubbles http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

K_Freddie
04-26-2007, 12:34 PM
Free energy.
http://nakedshorts.typepad.com/photos/uncategorized/electricshock.jpg

Divine-Wind
04-26-2007, 02:18 PM
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif

bun-bun195333
04-26-2007, 03:59 PM
raaaid,

Your best bet is to buy a house near high tension power lines and string a bunch of wires parallel to the power lines. Look up inductance...

Just send the check to me,

Bun-Bun

WWSensei
04-26-2007, 04:19 PM
Originally posted by Capt.LoneRanger:
Don't stop thinking in new ways, raaaid. Just do some recherche when thinking about them and, well, even if it is less amusing, don't post them as facts. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/10.gif

If only it was in new ways. Problem is it's just the same old ways that people really bad at science have been trying to pass off for decades. Some are True Believers who simply think they've stumbled onto something and in most cases they are just encountering something normal they don't understand.

Most are scam artists trying to steal money from people with phony products/ideas. Most of the "free energy" projects you see out there are flat out, bogus scam artists trying to swindle people out of their money in phony investment schemes.

Agamemnon22
04-26-2007, 05:02 PM
Originally posted by raaaid:

i dont believe free energy is posible

This will be a day long remembered.

Pollack2006
04-26-2007, 05:05 PM
Raaaid....what do you think of Steorn?

(if unsure Google it)

x6BL_Brando
04-26-2007, 06:26 PM
You'd think that surfers would be hip to global issues - after all, they go ballistic if they find a condom 2 miles offshore - but look at them moan about cheap, clean energy. (http://www.bbc.co.uk/cornwall/content/articles/2007/04/25/planetcornwall_wavehub_feature.shtml)

B

Aaron_GT
04-27-2007, 02:24 AM
Whatever happened to that Irish company that took out big glossy ads in business magazines claiming to have found a source of free energy that would be verified by a panel of 12 scientists that they would pick...

raaaid
04-27-2007, 03:32 AM
i think steorn are scammers

if they had succeded they would either be silenced and rich or dead

the only person whom i believe might have succeded lately would be schauberger due to the interest the nazis showed on him

hutchison has found interesting things but obviously havent succeded or would be silenced as well

imagine a world where water can be used as fuel, plumb cam be converted to gold(particle accelerators) and the whole world can be irrigated ending famines

certainly this is not in the aim of the people who rule the world, in my opinion is more likely they even have created aids to control population(the worst plague for africa appears from one day to another caused by the monkeys which always been there)

is my opinion that the rulers are the worst kind due to is the people who backstab the most the ones who get the higher

Pirschjaeger
04-27-2007, 03:55 AM
Originally posted by Aaron_GT:
Whatever happened to that Irish company that took out big glossy ads in business magazines claiming to have found a source of free energy that would be verified by a panel of 12 scientists that they would pick...

They received a power bill in the mail. All forms of energy are free until you get the bill.

x6BL_Brando
04-27-2007, 04:40 AM
certainly this is not in the aim of the people who rule the world, in my opinion is more likely they even have created aids to control population

Raaaid,

your world-view is incredibly depressing and I'm sorry for you if that reflects your personal make-up http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_frown.gif The kind of suggestion you make above is completely untrue and suggests a state of paranoia and an unwillingness to research existing technologies and the (very real) personalities who do this research. It also shows that you are totally un-read in the field of virology and the human immune-system, or you would realise that many thousands of hours and millions of money (mostly from the governments you so distrust) have been poured into researching and treating this modern day plague. To then suggest that it was all a plot by evil politicians is ludicrous and, worse, disrespectful to the thousands of people who devote their lives to such causes.

But you always seem to come to these erroneous conclusions and you always hide behind global-conspiracy-theory when your conclusions are rebuffed. Have you considered just how much work would go into rewriting all the research documents that exist on the subject of AIDS (to name just one example) in order to cover up the Machiavellian plots you want us to believe in? And can you imagine the kind of response such a re-writing would bring from the scientific community? Total outrage and a deafening outcry from the entire scientific community is the answer. But you seem to suggest that every medical researcher has a government agent behind him or her, holding a loaded gun to their heads to prevent them from letting out the ghastly secret. What rubbish you allow yourself to be blinded by!

B

raaaid
04-27-2007, 05:34 AM
i make no accusation i just say im suspicious

i saw on tv two things that make me suspicious:

first a documental where every single afrikan guy didnt want to use comdoms aided by 1st world because they said that by using them they would contract aids

there was just one old woman who would say that what appeared to be tiny warms when you put water inside the condoms was actually grease

how manipulative to show that general opinion was based on unexistent warms, when everybody thinks the same maybe theres some truth behind

the second was the death sentence on doctors and nurses in libia for contagiating intentionally aids to children

this 2 examples show how 3rd world really think 1st world is using aids to harm them

BSS_Goat
04-27-2007, 06:57 AM
Originally posted by raaaid:
this 2 examples show how 3rd world really think 1st world is using aids to harm them

this also 2 examples of ignorance and paranoia

M_Gunz
04-27-2007, 07:01 AM
A whole lot of US troops in WWII Pacific got malaria because some suspicious a-holes decided
to rumor it that the pills to prevent malaria would sterilize the men. It was totally untrue
but once a rumor like that gets created it gets credited, so a lot of guys got sick and many
did die.
So the same people believe the worst most BS in Africa gets people to not protect themselves
and to kill doctors over false beliefs and now YOU want to take that as evidence that AIDS is
created and fostered by governments.

It's all because of the mind spy rays. Aliens are doing it. Buy stock in Alcoa.

raaaid
04-27-2007, 07:30 AM
paranoia yes but not suffered by me but by most people in the third world

Pirschjaeger
04-27-2007, 07:37 AM
Raaaid, not to get into a political discussion but I have to point out something to you. While many point at the rich nations for not giving enough support to the poor nations you'll notice that poor nations have extremely corrupt governments and many human rights issues. That said, how much support are you willing to give to that sort of government?

Remember, the funds have to go through many hands before it reaches the needy, if it ever does. It's not as easy as people think.

Aaron_GT
04-27-2007, 12:08 PM
I remember back in the 1980s there was someone who would take out multiple page adverts in New Scientist espousing theories that seemed similar to Steorn's. New Scientist wouldn't publish his articles.

It would be great if there was some new cheap, clean energy source as the future prospects for energy might be difficult. But I doubt Steorn's claims are going to be proved true somehow...

LStarosta
04-27-2007, 12:14 PM
The world doesn't need "free energy" (which is impossible and does not exist). The world needs "free markets" and democracy.

Aaron_GT
04-27-2007, 12:20 PM
Iit needs cheap (as cheap as it is now) and clean energy AND free markets AND democracy probably!

jannaspookie
04-27-2007, 02:24 PM
Wouldn't the world economy get shook up pretty bad if free energy was ever developed? (I'm just a geography/cartography student, not an economist)

WWSpinDry
04-27-2007, 02:31 PM
Once the world achieves free beer, all else good will follow.

dazza9806482
04-27-2007, 02:38 PM
http://www.oceanpd.com/Pelamis/default.html

Free-ish energy

i used to rent a room from one of the mathematicians for this project

WWSpinDry
04-27-2007, 02:42 PM
Interesting design. Methinks that's similar to the diagram Billfish posted.

dazza9806482
04-27-2007, 02:50 PM
Aye same principle

the guy spend all day in his dressing gown looking at fluid dynamic equations- but i guess its paid off now

edit: in fact i think the Scottish executive is going to install these on the coast soon

Aaron_GT
04-27-2007, 03:03 PM
Wouldn't the world economy get shook up pretty bad if free energy was ever developed?

Relatively cheap, concentrated, portable energy is one of the corner stones of the current economy. Free is only really a problem if it is implies (via supply and demand) limitless energy. People will do all sorts of stupid stuff with limitless and free energy, especially in the area of Christmas displays outside their houses!

M_Gunz
04-27-2007, 04:17 PM
Energy cost to build, maintain and run energy recovery devices must be factored into the
"free" energy equation. That is something that seems rarely done in the early stages of
those projects.

It is like the beanstalk space elevator and how cheap it would be to put things in orbit
with one until of course the cost of building such, etc, is factored in. Then no one can
afford it and likely never will.

Still, I would rather see 10,000 wave energy installations than 10,000 anti-missile sites
that do diddly to stop a ship or like with a nuke. It will be a modern version of the
Maginot Line which we know how effective that was.

Aaron_GT
04-28-2007, 01:57 AM
Energy cost to build, maintain and run energy recovery devices must be factored into the
"free" energy equation.

Indeed. You can view solar energy as free, except that you have to build things to capture it, and suddenly you have a cost. Even coal is free in a sense except that you have to dig it up first. Really we need to leave what coal we have in the ground as chemical feedstock rather than burning it.

There is one area of 'free' energy that is now termed 'negawatts' (coined by Amory Lovins). Basically it is energy efficiency, proper house insulation, and related things.

Pirschjaeger
04-28-2007, 03:51 AM
The free use of free energy is impossible, if it even exists. When we convert one energy into another something has to be sacrificed. It's all about efficiency.

On the other hand, we could use what we already have as sustainable free-of-charge energy. The standard formula for Wind Power is 1mw costs 1 million euros. But our leaders tell us there isn't enough money for these projects.

Really? Then explain one simple example.

Bush's military budget for 2007, just one year, is 534 billion $. How many MWs of electricity would that give us?

I was working on a 400mw wind turbine project and it was calculated that it would be running in the black within 8 years.

The problem isn't with the investment and return needed. The problem is with the investment made and return needed in the oil industry. It's not so simple for governments to pull their money out of the oil industry and put it into alternative energy.

That's the problem.

M_Gunz
04-28-2007, 04:13 AM
Simple. First you give a legal monopoly on all wind or sea power to the oil companies
and then it becomes feasible. And like the railroads of old that includes free land to
site generators on and complete tax write-offs for construction while the same companies
get to add all land and installations to their own wealth. The old standard arrangements
as was done by Kings, etc, making grants back since the New World was first exploited.

M_Gunz
04-28-2007, 04:26 AM
Originally posted by Aaron_GT:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Energy cost to build, maintain and run energy recovery devices must be factored into the
"free" energy equation.

Indeed. You can view solar energy as free, except that you have to build things to capture it, and suddenly you have a cost. Even coal is free in a sense except that you have to dig it up first. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

The last few years they've been tearing whole mountains down to get the coal. The cost of
tearing the mountain down is calculated. However the cost of an entire region having the
ground water for who knows how long turned poison and draining off to the oceans has not
been considered except by the people who live there. Maybe in a few 1000 years the water
will be clean again, ask the affected communities in West Virginia and some other states.

I guess that pollution really only matters to those who get poisoned. I have friends with
a kid that has brain damage from lead poison and they've been told that by law they cannot
sue for support or damages.

Aaron_GT
04-28-2007, 05:53 AM
Pirschjaeger - check your PMs.

Aaron_GT
04-28-2007, 05:56 AM
The problem isn't with the investment and return needed. The problem is with the investment made and return needed in the oil industry. It's not so simple for governments to pull their money out of the oil industry and put it into alternative energy.

With the decline in some sources of energy (e.g. the North Sea) it seems that oil may continue at the current cost or higher for a long time, and energy security will be a big issue. It would seem that on that basis governments will have an increasing interest in promoting and investing in or encouraging investment in other energy sources. Plus other sources will become increasingly competitive on cost (although higher costs for resources will put up the cost of building wind, wave, solar, etc.).

But then there is not much point producing all this energy if it gets lost through roofs or via things on standby and so on.