jmdrake wrote:
> Unfortunately you are confusing ion wind devices with Biefeld-Brown
> effect devices. These are not the same thing. No one has yet come
> up with an explanation as to why the Biefeld-Brown effect works, but
> only that it does. And it has been tested in a vacuum.
All the words they mix into their articles like "Area 51" or "Element 115"
show clearly that they do not understand what they write. It's not easy to
debunk such an experiment without repeating it, and measuring other
effects.
The assymetric capacitor is not in empty space, but close to a very large
plate, the ground (surface of our planet earth, tied to a certain
potential). Now it's a lot easier to understand how this is going to give a
force, even one that allows "infinite lifting". A lot of people make
mistakes like this one, because the ground is always present, and therefore
ignored.
This is a standard trick used by magicans of all sorts: distract the viewer
from what's really happening. "Area 51" and "element 115" are obvious parts
of this, so these people are crackpots. And NASA for sure is such a large
organization that it has to have an crackpot somewhere.
And where a "scientist" stands that believes in creationism, is also
obvious: on the crackpot side. If you believe something even though there's
enough material around to question it, you deserve it. If you really think
a supreme being created our eyes "because it's perfect", you are
furthermore a bad engineer. Our eyes have been created by "blind
watchmakers", which shows that both veins and neurons are on top of the
light-sensitive cells, shading and diffusing light. And this "blind
watchmaker" didn't just cut&paste his errors on other independent designs,
because cephalopods got it right - but got their blood wrong (copper
instead of iron).
Or maybe HE was just in hurry because of the tight schedule ;-).
--
Bernd Paysan
"If you want it done right, you have to do it yourself"
http://www.jwdt.com/~paysan/
