@Allcanadian
The story of Lord Kelvin denying the heavier than air is typically a misinterpretation of what he meant. Do you think Lord Kelvin is stupid enough not to have understood that birds are heavier than air and yet they fly?
Lord Kelvin had calculated that because of the insufficient power of the best engines of the time, compared to their weight, heavier than air was impossible, which was true at that time. He spoke in the present, not in the future. Later engines with a better power to weight ratio appeared, and heavier than air machines were produced.
Taken out of context, this story has become a leitmotif that we see repeated everywhere when it comes to criticizing great minds. Of course, great minds can sometimes say stupid things, but when they talk about science, their words are refutable, and it is the fact that they cannot be refuted that makes what they say to us science.
I think it is a mistake to underestimate academic science, which has proven its worth, and its researchers, many of whom are also "finders". They have been considerably innovative since the 19th century. It is thanks to them that all the conventional energy we use today is produced.
Free energy researchers constantly refer to academic science. When they talk about electric or magnetic fields, electrons, neutrinos, waves... they plagiarize scientists. It is the scientists who introduced and defined these notions. If the free energy researchers claim that these objects are not what the physicists say they are, it is up to them to find the new objects, to define them, and to show the world their alternative technology based on their alternative science.
For the moment, their failure is total, there is no finders among the FE researchers, so modesty should be the order of the day.
When you say "
The only credible claim made by the scientific community is that we (not me of course) do not have the intelligence or understanding how to interact with it yet", first of all the scientific community has never said that in this form (references ?) since it continues the research in the field of energy, and if it wants to say that it does not know how to extract the energy that exists everywhere, it is right to recognize its current limits, and it is up to those who think they have this intelligence or understanding to prove that they can do it.
There is only one science because it is a knowledge, not a religion. And we can contribute to it. But you have to prove yourself. It is not by criticizing conventional scientists, who are often much more curious minds than free energy researchers, that one proves the validity of one's way of thinking and that one manages to produce something useful.
My message to FE researchers criticizing conventional science: you think FE is possible? Do it or shut up!
feature is available which provides a place all members can chat, either publicly or privately.
Author
Topic: The science of free energy (Read 33922 times)
