Vassilatos Debunked

[Aether84]

a little help

Have you tried replicating Bedini's scalar beamer or the Kromrey converter?

signs of Pseudoscience

1-Discoverers make their claims directly to the popular media, rather than to fellow scientists.

2-Discoverers claim that a conspiracy has tried to suppress the discovery.

3-The claimed effect appears so weak that observers can hardly distinguish it from noise. No amount of further work increases the signal.

4-Anecdotal evidence is used to back up the claim.

5-True believers cite ancient traditions in support of the new claim.

6-The discoverer or discoverers work in isolation from the mainstream scientific community.

7-The discovery, if true, would require a change in the understanding of the fundamental laws of nature.

bearden bedini vassilatos and others use all or them case closed

[OrionLightShip]

Second thought Aaron...I don't want to be here anymore. You have convinced me I don't belong here. This time I won't be back, I promise.

Could it be that you defend Vassilatos because Lindemans book has so much space paraphrasing his work?

I have no tolerance or respect for the willful ignorance expressed by religious fundamentalism. The harm they have done to this planet is all but irreparable. I thought of all places I could be, I wouldn't have to listen to their bull**** here.


Light travels instantly from the stars.
The earth was created 6000 years ago.
We walked the earth with dinos 4200 years ago.
We owe God a debt of gratitude that he doesn't kill us for sins committed by adam.
The ones I know personally think George Bush is good.

no thanks, but it was nice of you to ask

I thought I was being polite but I'll take dick-ish over dumbass any day.

adios

[Aaron]

group dynamics

Dollard says that Vassilatos is good for the beginning introduction to Tesla, but must be met with caution when trying to use the writings for engineering. Obviously, there is a picture painted by Vassilatos that is prettier than reality, but as far as I know, there is no other description of Tesla's work that is quite like it. Remember, you must all fine tune your BS sniffer. There are many sources out there that I don't agree with everything stated, however, I do take a little bit of everything that I read to piece together a bigger picture thru corroboration. Listen to what resonates as true with you and toss the rest in the garbage.

Dave

Exactly - but problem is "group dynamics". One person says something and like a tuning fork, someone else in resonance with ignorance falls prey to "throwing out the baby with the bathwater" and before you know it, a whole group of people that have no idea what they're talking about are beating the drum of darkness.

The sad fact of reality is that not enough common sense is used by those that don't know how to take pieces of this and that to put together what works for them or makes sense to them.

One person says something and suddenly it is the "holy gospel" and the whole concept of critical thinking is flushed down the toilet.

[Aaron]

misinformation agent = aether84

bedini has never demonsted anything that works

It is obvious you are a sock puppet.

If you have never built anything that works based on what Bedini has shared, quite simply, you shouldn't give up your day job because you aren't cut out for this field.

[Aaron]

flawed philosophical woo woo

Anger shows fear, fear shows lack of confidence.

Is that why people with little tolerance of misinformation show results from their experiments and you have shown none of yours?

[Aaron]

pencil jockey = no replications to post

signs of Pseudoscience

1-Discoverers make their claims directly to the popular media, rather than to fellow scientists.

2-Discoverers claim that a conspiracy has tried to suppress the discovery.

3-The claimed effect appears so weak that observers can hardly distinguish it from noise. No amount of further work increases the signal.

4-Anecdotal evidence is used to back up the claim.

5-True believers cite ancient traditions in support of the new claim.

6-The discoverer or discoverers work in isolation from the mainstream scientific community.

7-The discovery, if true, would require a change in the understanding of the fundamental laws of nature.

bearden bedini vassilatos and others use all or them case closed

Instead of all the obfuscation, why don't you just tell the truth.

The answer is NO, you never built any of it.

[Aaron]

@Orion

Many of your posts in Dollard's thread are constantly demeaning others, period.

You never said anything about Vassilatos? Um, the title of the thread you started is "Vassilatos Debunked" - end of story.

It isn't personal to me, I don't discriminate - I have no tolerance for blanket statements by anyone that DOESN'T SHOW THEIR OWN WORK and your thread post is such a blanket statement.

You come here to learn? Is that why an overwhelming majority of your posts, especially in the Dollard thread is to demean others with your holier than thou little riddled posts? That is how they come across to me and many others. Maybe I'm being a little harsh but I noticed it and it has been mentioned to me by others recently so perhaps the timing just happens to be "timely".

A person with feelings? What do you think it does to the feelings of others with your demeaning little riddled posts here and there. Those don't demonstrate learning but rather that you know something others don't and you hold this over their head.

Sock puppet, yes, I know the meaning and for you to state you're a real person tells me that you don't know. You get some idea in mind by certain individuals that causes you to post what you post. Essentially, you're carrying out an agenda that isn't even your own but you think it is actually your own idea.

You even say "clearly debunked by someone else, not me" - exactly.

Choke hold on the truth? This forum wouldn't even exist and neither would Dollard's thread or anyone else's that is actually posting information of value. That should be common sense.

The difference between COP and efficiency was already sufficiently explained from the time you started your "contest".

You showed no disrespect for Vassilatos? Really? You called this thread: Vassilatos Debunked. I'm not much up for GWBush or Obama double speak. That IS disrespect no matter how you spin it.

Yes, there is too much fascism as that is the exact state of our government and has has been for many years but calling out what I am is a different matter altogether.

Paving the way? There are many individuals that have been part of different groups of networks that have poured their heart and soul into this field. Whether they are right or wrong is irrelevant. The scoundrels are obvious - or should be but he isn't one of them. And I'm not saying their work should not be scrutinized - everyone's should. But Vassilatos was part of the Borderlands group and that group did compile one heck of a compendium of information that countless people got their hands on and still do and was very instrumental in the history of this "movement" adding up to decades to date.

If you look at the people that have stood the test of time, Peter Lindemann, Eric Dollard, Tom Brown and a handful of other like Bedini, etc... HAVE stood the test of time and are still here. Vassilatos' work is part of that even though he is not active in it himself due to some personal mishaps that almost cost him his life. And to start a thread called Vassilatos Debunked is a prime living example of disrespecting someone that contributed more than most people ever will in their lifetime.

Right or wrong is irrelevant. Look at all the past natural philosophers... Tesla and all the historical greats ALL were subject to error and to say they are debunked because certain parts of their work were flawed is a joke. If anything, those works should be revered as parts of the history that got us to where we were until we knew better.

Vassilatos was writing about Tesla and the aether years before most people on the internet ever heard of Tesla or the aether. Everyone has to start somewhere when there isn't much to go on and is work was and is still an inspiration to many people.

Don't put words in my mouth. Meditate on your posts - especially in the Dollard thread and you tell me if you posts are free of antagonism no matter how subtle.

Double standards? Dollard said you're licking up coyote puke and referred to himself as the one who goes the way of the coyote within a few sentences of that - but you conveniently ignore that.

Hypocrite? Dollard actually contributes his work - that is the difference between you and him - and a lot at that so he has a lot of room to talk in regards to what he believes in all of this since he is showing a comparison based on his actual work.

If you don't contribute your work, what room do you have to criticize others work? I would have to say NOT MUCH if any at all.

If you haven't noticed, most people that disrespect Bedini, Bearden, etc... never show anything. Is that a coincidence?

Calorimetry? That is more misdirection. I already stated very sound concepts that you cannot argue with, instead you argue something else. If the COP is 1.5, 2.0 ,etc... in low range, then calorimetry can show you a more accurate story. However, if the COP really is in the 17 range or something extremely high, calorimetry is irrelevant in showing that there is a huge result happening - IT IS NOT NEEDED!

There is a point where the gain is so huge that no amount of calorimetry is needed to prove "overunity" - that is simply a joke to believe that it is. In lower ranges, it can show the difference, but at COP 17, if that is the case, sorry, but proving overunity doesn't need it. If it is overunity, it will be apparent no matter what - calorimetry can show you by how much but that isn't what needs to be proven - just that it is...if it IS, calorimetry isn't needed. To argue this point is to simply prove insincerity in communicating anything meaningful - this was already discussed before with failure.

You can comment on the bouncing balls but you and all the other skeptics are too scared to post the math yourselves to see that all the force X distance in all the bounces added up equate to more dissipated potential (work over time) than was put in to begin with. Basically, it is indisputable and your only argument(s) is semantics or philosophy.

Please post the junior high equations with 3rd grade math and you have no choice but to agree with my claims, period, end of story. You will never escape the 25 cent bouncing ball proof that it is "overunity" and that Einstein's static model is wrong, there is no conservation of energy, potential to cause work comes from thin air (gravitational potential), etc... post the math... debate the math, not interested in semantics or philosophy.

[Aaron]

consistency

Second thought Aaron...I don't want to be here anymore. You have convinced me I don't belong here. This time I won't be back, I promise.

Could it be that you defend Vassilatos because Lindemans book has so much space paraphrasing his work?

I have no tolerance or respect for the willful ignorance expressed by religious fundamentalism. The harm they have done to this planet is all but irreparable. I thought of all places I could be, I wouldn't have to listen to their bull**** here.


Light travels instantly from the stars.
The earth was created 6000 years ago.
We walked the earth with dinos 4200 years ago.
We owe God a debt of gratitude that he doesn't kill us for sins committed by adam.
The ones I know personally think George Bush is good.

no thanks, but it was nice of you to ask

I thought I was being polite but I'll take dick-ish over dumbass any day.

adios

All you prove is that you believe Eric Dollard while talking about how you talk about listening to people's BS about instantaneous light propagation?

This is to say, no time lag may exist in a primary propagation, it can only be instantaneous. Einstein is calling 911!!

Here is the relativity shattering concept that it does not take eons of time for "light" to reach us from distant stars and galactic formations.

Well, I think your method of operation doesn't add up using the very words you say. You selectively choose what Dollard says to support your argument but in other parts, Dollard believes what you don't - so the consistency is lacking in your argument.

But if I get what you're saying partially - I think GWB is an abomination so we agree on something. I think 6000 years is a drop in the bucket compared to the age of the Earth, etc...

So as you can see, I'm perfectly ok having viewpoints in this forum that I don't believe in personally, because this forum has never been, is and never will be about me. My personal beliefs are irrelevant.

[Aether84]

Aaron

Instead of all the obfuscation, why don't you just tell the truth.

The answer is NO, you never built any of it.

Aaron you say your open minded but anytime pepole criticise one of your boys bedini bearden vassilatos when they are obviously wrong you attack them

clearly you are just closed minded to any ideas that dont fit in with what you already believe

and that is the key word BELIEVE because its certainly not science as any scientist would recognize it

but thats ok Aaron you continue to believe in bearden bedini vassilatos fairies big foot aliens atlantis and let them take your money

20 years now and all they do is preduce excuses you can only help those who want to be helped you enjoy living in ignorance and maybe whan they take all your money with their lies you will see sense

but i wont be holding my breath

[Joit]

Aaron you say your open minded but anytime pepole criticise one of your boys bedini bearden vassilatos when they are obviously wrong you attack them

clearly you are just closed minded to any ideas that dont fit in with what you already believe

and that is the key word BELIEVE because its certainly not science as any scientist would recognize it

but thats ok Aaron you continue to believe in bearden bedini vassilatos fairies big foot aliens atlantis and let them take your money

20 years now and all they do is preduce excuses you can only help those who want to be helped you enjoy living in ignorance and maybe whan they take all your money with their lies you will see sense

but i wont be holding my breath

Why do you assume its only one Person here, what do disagree with you, when you call J. Bedini and T. Bearden Conspiracy Theorists.
Because noone else write here, because they are allready sick from you smartasses?

When you refer to 'the lack of sharing' from J. Bedini to call him a Conspiracy Theorist, you did miss to mention E. Dollard, and especially his Story what happend to him after he did go public. Go on and call E. Dollard a Conspiracy Theorist too, because he probatly lied with his Story in your Opinion too,
also all others Inventors, what had Devices what your 'Fellow Scientists' could not agree with, but then they been chased at the End, until the most from her knowledge was gone for the public.

Then you go on to complain about, when they make Money with it.
At the next Moment you will probatly State. " When they really have some working Devices, why dont they sell it and make Money with it"
Do you guys even realize what crap cheap arguing you use?

Stay with your fellow Scientists at the Places what fits to you, here is not the right place for you and noone will miss your wannabe-smart Comments, when you are not here.

[Aether84]

Lol

Why do you assume its only one Person here, what do disagree with you, when you call J. Bedini and T. Bearden Conspiracy Theorists.
Because noone else write here, because they are allready sick from you smartasses?

When you refer to 'the lack of sharing' from J. Bedini to call him a Conspiracy Theorist, you did miss to mention E. Dollard, and especially his Story what happend to him after he did go public. Go on and call E. Dollard a Conspiracy Theorist too, because he probatly lied with his Story in your Opinion too,
also all others Inventors, what had Devices what your 'Fellow Scientists' could not agree with, but then they been chased at the End, until the most from her knowledge was gone for the public.

Then you go on to complain about, when they make Money with it.
At the next Moment you will probatly State. " When they really have some working Devices, why dont they sell it and make Money with it"
Do you guys even realize what crap cheap arguing you use?

Stay with your fellow Scientists at the Places what fits to you, here is not the right place for you and noone will miss your wannabe-smart Comments, when you are not here.

BORING same old excuses keep drinking that kool aid son gotta to love conspiracy nuts lol

and as for dollard he caused most of his problems himself with his arrogant attitude as you can see for yourself on his thread anytime someone questions one of his theorys he insults them not exactly going to win friends by doing is he

questioning theorys is how science evolves and develops so as long as dollard continues to behave in that way no true scientist will take him seriously

beam me up scotty

[Allcanadian]

@Aether84

signs of Pseudoscience
1-Discoverers make their claims directly to the popular media, rather than to fellow scientists.
2-Discoverers claim that a conspiracy has tried to suppress the discovery.
3-The claimed effect appears so weak that observers can hardly distinguish it from noise. No amount of further work increases the signal.
4-Anecdotal evidence is used to back up the claim.
5-True believers cite ancient traditions in support of the new claim.
6-The discoverer or discoverers work in isolation from the mainstream scientific community.
7-The discovery, if true, would require a change in the understanding of the fundamental laws of nature.

I'm not sure I would agree
1 - The phrase "what is the truth when the truth is unacceptable" comes to mind and we should remember that "scientists" are first and foremost people and subject to all there flaws. Not unlike the scientists who are now admitting they doctored their scientific reports regarding global warming and threatened others who did not fall in line with their beliefs.

2 - This is laughable, a conspiracy is only hersay until it's proven to be true, not unlike my example in #1, the scientists admitted publically that they doctored the global warming data to suit their agenda and this so called conspiracy happened to be true. So who decides what is a conspiracy and fact and what is not --- You?.

3 - This is nonsense, some of the most historic breakthroughs discovered in science were very small yet precise effects which required progress in technology to discover.

4 - I hate to be the bearer of bad news but most of science is Anecdotal, one scientist says Hmmm this is strange and then notes the effect then ignores it, 20 years later the scientist tells a friend who tells a friend who tells a friend who looks deeper and ends up winning a Nobel prize, such is the life of a scientist. You don't know much about the history of science do you?

5 - A belief can be a precarious thing especially in science because one proven fact keeps getting replaced with another better proven fact which kind of means the first proven fact wasn't actually true doesn't it?. As well I would never trust anyone who has no knowledge of the past because that is the very foundation on which everything else is built, children do this quite a bit moreso than intelligent responsible adults.

6 - LOL,again I hate to burst your bubble but most all of the people in history who have accomplished the most were regarded as loners, renegades or quacks by the mainstream. Let's ask a really silly question -- why would anyone work in isolation from the mainstream scientific community?. Well the obvious answer is a little scientific, if everyone acted the same and thought the same then how on earth could they do anything different?, you see every single Nobel prize winner was doing something different which is why they won the Nobel prize. They worked in isolation because of a fundamental premise in science ---- to remove external influences.
"In order to be an immaculate member of a flock of sheep, one must above all be a sheep oneself" --- Albert Einstein.

7 - This statement is a little confusing and does not imply a great deal of understanding. First Nature is what it is however the "laws of science" are variable which is why they are always changing. This is why one year science says something is impossible then 10 years later they say it is obvious, now we could ask a simple question here --- did nature change or did science?. Well Nature did not change, it is what it is, so science must have changed or our understanding of nature changed which is science.

To be honest this always confused the hell out of me, some half-wit scientist gets up on his soap box and say's "that is impossible and you have broken the laws of nature". At which point it should be obvious that a supposed law of nature is simply something people have decided is factual or an opinion. If it is one thing we should have learned by now it is that opinions are not facts and more people believing something does not mean it is more true only more popular. This is why science changes over time, we learn new things and gain more insight into how nature works and the supposed laws of nature change. This has happened throughout our history and logically it will continue into the future, science and it's laws will change --- get over it.

In my opinion it's all Pseudoscience, if it wasn't then why is the foundation of science always changing?. Ah, but some must believe science is infallible thus the scientists must be infallible which makes them --- gods. One word, Fubar.

Regards
AC

[Aaron]

free energy psychology

but thats ok Aaron you continue to believe in bearden bedini vassilatos fairies big foot aliens atlantis and let them take your money

If you can't comprehend what it means when I say I disagree with a lot of what Bearden says but agree with other stuff he says and you lump it together in a comment of willful ignorance such as the quote above, it indisputably proves you are completely incapable of critical analysis of anything anyone says OR you are simply a con OR BOTH.

BOTH are traits of someone that everyone should be wary of and cannot trust - just look at the manipulation of what you did to my words trying to make people think I'm outright buying everything said by certain people. Your method is indistinguishable from a politician's.

Like I said before, progress in the "free energy" field isn't a technological problem, it is psychological. With your method of thinking so clearly demonstrated in your quote in light of what I ACTUALLY DID SAY about Bearden proves my point.

If I wasn't open minded, this forum would be a fraction of the size it is now. There are plenty of things here that I don't believe or agree with but they're welcome to stay. Your argument is tired and worn out as is the censorship argument, etc... yawn...

There is a reason why people like you are not shown things by certain individuals that have all kinds of results to show that they are not only NOT "full of crap", but they are actually extremely masterful in their field. You already have your mind made up about them WITHOUT ever having the facts.

These people you dismiss probably forget more knowledge in this field in one year than you have gained in your lifetime.

If you're going to argue anything, at least have the decency to be HONEST without feeling the need to manipulate what people are saying.

[Aether84]

Lmao

If you can't comprehend what it means when I say I disagree with a lot of what Bearden says but agree with other stuff he says and you lump it together in a comment of willful ignorance such as the quote above, it indisputably proves you are completely incapable of critical analysis of anything anyone says OR you are simply a con OR BOTH.

BOTH are traits of someone that everyone should be wary of and cannot trust - just look at the manipulation of what you did to my words trying to make people think I'm outright buying everything said by certain people. Your method is indistinguishable from a politician's.

Like I said before, progress in the "free energy" field isn't a technological problem, it is psychological. With your method of thinking so clearly demonstrated in your quote in light of what I ACTUALLY DID SAY about Bearden proves my point.

If I wasn't open minded, this forum would be a fraction of the size it is now. There are plenty of things here that I don't believe or agree with but they're welcome to stay. Your argument is tired and worn out as is the censorship argument, etc... yawn...

There is a reason why people like you are not shown things by certain individuals that have all kinds of results to show that they are not only NOT "full of crap", but they are actually extremely masterful in their field. You already have your mind made up about them WITHOUT ever having the facts.

These people you dismiss probably forget more knowledge in this field in one year than you have gained in your lifetime.

If you're going to argue anything, at least have the decency to be HONEST without feeling the need to manipulate what people are saying.

(free energy" field isn't a technological problem, it is psychological problem)- WHAT HORSE**** that is what most con artist say its not me its you who cant understand it

i will say what i allways say to people making wild clams PROVE IT in clinical double-blind study but of course you and the others wont do that will you because than all your clams will be proven wrong & you and the others wont be able to con gullible pepole

(the burden of proof is on the believer not on the sceptic) if you dont believe this than don't pretend that it is science because its not for over 20 years these guys have been saying these things and still no proof most intelligent people would ask why if a person keeps promising and not delivering

but of course you wont will you? because if you do you would have to explain to people why you have been supporting liars and charlatans for so long

this is my last post on this subjet because your ignorance bores me some people are just happy living in ignorance because it's easier than having to think for ones self.

GOOD BYE Aaron

[Allcanadian]

@Aether84
I'm going jump in here again not because I totally disagree with what your saying but because I think your justification is seriously flawed.

i will say what i allways say to people making wild clams PROVE IT in clinical double-blind study but of course you and the others wont do that will you because than all your clams will be proven wrong & you and the others wont be able to con gullible pepole

I think this is debatable, we know as a fact from history that science has made not wild but logical claims and performed clinical double-blind studies and still they're facts have been later proven to be false. First matter was tangible, then it was made of a cloud of tangible atoms, then the atoms were in fact clouds of particles, then in fact the particles were actually waves or clouds, well no they were not waves because after that they were virtual particles popping in and out of existence from other universes --- which leaves us where exactly?. You see your arguement for normalcy as a foundation is skewed because the foundation is built on quicksand. The fact is we do not know much of anything for certain or in regards to undeniable proof because we have none.

(

the burden of proof is on the believer not on the sceptic) if you dont believe this than don't pretend that it is science because its not for over 20 years these guys have been saying these things and still no proof most intelligent people would ask why if a person keeps promising and not delivering

As I said above "Proof" is relative, prove to me there are virtual particles from other universes as is the overwhelming consensus in quantum mechanics? show me real tangible proof.

but of course you wont will you? because if you do you would have to explain to people why you have been supporting liars and charlatans for so long

Those are some pretty strong words, liars and charlatans?, the problem I have with words and claims is that 99% of the time it's a classic case of the kettle calling the tea kettle black. It's like saying your full of BS because you cannot prove what you are claiming even though I cannot either, which leaves us where exactly? -- nowhere.
If your going to disagree with anyone then at the very least then you should tell us where you stand and what you believe, be warned if you want to go all mainstream on me I will tear your logic limb from limb.

Regards
AC