Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [usa-tesla] Overunity III

Expand Messages
  • Ed Phillips
    ... I agree completely, but think you both are being far too polite about the subject. Ed
    Message 1 of 11 , May 20 2:59 PM
    • 0 Attachment
      Dye Hawley wrote:
      >
      > Dear Wallace:
      >
      > This is what I have been saying for two years!!! Excellent point. Thank
      > you.
      >
      > Dye Hawley
      >
      > The material I received on Overunity III as proof of the proposition, can
      > accurately be described, I think, as more bullshit dressed up nicely in
      > "black tie" scientific or electrical engineering jargon.

      I agree completely, but think you both are being far too polite about
      the subject.

      Ed
    • Dye Hawley
      Dear Ed Phillips: Well... why don t you respond in a less polite and more direct fashion than we do. You certainly have the scientific background and a
      Message 2 of 11 , Jun 5, 2000
      • 0 Attachment
        Dear Ed Phillips:

        Well... why don't you respond in a "less polite" and "more direct" fashion
        than we do. You certainly have the scientific background and a far greater
        ability than we do to respond. I love your responses...because you always
        back it up with hard "facts".... Not, baloney. Of course, Wallace and I
        always try to be polite but it doesn't mean that we can't be very firm about
        our point of view. I just don't feel as qualified as you in responding.
        Would love to hear your comments.

        Cheers,

        Dye Hawley


        -----Original Message-----
        From: Ed Phillips [mailto:evp@...]
        Sent: Saturday, May 20, 2000 3:00 PM
        To: usa-tesla@egroups.com
        Subject: Re: [usa-tesla] Overunity III

        Dye Hawley wrote:
        >
        > Dear Wallace:
        >
        > This is what I have been saying for two years!!! Excellent point. Thank
        > you.
        >
        > Dye Hawley
        >
        > The material I received on Overunity III as proof of the proposition, can
        > accurately be described, I think, as more bullshit dressed up nicely in
        > "black tie" scientific or electrical engineering jargon.

        I agree completely, but think you both are being far too polite about
        the subject.

        Ed

        ------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Sign up for the free zZounds.com newsletter for the latest and
        greatest music gear savings, musician tips and hot contests.
        http://click.egroups.com/1/3738/10/_/522035/_/958859994/
        ------------------------------------------------------------------------
      • Ed Phillips
        ... Answer: My wife is trying to get me to clean up my act and be kind and considerate to everyone, especially idiots....... Seriously, how many true
        Message 3 of 11 , Jun 6, 2000
        • 0 Attachment
          Dye Hawley wrote:
          >
          > Dear Ed Phillips:
          >
          > Well... why don't you respond in a "less polite" and "more direct" fashion
          > than we do. You certainly have the scientific background and a far greater
          > ability than we do to respond. I love your responses...because you always
          > back it up with hard "facts".... Not, baloney. Of course, Wallace and I
          > always try to be polite but it doesn't mean that we can't be very firm about
          > our point of view. I just don't feel as qualified as you in responding.
          > Would love to hear your comments.
          >
          > Cheers,
          >
          > Dye Hawley

          Answer:

          My wife is trying to get me to clean up my act and be kind and
          considerate to everyone, especially idiots....... Seriously, how many
          "true beievers" are ever swayed by words from anyone? I used to
          consider this sort of stuff as just amusing nonsense, but finally
          realized there are a lot of people in the world who are smart enough,
          but have no way of being informed on such subjects. How are they to
          separate fact from fiction and myth, particularly when the latter are
          often far more interesting.

          Ed
        • Jim Farrer
          Dear Ed, ... especially idiots... More secrets of knowledge have been discovered by plain and neglected men than by men of popular fame. And this is so
          Message 4 of 11 , Jun 7, 2000
          • 0 Attachment
            Dear Ed,

            "... especially idiots..."

            "More secrets of knowledge have been discovered by plain and
            neglected men than by men of popular fame. And this is so with good
            reason. For the men of popular fame and busy on popular matters."

            Some guy named Roger Bacon (c. 1220-1292)

            My God. 1200. The scientific method had not even been hashed out
            yet at that time!

            I've been a most unpopular guy ALL my life, starting from earliest
            memory. I guess it's no wonder that I delve into unpopular stuff.
            In fact I just can't *understand* why IBM kept me around for 32
            years (and hired me back numerous times as a consultant). Maybe it
            had something to do with making stuff work that their highly popular,
            fast-moving people just couldn't hack.

            BTW, I picked a poor subject to comment on, just making a general
            point, as I haven't been able to get myself interested at all in this
            retropsychokinesis.

            Regards,
            Jim


            Ed Phillips wrote:
            >
            > Dye Hawley wrote:
            > >
            > > Dear Ed Phillips:
            > >
            > > Well... why don't you respond in a "less polite" and "more direct"
            > fashion
            > > than we do. You certainly have the scientific background and a
            > far greater
            > > ability than we do to respond. I love your responses...because
            > you always
            > > back it up with hard "facts".... Not, baloney. Of course, Wallace
            > and I
            > > always try to be polite but it doesn't mean that we can't be very
            > firm about
            > > our point of view. I just don't feel as qualified as you in
            > responding.
            > > Would love to hear your comments.
            > >
            > > Cheers,
            > >
            > > Dye Hawley
            >
            > Answer:
            >
            > My wife is trying to get me to clean up my act and be kind and
            > considerate to everyone, especially idiots....... Seriously, how
            > many
            > "true beievers" are ever swayed by words from anyone? I used to
            > consider this sort of stuff as just amusing nonsense, but finally
            > realized there are a lot of people in the world who are smart
            > enough,
            > but have no way of being informed on such subjects. How are they to
            > separate fact from fiction and myth, particularly when the latter
            > are
            > often far more interesting.
            >
            > Ed
            > --------------------------------------------------------------------
            >
            > Type your search
            > [Get dot com essentials now!] here: [Submit]
            > www. .com
            >
            > [Image]
            > --------------------------------------------------------------------
          • Ed Phillips
            ... Plain and neglected men may well be geniuses, not idiots. Over the past millenia there have been many brilliant discoveries, such as the use of fire,
            Message 5 of 11 , Jun 7, 2000
            • 0 Attachment
              Jim Farrer wrote:
              >
              > Dear Ed,
              >
              > "... especially idiots..."
              >
              > "More secrets of knowledge have been discovered by plain and
              > neglected men than by men of popular fame. And this is so with good
              > reason. For the men of popular fame and busy on popular matters."
              >
              > Some guy named Roger Bacon (c. 1220-1292)
              >
              > My God. 1200. The scientific method had not even been hashed out
              > yet at that time!

              "Plain and neglected men" may well be geniuses, not idiots. Over the
              past millenia there have been many brilliant discoveries, such as the
              use of fire, how to make stone implements, animal husbandry, writing,
              etc. The guys (or maybe gals) who made those discoveries were in a
              sense just as much pioneers as modern "scientists" slaving away at a
              desk or in a lab somewhere. At the time those discoveries were made
              they were revolutionary and had much more impact on everyday life than
              almost any being made today.

              By the way, Bacon was by no means a plain and neglected man, and I
              think he understood the scientic method completely.


              > I've been a most unpopular guy ALL my life, starting from earliest
              > memory. I guess it's no wonder that I delve into unpopular stuff.
              > In fact I just can't *understand* why IBM kept me around for 32
              > years (and hired me back numerous times as a consultant). Maybe it
              > had something to do with making stuff work that their highly popular,
              > fast-moving people just couldn't hack.

              The ability to "make things work" is (or certainly should be) valued in
              any business or society. It is usually a mixture of education,
              intelligence, keen observation, and elbow grease. One of the very best
              and most valuable engineers who ever worked for me hadn't completed high
              school. He met all of the above qualifications, however, and at the age
              of 66 was still educating himself daily. He also raised a couple of
              brilliant sons who, due to the family environment he and his wife
              created, did go on to post-graduate degrees in college.

              By the way, whatever "laws" you applied in your work were proven by the
              results. Presumably if they had failed to work you would have
              discovered why and created new "laws".

              Ed
            Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.