Francois

Thank you Firewatter ,

I read a lot of things about Stanley Meyer , he has been killed
only because he was able to run his buggy with water.
Saoudies don't like that.

I really don't care about all the skeptics , Because I know It works
I know a french scientist who does it perfectly , the proof here :

http://jnaudin.free.fr/

I shall follow my experimentations and I'll let you know.

So, see you soon.

François.

Nigel Goodwin

If you know a French scientist who 'does it perfectly', then why would you need to experiment?. Simply duplicate his 'perfect' design and make yourself rich!.

Presumably he has some excuse why you can't do this?, and why he can't actually prove it works?.

There's a sucker born every minute!

__________________
PIC programmer software, and PIC Tutorials at:
http://www.winpicprog.co.uk

Francois

FireWater ,

Thanks a lot for all these informations , I 've already built myself THIS
specific electrolyser :

http://files.myopera.com/H2earth/fil...n%20Design.pdf
...but not tested on my old car.

It works perfectly except that choosing two NE555 for this expériment is
not stable in time , this is my conclusion.Choosing quartz is better but yet far behind this amazing concept :

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phase-locked_loop.

I have to read again all the details given by Stanley Meyer in his patent.

THanks again for your help.

François.

Francois

For Nigels Goodwin :

http://jlnlabs.imars.com/bingofuel/index.htm

Producing hydrogen is NOT a problem as you can see in the link above.
My main problem is to produce hydrogen with a weak current AND a high voltage.

In the link above they use a huge amount of current.So I'm not interrested in
because the battery in my car can only deliver 12 AMP.

Jean-Louis Naudin is not "a sucker" as you say ,it is a very respectable scientist :

http://www.gifnet.org/

By honesty ,you should at least study what this guy is able to do.

François.

Nigel Goodwin

No, I agree that producing hydrogen is no problem - it's been done commercially for hundreds of years.

What is ludicrous is greater than 100% efficiency, which is what all the fakers (like Meyer) are claiming.

What you need to prove it is a vehicle that has no other power source except water, and works - this has NEVER been done, and for good reason!.

__________________
PIC programmer software, and PIC Tutorials at:
http://www.winpicprog.co.uk

Francois

Hi Nigel ,

Look at this end of this web link :

http://jlnlabs.imars.com/cfr/index.htm

they say : "The estimated heat out was 800 times higher than input..."



François.

Phrase célèbre "impossible n'est pas français".

Nigel Goodwin

So you claim that France has a scientist who has a perfectly working "energy from nothing" scheme? - yet the French government aren't making any use of this?.

France isn't the USA, that's full of 'conspiracy nuts', France is also desperate for energy, and is one of the worlds largest nuclear energy users - if such a scheme worked France would be using it, and selling it to make a fortune.

__________________
PIC programmer software, and PIC Tutorials at:
http://www.winpicprog.co.uk

philba

Notice how the device is working perfectly except for "xcept that choosing two NE555 for this expériment is not stable in time". It's kind of like Stoern's bearing failure.

I'm sure the French Nuclear industry is supressing the guy's work because they don't want the competition. They probably sent ex Foreign Legionaires to rough him up. Or maybe ex CIA goons. Let's toss Mossad in there as well.

Francois

Nigel ,


You ->So you claim that France has a scientist who has a perfectly working "energy from nothing" scheme? - yet the French government aren't making any use of this?.

Me -> Not only in France , but you've NOT read this link
http://jlnlabs.imars.com/cfr/index.htm
.....obviously NOT !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


If you're intelligent , what did you do with a such amazing new technology ?

-> You decide to spread all this information on the internet ANONYMOUSLY
or
-> You go in a coffin like Stanley Meyer.

Why ?

Because all this world is corrupted ! It's evident.


France is as corrupted as England.
There is too much of financial interest implied so that things change.

The main purpose of this forum is to speak about new information
or tests concerning Hydrogen .

Isn't it ? .

François .

Garibaldi

While not specifically endorsing any of the mentioned claims, and at the risk of being labeled a “conspiracy nut”, I must mention that technology is frequently suppressed or denied for a number of self-interest, political or religious reasons. “Who Killed the Electric Car” documents the very deliberate effort by GM and others to suppress alternative energy vehicles, including buying out patents for high efficiency batteries and burying them. Solar is the prime example - power companies, who have the best means to develop it, don’t. Solar doesn’t produce an energy dependency that the drug dealers, err, uh, energy dealers can continue making profits from, so the technology has seen relatively little investment from big power companies. They could make huge profits from retrofitting solar energy systems – but that profitability would quickly end long before their lifetime, so they have no interest in such a system.

Nigel Goodwin

But what's amazing about it?, because it doesn't work? - the only amazing thing is how people keep getting conned into financing it.

Everyone dies in the end, the death of Meyer was 'offically' caused by a brain aneurysm, the poisioning theory is just made up by the conspiracy nuts!.

This is the 21st century, the information technology age, you can't kill something like this off - nor would any goverment or company want to, they would profit from it. There's all these plans about, loads of rubbish patents been issued, yet no one has EVER been able to show a working demonstration.

Perhaps you might be the first?, and I wish you well, but I seriously doubt it, tweaking proven non-working technology isn't likely to make it work!.

It's supposed to be about 'alternative energy' not about imaginary scams that have been doing the rounds for years, and have never worked yet, and presumably never will?. I'd love to see a new, cheap, clean source of energy, but these crackpot schemes are VERY unlikely to be it.

__________________
PIC programmer software, and PIC Tutorials at:
http://www.winpicprog.co.uk

philba

Nigel, maybe you were right about this section of the forum. At least more right than I thought at the time. I wish it weren't so.

Nigel Goodwin

I've been manfully avoiding the 'told you so' dance (if you watch Will & Grace)

__________________
PIC programmer software, and PIC Tutorials at:
http://www.winpicprog.co.uk

HarveyH42

I don't understand how these threads get so far off topic with arguements and debates, conspiracies. The OP was about a better method of of seperating water molecules to produce fuel.

People are going to keep playing with this, as water is so abundant and freely obtainable. Being able to use it as a fuel would be great in many ways. Of course any claim to something over 100% is crap, what's the point of dwelling on it, unless it's humorous. Nothing tried, is nothing accomplished...

How many people have bought metal detectors, with dreams of getting rich finding lost treasure? And how many actually get rich, or make even one rare find in their treasure hunting? Most barely cover their investment with corroded coins and cheap jewelery, but the dreams and adventure made it worthwhile.

By repeating all these failed attempt, new discoveries are made. Either by observation, or by accident. There have been a lot of persistant people in history, that ignored the constant never-going-to-works, and eventual suceeded. A 'Joe-cell' might not work, but it might be a step in the right direction, or atleast a point of departure. Who really knows?

Hero999

Global warming is going to have a higher impact on their profits than a perpetual motion technology that doesn't work so the idea that they're killing people involved with it is totally ludicrous.

If the oil companies have killed scientists involved in activities that could damage their profits, such as researching perpetual motion and global warming then why have the former been killed and not the latter?

__________________
I also post at the following sites:
http://www.stop-microsoft.org http://www.heated-debates.com
Screen name: Aloone_Jonez