To: Quix
you are not aware of the RELIGION OF SCIENCE AND you would be wrong on that point ...
I've got devices (actual working physical devices or 'product') that I created ('invented' if you will) that defied the 'conventional' thinking (by the masses, or at least the 'masses' that know about and use such devices) at the time of their introduction.
I arrived at their derivation by thinking outside the box BUT within the established, WELL KNOWN AND PROVEN TIME AND TIME AGAIN laws of physics.
We have a saying, those of us that work with "nature's laws" that we have discovered, and proven time and time again:
There is no cheating nature at her own game.
You can work with her you cannot work against her and make up your own rules.
People like you have no appreciation for actual lab work that either proves or disproves various wild-eyed 'theories' proposed by crackpots - which brings me to the second saying:
The proof is in the pudding.
Which means - WHEN you build something, it either it works or it doesn't, and to date NOTHING in the way of 'free energy' or Zero point energy has EVER been proven possible.
Splitting the atom (HAVE you forgotten about this equation: E=MC2) HAS been proven to be the CLOSEST thing to 'free energy' that mankind has ever seen ...
114 posted on
01/26/2004 6:58:15 AM PST by
_Jim
( <--- Ann Coulter speaks on gutless Liberals (RealAudio files))
To: _Jim
It must feel very safe and secure to be soooooo
convinced
that you have THE pristine, comprehensive, 100% accurate
construction on reality.
I understand your logic and consider it plausible to a point.
I don't believe your position explains a sufficient percentage of what seems to be 'out there.'
116 posted on
01/26/2004 7:03:16 AM PST by
Quix
(Choose this day whom U will serve: Shrillery & demonic goons or The King of Kings and Lord of Lords)
To: _Jim
Your assessment of my IQ
and general levels of stupidity are not
admirable constructions on reality at all, from my perspective.
117 posted on
01/26/2004 7:08:18 AM PST by
Quix
(Choose this day whom U will serve: Shrillery & demonic goons or The King of Kings and Lord of Lords)
To: _Jim
Obviously . . .
that depends on one's frame of reference, the context one is operating within.
The daughter of Einstein's closest friend/colleague would greatly beg to differ with you. No, I won't give you her email.
131 posted on
01/26/2004 5:11:27 PM PST by
Quix
(Choose this day whom U will serve: Shrillery & demonic goons or The King of Kings and Lord of Lords)
To: _Jim
Am glad you have some appreciation for the realities of
the
RELIGION OF SCIENCE.
132 posted on
01/26/2004 5:12:23 PM PST by
Quix
(Choose this day whom U will serve: Shrillery & demonic goons or The King of Kings and Lord of Lords)
To: _Jim
I didn't realize you had been actively involved in
ALL
the super black projects over the last 50+ years.
You must walk around with half a dozen Marine guards all trained to shoot you at first hint of your potential capture.
I would imagine that puts a real crimp in your socializing.
But given your humble, winsome ways, perhaps that's not as big a problem as I was construing it to be.
134 posted on
01/26/2004 5:14:54 PM PST by
Quix
(Choose this day whom U will serve: Shrillery & demonic goons or The King of Kings and Lord of Lords)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson