patent office controlled by military?

[Uncle Buddy]

This is interesting.

peswiki.com/index.php/Article:Free_Energy_and_the_Open_Source_Energy_Movement_Part_4

[didier]

Hi, when clicking on your link, all I get is "There is currently no text in this page".

[Uncle Buddy]

When I pasted it in, the hyperlink only got applied to the first part. You might have to copy the whole link and paste it into your URL bar and hit enter. That will take you there.

peswiki.com/index.php/Article:Free_Energy_and_the_Open_Source_Energy_Movement_Part_4

[jr]

Good read & mental fodder!

FWIW IMHO - "peswiki.com, Panacea-BOCAF, overunity et all" oozes with the 'zero-energy crackpot' stigma.

There are excellent points to be garnered, but there are also gross assumptions/assertations that cloud the reality.

Honestly, if all these people's 'free energy claims' were legit then why don't they get any traction? Surely the gov't isn't suppressing their websites. Remember the 'water for fuel' craze?

Professionally, I do my best to distance myself from these sites, lest I loose what little credibility I have.

Just my humble opinion.....

OT - Side note, this is also what happens in politics of news. It almost seems intentional; reinforcing conspiracy theories! Much like politicians use 'hot button' topics as subterfuges to divert & divide the American people's attention from what REALLY matters.

[Uncle Buddy]

It's a good idea to post anonymously on these sites, because associating with what anyone assumes to be perpetual motion nonsense means you are guilty by association even if the association is fallacious. It will besmirch your reputation to ever mention anything that can be mistaken for perpetual motion and other crackpot schemes.

It's too late for me, everyone knows who I am.

It's very hard to find someone to talk to about solar compressed air power plants, acoustic compressors, etc. since most rational people won't listen, once they get wind of any mention of free energy. There are even people who believe free energy is possible, but that it wouldn't be good for us. It might put people out of their jobs or whatever. Personally I think that what is good for general abundance is good for everybody, while it is really the industrialists and monopolizers who are afraid of "jobs" being lost, because the only people who benefit from jobs are the top people. The hireling is no longer able to make a living. We poor people need affordable energy, and since the greedmongers have chosen not to share that with us, we will have to take matters into our own hands and build solar pneumatic power plants in our own backyards.

Scott

[jr]

Bravo Scott!! I couldn't of said it better!

To quote K-House:
"Our problem is not that we have too many people, our problem is that we're (humans) corrupt and selfish and foolish and evil. "

[kirk]

It is controlled by the wealthy men, the same men who establish military policy. You might call them "The establishment". If your invention sufficiently threatens the status quo so many obstacles will appear you will wonder what happened. The whole paradigm is owned by a few so if your creation isn't sealed for national security there will be financial failures or environmental issues or regulatory issues ad infinitum. The structure is beyond your wildest dream.
I can give you many examples if you like.

[Uncle Buddy]

Please go ahead and give as many examples as you like.

One example I know of is Bob Neal, who patented a way to compress air for free in 1936. After he got his patent, he was visited by Germans, this was before the US joined the war so Nazis were as welcome in the US at that time as anyone else, and "Chancellor Hitler" as he was respectfully spoken of at the time by the press, might have been a successful real estate entrepreneur.

Anyway, these Germans showed up wanting to buy the invention outright, and Bob refused, so they threatened to kill off his family members one at a time, even kidnapped his daughter. I have all this on tape, direct from the inventor's son who was just a little boy at the time.

So naturally Bob put the project in cold storage, after wasting three years of his life jumping through hoops for the patent, it was really the patent that did him in. Without it he could have made a living off that invention, made his own electricity, built an air station and sold fillups to people with conventional short range air cars, the sky's the limit. But as soon as everyone knows your business, the sharks start circling.

I tell everybody, if you build a free range air car, then don't forget to paint the word PROPANE on one of your tanks and don't tell anyone what you really have.

Scott

[kirk]

If you remember the electric car project that got crushed the wet cell technology (NiMH) developed by Ovonics (coined from "Ovshinsky" and "electronics") was acquired by Chevron and the technology is not available. It could possibly halve the cost of battery packs so crushing the technology places a significant obstacle on the path for electric cars.

[Uncle Buddy]

It's easy to stop electric cars because of the batteries, no matter what kind of batteries are tried. The materials needed aren't necessarily any more abundant than petroleum, the processing and disposing of them is a big problem, and they have to be replaced ten times more often than air tanks. And the free range air car takes the focus off of the tanks, storing a moderate amount of air, and relying on new ways of compressing air to keep the car going down the road for cheap.

[jr]

IMHO current trends in electric cars will introduce a new shortage - mineral rights.

However we shouldn't rule out the power & abundance of electrons. It is plausible w/nano-tech that we can free-up electrons; perhaps to the extent that it could be 'self-generating'

What I mean here is electrons aren't destroyed in batteries, they simply move towards equilibrium. Nano-tech COULD dynamically alter the potentials such where there is always a flow.

I love the idea of a free-range air cars, again efficiently harnessing such abundant energy simply doesn't sound plausible. Has anybody done a block-diagram of the Neil tank. What I've read I couldn't grasp...

[jr]

Oh, BTW back to the original thread. The US govt does have the rights to 'surpress' a patent if it 'threatens' national security. Perhaps the 'Military' doesn't 'run' the PTO, but they sure have their say!
www.uspto.gov/web/offices/pac/mpep/documents/0100_115.htm
While this is fodder for conspiracy theories, it also makes good sense.

[Uncle Buddy]

What threatens national security is not for the nation to decide but for our benevolent dictators to decide with the nation's input. The mark of a dictatorship is that martial law seems to be about one step away. Military reasons are given for personal rights being ignored. Now we have "police" dressed like military and armed to the teeth, pepper spraying protesters, and getting away with it while our "liberal" president looks the other way and apparently condones drone attacks on civilians in other countries. There's no hope for nations, individuals have to do their best on their own.

[Uncle Buddy]

Regarding the Neal tank, Bob Neal passed the project on to a man he met many years after the engine, plans, etc. were gone. This man never knew what to do with it and he passed it on to me in 1988. So far the best anyone's come up with is that it works by acoustic power somehow. aircaraccess.com/resonance.htm

[kirk]

Jul 17, 2012 3:25:41 GMT -8 jr said:

Oh, BTW back to the original thread. The US govt does have the rights to 'surpress' a patent if it 'threatens' national security. Perhaps the 'Military' doesn't 'run' the PTO, but they sure have their say!
www.uspto.gov/web/offices/pac/mpep/documents/0100_115.htm
While this is fodder for conspiracy theories, it also makes good sense.

all your base belong to us.