International Skeptics Forum

International Skeptics Forum (http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/forumindex.php)
-   Science, Mathematics, Medicine, and Technology (http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=5)
-   -   Continuation Brilliant Light Power Going To Market - Free Energy Generator Part 4 (http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=334962)

Lukraak_Sisser 22nd February 2019 07:22 AM

Brilliant Light Power Going To Market - Free Energy Generator Part 4
 
Mod Info The [url=http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=327782]previous thread was creaking along slower than a snail on stilts, so have a shiny bright new, and hopefully faster, thread. Please don't go down the Andrew Wakefield rabbit hole in this thread, though; it's verging away from the topic.
Posted By:Agatha


Anyways, it is nearly the end of February 2019, what is your next 'this time for real' deadline Markie?
2029 in the hope everyone has forgotten the previous 'almost done now, please send more money' promises made for the past 30 ish years?

Mike! 22nd February 2019 10:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by halleyscomet (Post 12610316)
Ah, then you concede you have no evidence to back up your claims, just bluster and urban legends. I’m not going on a wild goose chase to hunt up evidence of YOUR lies about an Autism / Vaccine connection. I know it’s a wild goose chase because I DID that research when my first child was born, back before that scumbag Wakefield had been exposed as a fraud who faked his “study.” Hell, I even had my firstborn on the Sears alternative vaccine schedule for a couple of years.

You’re the one repeating a debunked chestnut about a vaccine / autism connection. Either admit you’ve got zip to support it or present your evidence.

Please, "scumbag" is too kind. In the future, I ask you that you use his proper title, The Bastard Wakefield.

halleyscomet 22nd February 2019 11:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mike! (Post 12610657)
Please, "scumbag" is too kind. In the future, I ask you that you use his proper title, The Bastard Wakefield.



That’s not the best term for him but most the words I’d need to describe him accurately aren’t allowed on this forum.

MEequalsIxR 22nd February 2019 01:24 PM

markie what is your connection to Mills and BLP? Are you an investor?

LTC8K6 22nd February 2019 01:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MEequalsIxR (Post 12610920)
markie what is your connection to Mills and BLP? Are you an investor?

The NDA probably does not allow that discussion.

Mike! 22nd February 2019 02:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by halleyscomet (Post 12610722)
That’s not the best term for him but most the words I’d need to describe him accurately aren’t allowed on this forum.

That's why I settled on The Bastard Wakefield. It drives the point home more effectively than The ************* ******* Wakefield that most forum software would display. :thumbsup:;)

HappySkeptic99 22nd February 2019 02:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hellbound (Post 12608853)
I've stated this before, but perhaps it's time again. I've always compared scientific method to vehicle crash testing. The goal isn't to ram your car (theory) into soft piles of pillows and strands of rubber bands to make sure it doesn't get hurt. The idea is to slam it head-on into the brick wall of existing knowledge at high speed, and see what breaks. If your theory is correct, what breaks will be the wall.

All the excuses, the made-up explanations, the just-so stories, the bad and incomplete data, the equations that don't give correct answers, the refusal to get truly independent testing or to release the data that would allow such; these are all piles of pillows. It can only lead one to question why he claims a 5-star crash rating when his theory has never hit anything more rigid than warm jello.

Nice post!

Truth produces its own conviction, because the more you test something that is true, the more evidence you produce for its veracity.

A real scientist at BLP would take the claims of hydrino analysis, and energy production, and come up with an iron-clad experiment that could be reproduced by the world to prove the claims. Scientists are laser-focused on getting this type of recognition and evidence. Hydrinos would result in a Nobel Prize. Do you really think a scientist wouldn't exhaust every way to test the claims false, or find evidence to prove them true?

This tells me that there are no real scientists at BLP. Those with scientific training likely either suspect fraud and don't care, are incompetent (that covers true-believers), or are in on the scheme.

This is not how either science, or product development it done.

MEequalsIxR 22nd February 2019 02:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LTC8K6 (Post 12610973)
The NDA probably does not allow that discussion.

Shame too.

Still, since he's here defending Mills so vigorously some disclosure would seem to be appropriate.

I figured he'd ignore the the post since transparency/honesty and Mills seems to be mutually exclusive.

Hans 22nd February 2019 10:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mike! (Post 12610263)
Nice. So we can now lump Mills in with The Bastard Wakefield. I'm okay with that.

I humbly suggest the cognomen of The Mumpsimus Mills or Mills the Mumpsimus.

... "someone who obstinately clings to an error, bad habit or prejudice, even after the foible has been exposed and the person humiliated; also, any error, bad habit, or prejudice clung to in this fashion".

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mumpsimus

JeanTate 23rd February 2019 01:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lukraak_Sisser (Post 12611916)
Mod Info The [url=http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=327782]previous thread was creaking along slower than a snail on stilts, so have a shiny bright new, and hopefully faster, thread. Please don't go down the Andrew Wakefield rabbit hole in this thread, though; it's verging away from the topic.
Posted By:Agatha


Anyways, it is nearly the end of February 2019, what is your next 'this time for real' deadline Markie?
2029 in the hope everyone has forgotten the previous 'almost done now, please send more money' promises made for the past 30 ish years?

As far as I know, markie’s 26 February, 2019 is the furthest into the future, of any specific claim. And he’s walked away from that anyway.

So soon we’ll be in uncharted territory. :p

RecoveringYuppy 23rd February 2019 01:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JeanTate (Post 12611964)
As far as I know, markie’s 26 February, 2019 is the furthest into the future, of any specific claim. And he’s walked away from that anyway.

So soon we’ll be in uncharted territory. :p

But we have something even more revealing that that. And Markie and all the other Mills fans seem totally incapable of addressing it. For a year now BLP has been claiming to have 'Product Hydrino® “in a bottle” identified by multiple analytical methods'. Why is no one talking about it this product? He also promised that last year would be the year he show the world the hydrino compounds he's been claiming to have for a decade or more. Didn't happen.

jrhowell 23rd February 2019 02:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RecoveringYuppy (Post 12611982)
For a year now BLP has been claiming to have 'Product Hydrino® “in a bottle” identified by multiple analytical methods'. Why is no one talking about it this product?

Mills would probably say, “Oh you thought I meant product as in something for sale. No, it is the product of a chemical reaction and we must keep it to ourselves so that the secret of hydrino creation cannot be reverse engineered by our competitors.”

jonesdave116 23rd February 2019 02:38 PM

You can't blame Mills for not revealing his working product. Within months the Chinese would be copying it and flogging it for half the price. Perhaps it will always remain a secret?

Lukraak_Sisser 23rd February 2019 03:56 PM

Hmmm, a thought occured to me.

I, and with me most ohters here, believe Mills is a conman stealing money from scientifically illiterate marks because his physics is wrong at virtually every level.

But what if he is right? Because his method, if actually true, were to be an extremely cheap, clean and simple way to provide near unlimited energy to the world. If it were released it would end several wars, save millions, if not billions from starvation, solve global warming and give us the energy we'd need to start both recycling our limited resources more efficiently and start expanding out into space.
And yet, knowing that, Mills has been sitting on his invention, shielding it from independent verification, hiding it from the world, all so he can make the most money out of it.
That is a level of selfish monstrosity en par with Stalin, Pol Pot, Mao and Hitler.

So, markie and opiniongeek, both of you claim to believe his claims, so why are you not agitating that the most important invention of the century should be brought out in the open and shared with humanity, rather than be kept in the clutches of a man who is willing to let 30 years of hunger victims die just to get a bit richer in the end?

jrhowell 23rd February 2019 05:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lukraak_Sisser (Post 12612125)
So, markie and opiniongeek, both of you claim to believe his claims, so why are you not agitating that the most important invention of the century should be brought out in the open and shared with humanity, rather than be kept in the clutches of a man who is willing to let 30 years of hunger victims die just to get a bit richer in the end?

You didn’t ask me, but I will answer anyway. It is because Mills isn’t some socialist bleading heart liberal. He is a true capitalist working hard to make America great again! :boggled:

RecoveringYuppy 23rd February 2019 06:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lukraak_Sisser (Post 12612125)

So, markie and opiniongeek, both of you claim to believe his claims, so why are you not agitating that the most important invention of the century should be brought out in the open and shared with humanity, rather than be kept in the clutches of a man who is willing to let 30 years of hunger victims die just to get a bit richer in the end?

And remember, that by delaying this invention he is also delaying his cure for cancer and heart disease which he plans to finance from this operation.

Seriously, how can anybody take this guy seriously?

markie 23rd February 2019 09:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mike! (Post 12611917)
Please, "scumbag" is too kind. In the future, I ask you that you use his proper title, The Bastard Wakefield.

I've noticed a trend with 'skeptics' here, a behaviour that exhibits low inhibition in ascribing the foulest of motives to those who challenge the status quo. Venom is directed towards the individuals, the mavericks, who buck the system. It's like skeptics don't want to believe the story from the maverick point of view ; they prefer the safety of the incumbent, institutional view, despite evidence. Yes, despite evidence. The evidence is simply not believed, is dismissed and mindlessly swatted at as one would a persistent fly at a picnic.

It's a choice, really, to besmirch people that you don't even know, based on second or third hand information from parties often having a vested interest against such people and their ideas.

The true skeptic will not mindlessly swat at the fly; he will carefully note what the fly is after. And when he realizes that the fly is attracted to a collection of rotten meat that the picnic attendees have been putting into their sandwiches, it's time to declare the company picnic over and admit there is a problem.

There is a problem in physics today, and certain individuals like Randell Mills are trying to fix it. There is a problem in our environment today that is causing autism, and certain individuals like Andrew Wakefield are trying to fix it. I try to understand such individuals and in understanding them I have come to admire them.

I know most 'skeptics' here won't bother, but on the chance there is a real skeptic here, who is as skeptical of the corporate funded mainstream media view as he is of the maverick, here's a recent video of Andrew Wakefield being interviewed and explaining himself. And that is all I will be saying on this matter, thank you.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sh8yjUqzhNs

RecoveringYuppy 23rd February 2019 09:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by markie (Post 12612314)
Yes, despite evidence. The evidence is simply not believed, is dismissed and mindlessly swatted at as one would a persistent fly at a picnic.

You have no evidence and you are just an annoying fly.

Please address why BLP was unable to prove that their lies weren't lies as they promised to do last year. This is very simple markie. BLP has been claiming for a decade to have hydrino compounds. A year ago they said they were going to show them to the world in 2018. 2018 has come and gone and they did not show them to the world. They claim to have the evidence. They claim they wanted to show it to the word. Yet they didn't. It was put up or shut up time according to their own statements. Yet they didn't put up and you haven't shut up.

markie 23rd February 2019 09:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lukraak_Sisser (Post 12612125)
Hmmm, a thought occured to me.

I, and with me most ohters here, believe Mills is a conman stealing money from scientifically illiterate marks because his physics is wrong at virtually every level.

But what if he is right? Because his method, if actually true, were to be an extremely cheap, clean and simple way to provide near unlimited energy to the world. If it were released it would end several wars, save millions, if not billions from starvation, solve global warming and give us the energy we'd need to start both recycling our limited resources more efficiently and start expanding out into space.
And yet, knowing that, Mills has been sitting on his invention, shielding it from independent verification, hiding it from the world, all so he can make the most money out of it.
That is a level of selfish monstrosity en par with Stalin, Pol Pot, Mao and Hitler.

So, markie and opiniongeek, both of you claim to believe his claims, so why are you not agitating that the most important invention of the century should be brought out in the open and shared with humanity, rather than be kept in the clutches of a man who is willing to let 30 years of hunger victims die just to get a bit richer in the end?

"hiding it from the world"? Um, he's been showing it - the SunCell type of reaction - to the world for the last five years. During that time the advancements have been very apparent. Yes there have been setbacks and delays. That is almost inevitable in pioneering research. To say Mills has been 'sitting' on his invention is strange indeed.
For your contemplation: The invention of the SunCell will not solve world hunger nor end wars any more than did the discovery and utilization of oil. Comparing Mills to the likes of Stalin and Hitler just about sums up the mentality here.

RecoveringYuppy 23rd February 2019 10:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by markie (Post 12612324)
"Um, he's been showing it - the SunCell type of reaction - to the world for the last five years. During that time the advancements have been very apparent.

No he has not. He shows youtube videos that are easily faked and he fails to provide the convincing evidence that he claims to have.

BTW how are "the advancements have been very apparent" when in 2016 he was claiming to be delivering prototypes ready for commercialization to a third party and now that has fallen through and he has no projections on when he's going to actually do that?

How in the world do you expect anyone to buying in to the monumental stupidity you are pedding?

markie 23rd February 2019 10:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RecoveringYuppy (Post 12612319)
You have no evidence and you are just an annoying fly.

Please address why BLP was unable to prove that their lies weren't lies as they promised to do last year. This is very simple markie. BLP has been claiming for a decade to have hydrino compounds. A year ago they said they were going to show them to the world in 2018. 2018 has come and gone and they did not show them to the world. They claim to have the evidence. They claim they wanted to show it to the word. Yet they didn't. It was put up or shut up time according to their own statements. Yet they didn't put up and you haven't shut up.

Consider that large, transparent cuboid - in which a wire was exploded and a weblike substance formed - to be the "bottle". There it is : hydrino in a bottle. If you care to look, the substance is characterized in the early 2019 version of his GUTCP.

RecoveringYuppy 23rd February 2019 10:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by markie (Post 12612328)
Consider that large, transparent cuboid - in which a wire was exploded and a weblike substance formed - to be the "bottle". There it is : hydrino in a bottle. If you care to look, the substance is characterized in the early 2019 version of his GUTCP.

I do not care to look at more lies. He's been claiming to have such stuff for ten years or more and was going to show it to the world last year. HE DIDN"T.

It's a freaking fakable video for crying out loud.

Are you a freaking moron? It's the most obviously fakable stuff on the planet and no where even close to what anyone with half an ounce of brain should consider evidence let alone proof.

Yet the guy claims to have convincing proof and a desire to show it to the world. Yet he doesn't. He persists with completely fakable videos.

Squeegee Beckenheim 24th February 2019 03:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by markie (Post 12612314)
I've noticed a trend with 'skeptics' here, a behaviour that exhibits low inhibition in ascribing the foulest of motives to those who challenge the status quo. Venom is directed towards the individuals, the mavericks, who buck the system. It's like skeptics don't want to believe the story from the maverick point of view ; they prefer the safety of the incumbent, institutional view, despite evidence. Yes, despite evidence. The evidence is simply not believed, is dismissed and mindlessly swatted at as one would a persistent fly at a picnic.

It's a choice, really, to besmirch people that you don't even know, based on second or third hand information from parties often having a vested interest against such people and their ideas.

The true skeptic will not mindlessly swat at the fly; he will carefully note what the fly is after. And when he realizes that the fly is attracted to a collection of rotten meat that the picnic attendees have been putting into their sandwiches, it's time to declare the company picnic over and admit there is a problem.

There is a problem in physics today, and certain individuals like Randell Mills are trying to fix it. There is a problem in our environment today that is causing autism, and certain individuals like Andrew Wakefield are trying to fix it. I try to understand such individuals and in understanding them I have come to admire them.

I know most 'skeptics' here won't bother, but on the chance there is a real skeptic here, who is as skeptical of the corporate funded mainstream media view as he is of the maverick, here's a recent video of Andrew Wakefield being interviewed and explaining himself. And that is all I will be saying on this matter, thank you.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sh8yjUqzhNs

I know we've been told not to go down the Wakefield rabbit hole, so I'm not going to go into this in any depth. I will just say, however, that Wakefield filed a patent for a new kind of MMR vaccine the year before publishing the research he claimed showed a link between the MMR vaccine and autism. Furthermore, 2 years before he published that research he was paid nearly half a million pounds to make a case against the MMR vaccine.

The anti-vaxx movement Wakefield created for his own financial gain has a body count of more than 10,000 - maybe as high as double that. Most of those deaths are children.

Now, ask yourself, do you really want to associate Mills with this man? Do you really want to imply that they are the same?

This is going to be my only post on this subject. I just believe you ought to put some serious thought into whether associating Mills with Wakefield does Mills good or whether it does him harm.

The Man 24th February 2019 07:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by markie (Post 12612314)
I've noticed a trend with 'skeptics' here, a behaviour that exhibits low inhibition in ascribing the foulest of motives to those who challenge the status quo. Venom is directed towards the individuals, the mavericks, who buck the system. It's like skeptics don't want to believe the story from the maverick point of view ; they prefer the safety of the incumbent, institutional view, despite evidence. Yes, despite evidence. The evidence is simply not believed, is dismissed and mindlessly swatted at as one would a persistent fly at a picnic.

It's a choice, really, to besmirch people that you don't even know, based on second or third hand information from parties often having a vested interest against such people and their ideas.

The true skeptic will not mindlessly swat at the fly; he will carefully note what the fly is after. And when he realizes that the fly is attracted to a collection of rotten meat that the picnic attendees have been putting into their sandwiches, it's time to declare the company picnic over and admit there is a problem.

There is a problem in physics today, and certain individuals like Randell Mills are trying to fix it. There is a problem in our environment today that is causing autism, and certain individuals like Andrew Wakefield are trying to fix it. I try to understand such individuals and in understanding them I have come to admire them.

I know most 'skeptics' here won't bother, but on the chance there is a real skeptic here, who is as skeptical of the corporate funded mainstream media view as he is of the maverick, here's a recent video of Andrew Wakefield being interviewed and explaining himself. And that is all I will be saying on this matter, thank you.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sh8yjUqzhNs

We already know what "the fly" is after, money. Mills exemplifies this in statements and actions intended to keep corporate secrets and as a result money is all he can get. Even in this though, as others have noted, he is doing it wrong, if real, as, if I recall, the patent protections obtained don't actually provide the intended protections. Either you have made no actual attempt to "try to understand such individuals" or you are simply lying. Which would of course make your admiration of such liars understandable.

Where's Mills study on the relation of Hydrino production to autism, or just any medical condition?

Lying and faking data doesn't make people "mavericks" it just makes them part of the problem.

gabeygoat 24th February 2019 08:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by markie (Post 12612328)
Consider that large, transparent cuboid - in which a wire was exploded and a weblike substance formed - to be the "bottle". There it is : hydrino in a bottle. If you care to look, the substance is characterized in the early 2019 version of his GUTCP.

Holy hell, seriously? This is getting sad

Darat 24th February 2019 08:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gabeygoat (Post 12612564)
Holy hell, seriously? This is getting sad

But there's a video on YouTube! What more could anyone need!?

Lukraak_Sisser 24th February 2019 08:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by markie (Post 12612324)
"hiding it from the world"? Um, he's been showing it - the SunCell type of reaction - to the world for the last five years. During that time the advancements have been very apparent. Yes there have been setbacks and delays. That is almost inevitable in pioneering research. To say Mills has been 'sitting' on his invention is strange indeed.
For your contemplation: The invention of the SunCell will not solve world hunger nor end wars any more than did the discovery and utilization of oil. Comparing Mills to the likes of Stalin and Hitler just about sums up the mentality here.

By that measurement Marvel have shown the advancement of both aliens and superhumans, and the advances have been very apparent too.
Youtube video's are not evidence of anything but the ability to make a video.

Sending 200 prototypes and schematics to labs around the world is proving something, provided they can replicate the results without being payed shills.

RecoveringYuppy 24th February 2019 08:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Man (Post 12612554)
Even in this though, as others have noted, he is doing it wrong, if real, as, if I recall, the patent protections obtained don't actually provide the intended protections.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lukraak_Sisser (Post 12612602)
Sending 200 prototypes and schematics to labs around the world is proving something, provided they can replicate the results without being payed shills.

The fact is that if what Mill's has been claiming for 30 years is correct someone else would have made him rich by now. He has published over a thousand pages of his so-called theory and he has multiple public patents. And I would point out that the rejected ones are still public even though rejected. Further, BLP could get the rejected ones re-instated if someone else proved they were valid by implementing them.

Yet markie persists in the extreme delusion that the whole planet is so jaded against change that not one person, university, company, or country wants to take over a large part of the 8 trillion energy market.

Hans 24th February 2019 09:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RecoveringYuppy (Post 12612610)
The fact is that if what Mill's has been claiming for 30 years is correct someone else would have made him rich by now. He has published over a thousand pages of his so-called theory and he has multiple public patents. And I would point out that the rejected ones are still public even though rejected. Further, BLP could get the rejected ones re-instated if someone else proved they were valid by implementing them.

Yet markie persists in the extreme delusion that the whole planet is so jaded against change that not one person, university, company, or country wants to take over a large part of the 8 trillion energy market.

Hmmmm, yes the very funny 'they are against change' is easily disproved by examining what the world was like in 1819 vs 200 years later. I don't know (I know a lot about 1819 and that era) but the world seems remarkably changed - and better in many ways - how did that happen if mavericks were not followed?

It is a silly argument. We all noted how the computer nerds were all slapped down and the internet still born....oh wait....lol..

Mills the Mumpsimus isn't a maverick he's a con man - big difference.

MEequalsIxR 24th February 2019 09:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by markie (Post 12612314)
I've noticed a trend with 'skeptics' here, a behaviour that exhibits low inhibition in ascribing the foulest of motives to those who challenge the status quo. Venom is directed towards the individuals, the mavericks, who buck the system. It's like skeptics don't want to believe the story from the maverick point of view ;[snip]

Of course skeptics are skeptical. That is the whole point. Self serving words and cheesy youtube videos are not proof. Anyone can claim anything but proving it is a different story. Some might be gullible enough to sink a life savings into a scheme like BLP on the basis of some youtube videos and a book full of nothing but eventually the time comes to realize they have been had.

I would bet most here would be delighted to see a real maverick turn science on it's head. I for one would love to see that happen. But youtube videos are not the way it happen serious papers in serious publications and results verified by independent sources with no connection to the claimant is the way it is done and Mills has done nothing even close. The reason of course is because he is a fraud and a scammer and his work can not and will not hold up to any scrutiny.

I'm sure your financial loss in this will hurt but it's time to wake and realize you have been scammed.

Quote:

Originally Posted by markie (Post 12612314)
[snip] they prefer the safety of the incumbent, institutional view, despite evidence. Yes, despite evidence. The evidence is simply not believed, is dismissed and mindlessly swatted at as one would a persistent fly at a picnic. [snip]

There is zero evidence. Just silly youtube videos. No proof at all. Bill Nye the Science Guy demonstrating grade school concepts to children makes more scientific videos than Mills. For that matter Beakmans World was better science than Mills. Pictures of something glowing with the assurance output is higher than input is not science and it's not convincing to anyone. Except maybe someone who made a bad investment and is desperately clinging to hope somehow the junk science is real.

Quote:

Originally Posted by markie (Post 12612314)
[snip]
It's a choice, really, to besmirch people that you don't even know, based on second or third hand information from parties often having a vested interest against such people and their ideas.

Mills opens himself up to exactly what he gets. He makes promises he doesn't keep. Although he finally got smart and no longer makes promises that way he can't be called on it later. Soon is open to interpretation so if I say to you markie I'll send you 100 dollars soon in five years you can't complain you haven't gotten it yet because it will still be sent out to you soon.

The sad fact is you post something for skeptics to see they will be treat it as not true until it can be proven to be true. There is no reason to be any other way. The proof is on the person making the claim and the world would be a much better place if more people were unwilling to believe anything on the evening news spewed by a politician or a discredited doctor or a charlatan with a scam and a bag full of magic.

Darat 24th February 2019 10:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MEequalsIxR (Post 12612647)
Of course skeptics are skeptical. That is the whole point. Self serving words and cheesy youtube videos are not proof. Anyone can claim anything but proving it is a different story. Some might be gullible enough to sink a life savings into a scheme like BLP on the basis of some youtube videos and a book full of nothing but eventually the time comes to realize they have been had.



I would bet most here would be delighted to see a real maverick turn science on it's head. I for one would love to see that happen... Snip...



From the stories that people have posted elsewhere in the forum I know many of us often came into skepticism because we wanted fantasy to be true but found out it ain't. I think what often happens is that the supporters of such people like Mills really have little understanding of what it would mean if it was true, skeptics often show a much greater understanding of how the world actually works and the significance of something like hydrinos being true, what a world changing breakthrough it would be.

And why wouldn't everyone in the world (bar some oligarchs) want it all to be true?

abaddon 24th February 2019 11:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by markie (Post 12612328)
Consider that large, transparent cuboid - in which a wire was exploded and a weblike substance formed - to be the "bottle". There it is : hydrino in a bottle. If you care to look, the substance is characterized in the early 2019 version of his GUTCP.

Wow. Just wow. This is bizarre.

JeanTate 24th February 2019 11:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RecoveringYuppy (Post 12611982)
But we have something even more revealing that that. And Markie and all the other Mills fans seem totally incapable of addressing it. For a year now BLP has been claiming to have 'Product Hydrino® “in a bottle” identified by multiple analytical methods'. Why is no one talking about it this product? He also promised that last year would be the year he show the world the hydrino compounds he's been claiming to have for a decade or more. Didn't happen.

All true.

However, all predicted/expected/announced dates/deadlines have passed ... except markie’s 26 February, 2019.

I find it very telling that explicit dates are no longer claimed, by either Mills/BLP, or fans such as markie or Brett H. A sea change after 3+ decades.

It’s almost as if there is a collective understanding that such explicitness is counterproductive, creating more adverse blowback than new investment. :p

Red Baron Farms 24th February 2019 12:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Darat (Post 12612593)
But there's a video on YouTube! What more could anyone need!?

There are lots of informative videos on YouTube nowadays. This is of course not one of them, but I have a whole library of lectures etc that I found there.

Reality Check 24th February 2019 12:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by markie (Post 12612324)
"hiding it from the world"? Um, he's been showing it - the SunCell type of reaction - to the world for the last five years. ....

That is a delusion, markie. Mills has been spewing company propaganda videos which only show an ability to essentially blow up apparatus/ That is not evidence of any of Mills' delusions. It is evidence of yet another scam like his other ones either on purpose or because Mills is deluded. Mills is trying to sell his scam, not give credible evidence that he is not deluded.

Reality Check 24th February 2019 01:02 PM

A deluded fantasy that a wire in a "cuboid" is hydrinos
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by markie (Post 12612328)
Consider that large, transparent cuboid ....

A deluded fantasy that an exploding wire in a "cuboid" is hydrinos when exploding wires are well known technology. Even wires in light bulbs can explode :jaw-dropp!

The idiocy of a citing a "early 2019" of Mills book which we already know to be ignorant, deluded and lying. There is little doubt that this new edition will just add more ignorance, lies and delusions.
2 years of analysis of Mills book listing the ignorance, lies and delusions in it

markie 24th February 2019 02:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MEequalsIxR (Post 12612647)
Of course skeptics are skeptical. That is the whole point. Self serving words and cheesy youtube videos are not proof. Anyone can claim anything but proving it is a different story. Some might be gullible enough to sink a life savings into a scheme like BLP on the basis of some youtube videos and a book full of nothing but eventually the time comes to realize they have been had.

I would bet most here would be delighted to see a real maverick turn science on it's head. I for one would love to see that happen. But youtube videos are not the way it happen serious papers in serious publications and results verified by independent sources with no connection to the claimant is the way it is done and Mills has done nothing even close. The reason of course is because he is a fraud and a scammer and his work can not and will not hold up to any scrutiny.

Mills' work has held up to the scrutiny of third parties quite well. Unlike armchair skeptics here, the validators are qualified people who have actually visited BLP and checked out the various experiments for themselves. They are confident enough in their evaluations to put their names down as validators.

Quote:

I'm sure your financial loss in this will hurt but it's time to wake and realize you have been scammed.
You repeat that I have a financial investment in BLP, when I have stated at least twice in this thread that I have none.

Quote:

There is zero evidence. Just silly youtube videos. No proof at all.
There you go, mindlessly swatting away two decades of validated work and dozens of papers published.

RecoveringYuppy 24th February 2019 02:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by markie (Post 12612814)
Mills' work has held up to the scrutiny of third parties quite well.

There has been no third party validation.



Quote:

Originally Posted by markie (Post 12612814)
Unlike armchair skeptics here, the validators are qualified people who have actually visited BLP and checked out the various experiments for themselves.


Stop this lying. You should know damn well that visiting BLP is not independent third party validation.

Darat 24th February 2019 04:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by markie (Post 12612814)
Mills' work has held up to the scrutiny of third parties quite well. Unlike armchair skeptics here, the validators are qualified people who have actually visited BLP and checked out the various experiments for themselves. They are confident enough in their evaluations to put their names down as validators.





You repeat that I have a financial investment in BLP, when I have stated at least twice in this thread that I have none.





There you go, mindlessly swatting away two decades of validated work and dozens of papers published.

Where is the working generator?

MEequalsIxR 24th February 2019 04:06 PM

Mills work has held up to nothing. It is quite unbelievable you refuse to see it. Being payed by Mills is not independent.

The work of Newton, Einstein, Maxwell, Dirac, Pauli, Currie and thousands of others work is published, out there and available for testing and it all has been tested over and over again by different people and organizations. 100 years later Einstein is still being tested. What independent testing has been done to verify Mills work - that is by a third party working at an independent facility with no connections to Mills with people with no connection?

If Mills science was real all he'd have to do would be to ask for help to resolve the supposed issues he claims he has to resolve and there would be a cadre. Graduate students, PHD candidates looking for a dissertation, lots of people looking to build a career would be lined up around the block.


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 07:31 AM.

Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
© 2015, TribeTech AB. All Rights Reserved.