Archive for July, 2012

More Marquis Omissions by Ron

July 31, 2012

For some reason, Ron has not mentioned other famous people in MWW. For instance, Waldyr Rodrigues, Akhlesh Lakhtakia and … Lizzie Andrew Borden!


Marquis Who’s Who Guide to Pseudoscience (again)

July 31, 2012

Ron really does not get it, does he? Although we pointed out that Marquis Who’s Who is now generally considered to be a vanity publication for the lunatic fringe, he helpfully confirms that diagnosis by providing a handy list. Evans, Eckardt, Delaforce, MacLachlan, Lindstrom and Pendergast are givens of course. However, Croca, Ciubotariu, Lehnert,  Coffey, Roy, Barrett,  Harmuth and Horwitz are also well-known characters in physics faeryland. We note that several of them (including Barrett and Harmuth) were once brought together in a book edited by Lakhtakia … which is why we also look askance at him, even though he is anti-Evans. NB: isn’t it strange that Ron does not mention that his old crackpot friend, Bearden, and his current conman friend, Searl, are also listed in MWW?

New Job?

July 31, 2012

We wonder whether Ron could wangle a post at Searl Magnetics: they have better scenery, nice spacious offices and an employer who appears to have far more money than good sense. They can probably also supply guns for shooting scramblers, and horsemen who do not keep to bridle-ways. Ron will have no problem with immigration or visas, given his famous dual nationality. On the other hand, that makes one wonder how Searl himself ever got into the country and stayed for so long. After all, he has no skill except that of running long-cons but does have several criminal convictions; one of them for sabotage. What on Earth was Homeland Security thinking of? Whatever. Searl Magnetics is sorely in need of some high-grade crackpot theorising; their new long-haired physics star just does not have the imagination to ‘explain’ the operation of a non-existent machine. Bon voyage, Ron (et bon débarras).

Note on Anti-Relativity Nuts

July 31, 2012

This world is a strange madhouse. Currently, every coachman and every waiter* is debating whether relativity theory is correct. Belief in this matter depends on political party affiliation.”

Einstein to Marcel Grossmann, 12 September 1920.

* It seems that a modern list would also include tug-boat captains.


Next to creationism, ‘anti-einsteinism’ is the mental affliction which is most likely to cause an academic to tell blatant lies about current scientific knowledge and to try to ‘baffle laymen with science’ in order to support an untenable position for personal motives. Ron is far from being the first anti-Einstein nut, but is certainly the most disgraceful, given his Civil-List status. There have been several prominent anti-Einstein nuts of the ‘paradoxer’ (see previous posts) variety. Perhaps the most notable ones were Herbert Dingle (one of the first proselytisers of relativity in the UK) and Louis Essen (who pioneered a new method for measuring the speed of light). In later life, both of them ‘turned on’ special relativity. We generously attribute this behaviour to encroaching senility. The most colourful anti-Einstein nut of the sciolist variety was certainly A.A.Lynch; a ‘born rebel’ politician in the mould of Errol Flynn who had the chutzpah to sit in the House of Commons while being sought by police for a hanging offence!

Of course, we can forgive him as he clearly did not know what he was writing about (in his several books) and will never have to be listed, alongside Faraday and other real scientists, by future generations.

Help for Ron

July 30, 2012

As he is a tyro in the field (pun intended), we  feel that Ron should drop his new enthusiasm for LENR (aka cold fusion) and seek instruction on bosonic matters. For instance, he might be able to manage:

“Unveiling the Higgs mechanism to students”


 European Journal of Physics, 2012, 33[5] 1397 

Blast from the Past

July 30, 2012

19th August 1999

“I would like to bring to the attention of the scientific community a document in the public domain, part of a speech by the Honorable WIliam Cohen, U.S. Defense Secretary, at the University of Georgia, Athens, Apr. 28th 1997, at a conference organized by former Senator Sam Nunn. The relevant quote is: “Other (terrorists) are enaging even in an eco-type of terrorism whereby they can alter the climate, set off earthquakes, volcanoes, remotely through the use of electromagnetic waves………it’s real and that is the reason we have to intensify our (counter terrorism) efforts.” This speech was released to the press, and is in the public domain. This kind of statement cannot be understood in terms of Maxwell Heaviside theory, so there is an extremely urgent need to develop a new kind of electrodynamics. The principle is that one must assume that such weapons exist, or be caught by surprise. Bill Cohen and Sam Nunn are responsible, highly experienced, and level headed. There is effectively no stable government in the former USSR, a state of near anarchy prevails, an extremely dangerous scenario for NATO. The conservative academic adherence to an utterly discredited U(1) theory is actually leaving NATO wide open to surprise attack in the opinion of the US Government in the form of the Secretary of Defense. This is also my personal opinion as a permanent resident alien of the US, and British /EEC citizen. The O(3) idea is a first step to what should develop into a massive NATO research effort. This is why I have been working so intensively on papers in the past few months, and ask editors and referees to bear with me and go the extra mile. Dr. M. W. Evans, 82 Lois Lane, Ithaca, NY 14850, USA.”

… or just send James Bond

Our Ruling on Internet Pseudoscientists (e.g. Ron)

July 28, 2012

We suggest to the community of real scientists of all schools that internet pseudoscientists be expelled from the subject as criminals. Their abuse of scientific qualifications and knowledge seriously distorts the public understanding of science. There is no point in hiring hyperexpensive lawyers who are equally ignorant of science (we know of a patent lawyer who has patented his own antigravity machine). So we suggest banning Akhlesh Lakhtakia (yes, we do, as he has been involved with some very dodgy people; including someone who ‘explained’ how Searl’s non-existent machine works) and Waldyr Rodrigues (who is just another nutter in our opinion). We have only praise for Gerhard Bruhn, and hope that he was not really silenced by Ron’s legal machinations (to which a real scientist would never stoop). Praise too for “Aaron Vee”, “Arthur Dent” and above all “Lizzie Borden”; most of whom it seems have to take time off from real (and paid) scientific work in order to ‘out’ a Civil List ‘scientist’ who is not worthy of the honour. It is certainly up to the police to catch pseudoscientists who try to sell worthless perpetual-motion and antigravity machines. Unfortunately, such conmen can hide behind the defence of caveat emptor. We shall nevertheless be keeping a close eye on Ron’s company and its marketing activities. We suggest international professional praise for Gerard ‘t Hooft; not since the heyday of Augustus De Morgan has a world-class academic taken the trouble to argue with street-level crackpots. The pool of physics pseudoscientists is a tiny minority and merely state the same lies over and over again in true Hitler style; their lies becoming ever louder due to the megaphone-effect of the internet. Any moron can buy a megaphone, and they do. They have no authority of any kind, and constantly screw up the algebra (but only experts can spot that). The algebra of the AIAS refutations has been looked at by trusted professionals, and those capable of spotting the errors (i.e. not chemists or engineers) have pointed them out. There is no way in which real scientists are going to be intimidated by cheap criminals with their endless and disturbed theories. However, they should take more time (as did De Morgan and as does t’Hooft) to counter the loony distortions of pseudoscientists because tin pot totalitarians will exploit pseudoscientific evidence for their own ends (as when certain African potentates used crackpot ‘AIDS is not caused by a virus’ reports to deprive their peoples of effective – but expensive – treatment).

Result of Appeal

July 28, 2012

Some weeks ago we asked anyone, who was incorporating Ron’s ‘work’ into their own research or weltanschauung, to contact us. Answer came there none. So we again claim that Ron has no following and that, as suggested by his own published list of referring websites, visits to his obscure blog are either ‘incestuous’ or are from people who are looking for perpetual motion, antigravity … or pornography.

Marquis’ Who’s Who in Pseudoscience

July 28, 2012

“Not that anybody has read Who’s Who lately, or ever, at least not very closely. The point of Who’s Who is not to read it, but to be in it. One hundred years after it was first published by Chicago newspaper publisher Albert Nelson Marquis (who despite his ostensible commitment to accuracy pronounced his name “Markwis”), Who’s Who has been a fairly reliable guide to who has made it and who has not. That’s been the marketing strategy, anyway. Flip through the latest volume, however, and it’s hard not to conclude that something has changed, that the selection criteria for “Honored Biographees” in Marquis’s Who’s Who have become–how to put it?–more democratic.” [The Hall of Lame, Tucker Carlson, Forbes, 03.08.99

Why is Ron boasting about being in this vanity publication? Has he not noticed that Bearden and Searl are also in it? Is this an admission that he considers himself to be the equal of those notorious pseudoscientists?

Defamation of Lizzie Borden

July 28, 2012

Ron has frequently accused Lizzie Borden of being “an axe murderer”.  This again illustrates Ron’s uneasy relationship with the truth. To accuse someone of a crime, when that person has been acquited by a properly constituted court, is moreover a clear case of  defamation. How lucky he is that the offended person is dead.

Not Worth a Hill of Beans

July 18, 2012

Ron challenges us to test a Hill perpetual-motion machine, but:

Due to our limited present scale of manufacturing we are forced to temporarily restrict the availability of our circuits to Mexico, although we are in the process of expanding shortly. Sorry!!!

Hmm, ‘limited production’ … or is it that other countries have stronger consumer-protection legislation in place?

By the way, Hill, do you know whether the Hoxsey clinic is still operating, safely just across the border from the US? We are sure that the shades of Andy Kaufman and Steve McQueen would love to know.

Hill-Site Strangler

July 18, 2012

“… as in the case of hydroelectric plants, or with the counter- weight in elevators) we are in fact extracting energy from spacetime, and have been doing so for many years.

Even Ron’s favourite ‘O-level student’ benchmark would laugh at this silly statement. The gravitational field is conservative and energy therefore cannot – by definition – be extracted from it (except by using planetary-scale techniques that are far beyond our technology). Only a simpleton would think that hydroelectric plants extract gravitational energy. Listen-up, Hill: hydroelectric plants extract energy from nuclear fusion. Aww, all baffled by that concept, Hill? Let us spell it out for you: a fusion-reactor (aka the Sun) heats a ‘working fluid’ (aka the water in the Earth’s rain-cycle) and the latter’s  stored (potential) energy is then used to drive turbines as the water seeks out sea-level. So, no spacetime energy. The lift-counterweight statement is even more ludicrous: electrical energy, say, which drives the lift is stored as potential energy. We suggest, Hill, that you erase such embarrassing statements from your site. Better still, erase the whole thing. When Ron admires your site, it makes him look like an idiot. Gee, we are too good to Ron.

Barking up the Wrong Tree?

July 18, 2012

Attentive readers will recall that a friend recently copied an e-mail to us:

“Dear *******,

Regarding your contact via the Royal Society website today, we thoroughly deny any association with or endorsement of Dr Myron Evans.

Natasha “

It seems that he was afraid that he had contacted the wrong department and that the spokesperson was perhaps not in possession of the full facts. So, he asked again, and the answer was:

“Dear *******,

You may be certain that as I said, we have never had any association with or made any endorsement of Myron Evans.



Well now one has to feel sorry for Mr Vee: after going to the trouble of setting up a petition ( addressed to the Royal Society, it seems that the latter might not be the correct target.

On the other hand, why does Ron keep on recounting that tale concerning the RS, Tony Blair, parliament, etc? By the way, we have not finished looking, but we have so far found no mention of Ron in Hansard (the written record of all parliamentary business and decisions). This is all very suspicious.

Hill Ticks a Box

July 18, 2012

We always have a little bet with ourselves that, when we come upon a perpetual motion crackpot, the latter is sure to have plans for an antigravity machine as well. Then, after a while, it usually turns out that the person even has a miracle cure (especially for cancer) available. The final symptom is usually for the ‘gentleman’ to express a belief in the paranormal. Mr Hill has now exhibited the third symptom – belief in alternative medicine – so, taking the Ron-Hill axis as a whole, that makes three symptoms. Who will be the first to declare for the paranormal?

NB ‘Alternative health’ is a billion-dollar industry but has scant scientific support, especially from physicists. Many genuine medics support nonsense like homoeopathy, but it should always be remembered that their ‘Dr’ title is a courtesy one: very few medics have PhDs and therefore have no proper training in scientific research. It is saddening to say, but medics also have the unfortunate reputation of ‘being in it for the money’ so they are unlikely to saw through the branch upon which they are sitting.

NB A trick commonly used by all sorts of conmen is to fool the logically challenged by using a false “If this, then so that” argument. For instance, they might say “I have just burned you with this laser and light is electromagnetic in nature. Therefore, if I wave this magnet at you, it will also have an effect”. Gee, that pretty much sums up all pseudoscience.

Rank …Really Rank

July 18, 2012

Ron is asking where his armiger status comes in the honours stakes. It is strange that he should be asking now, given that he has previously claimed:

“Scientific colleagues internationally may think that this is a waste of time, being already an Armiger (a Gentleman granted arms by the College of Arms and in law of arms, effectively same rank as Knight or Baron [our emphasis])” Blog, 5th Feb.2012

If like us, he bothered to read reviews of his books he would know that one reviewer contacted the College of Arms on his behalf and was told that armiger came nowhere and that ‘in order to hold a lower honour, he would have to change sex’.

Back with a Bang

July 18, 2012

Ron seems to think that we exist only because of him. No, we concentrate on him for the moment because, in our opinion, he is the most pernicious pseudoscientist in the history of psychoceramics. He may have thought that we went silent yesterday because of his declared intent to ignore us. Wrong again, some of us have real scientific work to do. However, an informant did send us another interesting tidbit which we shall divulge later.

Kellum Strikes Again

July 16, 2012

“Methods and systems for creating a local anti-gravity region are defined. The anti-gravity region is created between two counter-rotating magnetic fields. The magnetic field sources can be permanent magnets, magnetized material, or a combination of both. Matter in the induced anti-gravity region obviously behaves as in a zero-gravity environment, such as outer space. Processes conducted in the anti-gravity region can experience increased efficiency. The anti-gravity effect is generated by the electromagnetic fields, of the counter-rotating magnetic sources, resonating with the torsion of spacetime. This resonance causes the potential of the electromagnetic fields to be amplified, maximizing the effect of the electric field in a direction opposite to gravitation. This anti-gravity effect is in accordance with the new ECE (Einstein-Cartan-Evans)-Theory of physics. ECE-Theory shows gravitation and electromagnetism are both defined as manifestations of the curvature of spacetime”

Not only is this ‘invention’ a plagiarised version of the well-known Levitron toy, the main claim made by the application (US2012105181 A1)  is nonsense. The device does not create a ‘zero-gravity environment’ any more than would putting an object on a shelf. [NB Even Geim’s levitated frog is not in a state equivalent to free-fall because its various internal organs are differently affected by the magnetic field.]

More Deconstruction

July 16, 2012

“Our mutual friends on the shadow blog seem to have started abusing every inventor since Tesla”

No, only the ‘magnetic motor’ and ‘spinning wheels in box’ space-drive ones … so far.

“but have still not tried out the Alex Hill devices (”

Nor have we given our bank details to gentlemen from Nigeria.

“They complain that no one is commenting on them. I wonder why?”

They are not being commented upon because they do not exist. Duh!

“They claim that marketed space energy devices do not exist.”

No, we claim that genuine devices are not being marketed, and those that are being marketed are scams. We shall be happy to buy one … if it is guaranteed by the NPL or NBS.

“At this point I reach for my white coat.”

Is that the one with extra-long sleeves, that ties at the back? Suits you Sir.

 “I regard them as criminals, irrepsective [sic] of any argument of natural philosophy.”

So do we: the very idea of trying to sell perpetual-motion machines is beyond the pale!

“I have just denied any involvement in cancer cure, so they post that I have admitted it.”

So explain this:…/Evans%20Letter.doc. Back-peddling is futile.

“I refer them to Cartan geometry”

And? It is just a mathematical technique. It has to be twisted [sic] rather too much to ‘explain’ the unobserved perpetual-motion and antigravity machines which populate Ron’s imagination.

“False and anonymous accusations are criminal offences. Every time a false accusation is repeated it is another criminal offence.”

Irrelevant, as usual.

Cast Adrift?

July 16, 2012

A friend sends us this:

“Dear *******,

Regarding your contact via the Royal Society website today, we thoroughly deny any association with or endorsement of Dr Myron Evans.


Natasha Little

Assistant Press Officer

Tel +44 (0)20 7451 2510
Fax +44 (0)20 7930 2170

The Royal Society
6-9 Carlton House Terrace
London SW1Y 5AG”

Well, that is strange, given that Ron claims to have been recommended for his Civil-List Pension by the RS.

Blatant Perpetual Motion Claim!

July 16, 2012

“A common V-8 type internal-combustion engine, of the type in wide use by today’s automotive and nautical industries, is modified to operate with magnetic fields instead of internal-combustion. The internal-combustion process is eliminated, along with engine components required for the internal-combustion process. This can reduce engine size and weight. The pistons of such a modified V-8 type engine are driven by magnetic fields which are aligned by the control system of the modified V-8 type engine. The engine and control system are powered by electrical energy derived directly from spacetime. This electrical energy is produced using principles of Evans-Cartan-Einstein (ECE)-Theory to achieve spin-connection-resonance (SCR), thus amplifying the potential energy of spacetime. The resulting amplified potential energy is feed (as electrical energy) to the modified V-8 engine. Thus, this type of engine does not require gasoline type fuel, generates no exhaust, has a renewable power source, and a near zero environmental footprint (our emphasis)”

This is clearly a perpetual-motion machine patented [US2011062802 A1 (i.e. a mere application)] by AIAS member, Kellum. So why does Ron deny his association with perpetual motion?

Deconstructing Perpetual Motion

July 16, 2012

“I think that the development of these devices is very important”

How does one ‘develop’ that which does not exist? If somebody really had a device that obtained energy from nowhere, they would not be selling it piecemeal via some  dubious website.

“Anyone is welcome to try them out for themselves under a non disclosure agreement with Alex Hill ( by appointment”

Why not prove it ‘once and for all’ by having the NBS take a look at it? The NBS is no stranger to non-disclosure agreements … or purported perpetual-motion machines.

“They have been observed to work by the U. S. Navy.”

Provide a link to the US Navy’s report. We already have a pile of ONR reports on crackpot claims … going all the way back to T.T.Brown.

“Many here have tried them out. “

Yet more proof that the AIAS is a bunch of crackpots.

“Several of these devices have been patented”

There are hundreds of patents on ‘space drives’ that involve nothing more than eccentric wheels spinning in boxes – let alone endless junk patents on magnetic motors.  Ron is confusing patent applications with granted patents.

“and are on the market, so any talk of perpetual motion is de facto false accusation.”

Better tell that to the Royal Society; it loves to try to keep up with such things.

“Doug Lindstrom recently made a list of the devices already on the market.”

We hope that he did not forget Searl’s SEG; after all, Ron wants HM Government to back it. Well, why not, they have already backed a crackpot space-drive called the Emdrive.

“The ECE theory is seen to be so important because it shows how they can work. I have proven conservation of energy, so they are not “perpetual motion”.

So, since there are no perpetual-motion machines, Ron’s theory is rubbish. QED

“In fact the U.S. Patent Office accepts applications on such devices and no longer sees them as perepatual [sic] motion.”

The USPO pays peanuts and so has monkeys working for it. One of them was Dr (fake) Thomas Valone. When the USPO tried to fire him, he claimed that ‘alternative energy was his religion’. This ludicrous defence worked!

“That is major progress that ECE helped bring about.”

Rubbish. The USPO has been accepting crackpot inventions since before Ron was born.

“Tesla was 2006 UNESCO Scientist of the Year,”

A purely political sop; like the UN making Mugabe its poster-boy for tourism.

“ and he also suffered from malicious false accusations.”

He deserved every one of them. Tesla has ever been the subject of merely hagiographic biographies by journalists, a parapsychologist and assorted crackpots. When a real historian of science takes a good hard look at him, his ‘reputation’ will crumble to nothing.

“The law on false accusations is a very tough one if implemented properly.”

Irrelevant. We do not deal in false accusations.

“Because the internet at present is unpoliced and uncontrolled,”

… it can  be exploited by pseudoscientists to sell crackpot ideas – or even crackpot products – to innocent members of the public.

“He now has to prove that devices on the market do not work, and he has to prove that I advocate quack cancer cures”

No, a rational scientist would know that it is the person making the outrageous claim who has to prove his point; not the person upholding the status quo. Let Ron take his ‘over-unity’ gadgets to the NPL and see what reception he gets. Ron has already admitted promoting cancer cures. As an unqualified person, that is already an offence whether or not it is a quack cure. However, as it happens, the Priore machine is as quack as it gets. So it once fooled a few people … so did cold fusion. Even monkeys sometimes fall out of trees.

“ and that I want to see suffering patients die. That accusation is a very ugly lie,”

No, that is the implication – and the likely outcome – of backing worthless treatments. That is why unqualified people like Ron must not be allowed to do it.

“Peter has to prove that Cartan geometry misepresents [sic] geometry.”

No, Ron misuses Cartan’s methods and, when he finds that this clashes with his favourite textbook on the subject, he declares that the textbook is wrong!

“If he cannot, then he may well be prosecuted by the Oxfordshire police if I made a complaint.”

Haha, it’s the way that Ron tells ‘em. Just who would give the police a crash-course in differential geometry, and who would take it? Ah well, experts would have to be called in. Back to the Royal Society again. What a lot of trouble their protégé causes them.

“I am not malicious or childish in nature.”

No comment.

No point in copying this to the PM. We shall send one to the RSC, as usual.

A Crackpot Writes

July 16, 2012

Ron appears to be living in a strange alternative universe. According to him:

“Under Section 314 of the Crimes Act, the maximum penalty for false accsuation [sic] is seven years in prison. The petition started by “Aaron Vee” falls under the Crimes Act.“

We are puzzled by the term ‘false’. Ron recently admitted to promoting a cancer cure (it does not necessarily have to be a fake cure for that to be an offence) and, moreover, copied that admission to the police and to a politician! As for promoting pseudoscience in general, the Royal Society should perhaps be asked for their opinion. When they fully realise what their protégé has been up to, the petition may well become moot. By the way,  it is amusing to note that, having been in the doldrums for some months, it has suddenly acquired a new signature. This is undoubtedly due to the Streisand effect. Keep up the good work Ron!

Crackpot by Appointment

July 16, 2012

Ron claims that  his  Civil List pension makes him an employee of the Queen. This delusion has led to monstrosities such as the following. One wonders what on Earth her majesty’s bean-counters make of requests for off-prints or for advice on how to build a perpetual-motion machine.


Physica B 400 (2007) 175–179

Spin connection resonance in magnetic motors

Myron W. Evans,_, H. Eckardt

British Government Treasury, Horse Guards Parade, London, UK

Alpha Institute for Advanced Study (A.I.A.S), UK

Received 5 July 2007; received in revised form 11 July 2007; accepted 11 July 2007

By the way, the journal tells us that it is looking into how this paper ever got published. 

Note to Horst: just because a device does not obey simplistic flux-cutting rules, that does not make it magic.

Feedback Report

July 16, 2012

Hits are up by 1000% since Ron Streisand started avidly to read our blog. However, we are disappointed by the number of comments received. We have heard only from Ron and Tug-Boat Bob. Why has no other member of Ron’s mini-flock seen fit to comment? Are they, like the ‘non-existent college’, under orders not to comment?.

Advice to the Bemused Layman

July 16, 2012

We claim that Ron is pushing (well, one kind of has to doesn’t one as they cannot push themselves) perpetual-motion and anti-gravity machines. He has set up a company to develop ‘space-energy’ and  ‘counter-bary’, but every connoisseur  of psychoceramics knows that those are simply lunatic-fringe euphemisms for … you guessed it. Ron, as usual, claims that we are being malicious and untruthful. Let us allow a disinterested and very well-informed body to decide that. We encourage readers to contact the Royal Society,

(choose ‘education’ or ‘press office’) and insist on having the RS’s official opinion of (fake) Dr Thomas Bearden, ‘Professor’ John Roy Robert Searl, the ‘Motionless Electrical Generator’, the ‘Searl Effect Generator’, Cold Fusion … and anything else that may be confusing them. We are sure that Ron will submit to the RS’s judgement. After all, the RS recommended him for a Civil List pension and gave a Hauksbee Medal to his biographer.

Er, then again, perhaps we have not thought this through …

Should they ask the RSC instead. Oh, they awarded a fellowship to the murderous pseudoscientist, Mrs Ceausescu. Damn! These nutters are everywhere.

The Relativity of Psychoceramics

July 16, 2012

About a decade ago, a crackpot conference was held in Switzerland. It was described thus:

The idyllic Swiss town of Weinfelden saw an audience of some 200 energy research interested people gathering to hear distinguished researchers talking about future energy technologies and some encouraging results in the gravity research field.”

The speakers included Ron’s once-reputable friend, and co-author:

“Prof. Jean-Pierre Vigier: A New Source of Energy”

and the disreputable person that is linked-to by AIAS, and whose machine Ron has said should be funded by HM government:

“Prof. John R. R. Searl: The Searl Effect Generator and the Levity Disc”

Given that they were given equal billing and respect by the organisers, our question is: was Vigier’s reputation dragged down by this connection, or was Searl’s reputation elevated? (Note: like Ron, Searl is listed in Marquis Who’s Who. Unlike Ron, Searl has a piece of paper proving that he is a professor. A film about Ron was made by a nobody, and disappeared without trace. A film about Searl was made by a Hollywood star and won an award.) One can see why Ron would want to ‘suck up’ to Searl.)

Holocaust Denier?

July 16, 2012

As everyone except his minute flock of sheep will have noted, Ron is very sly – and adept at taking things out of context (he would indeed have made an excellent politician). He claims that Professor Atkins told a distinguished Cambridge academic to ‘rot in hell’; implying that it was a random outburst. The true story was recounted by Professor Dawkins:

“This … reminds me of an occasion when I was on a television panel with Swinburne, and also with our Oxford colleague Professor Peter Atkins. Swinburne at one point attempted to justify the Holocaust on the grounds that it gave the Jews a wonderful opportunity to be courageous and noble. Peter Atkins splendidly growled, “May you rot in hell.”

Yes, the concept of hell is indeed a meaningless concept to an atheist, but there is nothing wrong in using a believer’s ‘tools’ against him. We are in favour of pointing bones at witch-doctors.

Seriously though …

July 16, 2012

Ron has accused Professor Atkins and others of being members of our group. Such is not the case. We know Professor Atkins only by name as a highly successful educator in the field of chemistry. In view of the intemperate language that Ron used in making his claims, we are sure that persons having his disposition would know how to seek redress. As those offended are unlikely to find his obscure blog, except by accident, we shall make sure that the offended parties, the RSC and the Royal Society are informed of his latest misdeed as ‘Civil List Scientist’.

Ron Needs a Sense-of-Humour Transplant

July 16, 2012

We promised that we would reveal the name and address of the persons who photographed his house, using a very high-quality camera, and posted the pictures on the internet – IF he asked nicely on his blog. Of course, Ron is incapable of doing anything nicely; but we shall tell him anyway …. It was

Google UK Ltd
123 Buckingham Palace Road
London SW1W 9SH

Buck House Road, eh, and Brenda-his-boss never thought to tell him.

Ron the Plod

July 16, 2012

Ron says that he has been maliciously and wrongfully accused of using legal means to try to suppress legitimate scientific criticism. Well this,

and many other examples, says otherwise. NB It is strange, is it not, that everything that Ron does not like becomes ‘malicious’, no matter how mild.

The Streisand Effect

July 15, 2012

Hello All!  Just had a wonderful afternoon relaxing by the pool, and thought perhaps I should explain just what  the “Streisand Effect” is, as it was mentioned by my friend earlier today.

In a nutshell…

Streisand Effect refers to the unintended consequence of further publicizing information by trying to have it censored. Instead of successfully removing the information from the public, it becomes even more widely available than before as a backlash against the censorship attempt.”

Since My caught wind of Crackpot Watch our hits have increased by 1000% ! Thanks My!

Gone Fishing

July 15, 2012

We are having a well-earned day off, and one of us is polishing the manuscript of his book on the damaging  inroads made into society by pseudoscience. In fact, Ron is doing our work for us at the moment. He may believe that the copious reiterations of his connections to bogus cancer cures, crackpots and conmen is doing him good (and perhaps it is … as far as the lunatic fringe is concerned) but real scientists who are made aware of him for the first time, thanks to us, will be asking what gigantic Homeric nod (more akin to a coma) led to his receiving a Civil List pension. Thankyou by the way, Ron, for drawing everyone’s attention to that petition (which does not even mention you): never heard of the Streisand Effect?

Deconstruction of a Post by Ron

July 14, 2012

“ECE is a grand unified field theory of the four fundamental fields: gravitational, electromagnetic, weak and strong nuclear based on standard Cartan geometry. “

No, you just think that it is. GUTs are ‘two-a-penny’ in the lunatic fringe.

“It has 223 source papers ( UFT section) and many articles and books by the colleagues.”

Yes, and they are cited only by you  and ‘the colleagues’. There is no sign of any other interest. What does the ‘invisible college’ do all day?

“ECE is used by all scientists and engineers all the time because it reduces to all the known equations of physics, unifying them with geometry.”

Again, where is the evidence?

“It easily refutes some basics of the standard model, notably the U(1) sector, Einsteinian general relativity, particle physics theory, absorption and scattering theory.”

Not that easily, it seems. First there was the longitudinal wave nonsense (laughed at and ignored), then the incorrect differential geometry of ECE (laughed at and ignored) and now the misused Clairaut analysis which – as graphed by tug-boat Bob – gives clearly incorrect results.

“All these refutations are read all the time.”

And to what end? Prove that they are being read for instruction, and are not merely a cause for derision.

“One only needs to study to learn about this. In contrast the standard model is a theory of three of the fields, electromagnetic, weak and strong, using the failed U(1) sector riddled with errors and inconsistencies described even in a standard model book by Lewis Ryder, “Quantum Field Theory”.”

Hey, read the literature, as scientists do. Only amateurs believe that textbooks are ‘the latest word’. Did you know that  many  particle-physics papers have more authors than sentences? Go argue with those authors. Of course, you will have to explain who you are: the ‘the Wizard of the Welsh mountains’. Sorry, that was Grindell Matthews, wasn’t it?

“The deeply flawed U(1) sector is used to construct a completely meaningless standard unified field theory, which is no more than a mess of adjustable parameters based on an obscure idea by Higgs and several others, many years ago, called spontaneous symmetry breaking of the vacuum. In attempting to unify the three fields the standard model uses more than twenty adjustable parameters, which means that it predicts nothing. Anyone who has tred to plough through Ryder knows what an utterly obscure book it is.”

So where is your explanation for mass, and how do we know that it would fit precisely?

“The claim to have observed a Higgs boson is farcical, and is riddled with errors as in essay 66, and there are so many critics of CERN”

The vast majority of critics are to be found in the lunatic fringe.

“that the world of professional science tends to regard it as a joke.”

What do you know of the world of professional science? Your academic career seems to have been very unprofessional and preoccupied with arguing about money and status.

“The general public does not understand any of the mathematics.”

At last, a true statement. Quite, that explains why people like you, Bearden, Mathis and Searl can ‘baffle them with science’ and promise them ‘free energy’, antigravity, etc. No wonder that you all worship Tesla. Dodgy accountants probably worship Madoff.

“I think I will start an electronic petition on asking scientists worldwide to reject the Higgs boson and repudiate any Nobel Prize that may be “awarded” for it.”

And how are you going to prove that signees  are scientists or otherwise competent to judge? You have already pointed out that the general public is ignorant. This also shows up the flaw in your silly faith in direct democracy. We hear that there is also an online petition asking for a mechanism to be put in place to remove Civil-List pensions from those who have brought the honour into disrepute.

“As a chemist I have never accepted large parts of modern physics, and this is a common stance among chemists, engineers and most of physicists.”

Exactly! You are a chemist. Instead of demanding that critics prove their ability to question your work, please state where you obtained your degrees in mathematics and/or physics. Any competent person can spot an equation that does not balance. It takes a true genius – a Feynman, say – to come up with a theory that works. We can agree about the engineers: it is well known that electrical engineers are disproportionately represented in the lunatic fringe. For instance, Laithwaite, Aspden, Valone, …

“The use of annoying media propaganda by failed particle physicists”

Well then, stop doing it!

“The Miles Mathis site refutes many points of physics, making people think. One may or may not agree with Mathis, but he makes people think”

Yes, he makes everyone think that he is an idiot and outs you as an idiot for citing him. But what is the point of trying to explain that to someone with a permanent link to Searl’s nonsense?

Photon Mass

July 12, 2012

Ron insists that the photon has mass because it appears to suffer gravitational attraction. Even the most lay layman might ask why, since everything else is constrained to follow the gravitational curvature of space-time, light – massless or not – should be an exception. Wouldn’t that lead to strange phenomena, with light gleefully going off the extremum path, and leading to temporal paradoxes, say? As luck would have it, here is a chance for Ron to get back into the habit of mainstream publishing: the current issue of the European Journal of Physics contains a paper (Can there be Massive Photons? A Pedagogical Glance at The Origin of Mass) which explains why unwary students may come to believe that photons exhibit mass in some situations. We encourage Ron to write a counter-argument for publication in the same journal. Of course, because EJP is essentially a teaching journal, he will have to counter the authors’  work using the same mathematical techniques, and not introduce the outlandish ones that have found favour only with his few friends. He will also be delighted to find that the same paper explains the Higgs’ boson concept in simple terms; so he can have-a-go at that at the same time.

Abuse of Scientists

July 12, 2012

We endorse Ron’s advice, supposedly had from police, that scientists who feel themselves to have been abused by an internet blog, should contact their local force. With that in mind, we are bringing his blog to the attention of Professors Hawking, Penrose, Higgs, etc. We are also encouraging CERN to make a complaint. [Our book on media-law seems to be out-of-date; we were pleasantly surprised to find that corporate entities are now allowed to complain about defamation – such was not previously the case.]

A Reply to Tug-Boat Bob

July 12, 2012

Mr Mr Mr Mr (very much a Mr) Cheshire objects to our questioning of his qualifications to comment on celestial mechanics and forensic document analysis (a recognised profession by the way:  see Word Crime by J.Olsson). We of course are quite sanguine when our ability to question Ron’s output is queried.  Their hypocrisy is a very common feature of the ‘asymmetrical warfare’ waged by them: they feel free to deny well-established mainstream physics – without offering any adequate evidence – while defenders of the mainstream view are asked to prove (to a hostile audience which would not understand the proof anyway) that the dissidents are wrong. Having to tackle sciolists and paradoxers of this ilk is not a new problem. The implacable Augustus De Morgan detailed his struggles – with the lunatic fringe of his day – in his Budget of Paradoxes.  His colleagues felt that he should not ‘jump down from the departing stagecoach’ (of real learning) in order to remonstrate with ‘stone-throwing urchins in the street’. He disagreed with that advice. So do we, especially so now that the internet misinforms young people about science from an early age.  Concerned parents should be just as concerned about fake internet science (‘space-energy’, ‘free energy’, ‘over-unity’, anti-gravity, etc. ), fake doctors of science (Bearden, Valone, etc.) and fake academic institutes (Telesio-Galilei, etc.) polluting their youngsters’ minds, as they are about internet pornography doing the same.

Meanwhile, Mr Cheshire has yet to explain how his computer simulation, based upon Ron’s theory, managed to produce a result which would be self-evidently wrong to that ubiquitous ‘O-level student’. His initial excuse was that it was some sort of early draft. Fine, we have all had programs go haywire. But, in that case, why post something which was embarrassing to Ron? The only other explanation is that Cheshire could not see the error, just as Ron seems to be unable to spot the endemic typographical errors in his blog. However, if Cheshire could not see the error, what does that say about his knowledge-base? [Note to puzzled laymen: it is not normal, when presenting diagrams of orbits in academic work, to depict them in perspective view. And if it is done,  that fact is clearly stated].

On the subject of Tesla (now at least  a handy ‘touchstone’ for detecting pseudoscientists), we wonder how Cheshire formed his opinion of the man. Did he perhaps – like one of us – make a lifelong study of the history of electrical engineering, and find that Tesla’s role was in fact as substantial as that of the Cheshire Cat’s smile? Obviously not. Or did he simply read all of the poor-quality and tendentious biographies (written by mere journalists [O’Neill, Cheney], a parapsychologist [Seifer] and an outright loon [Storm]) which have long misinformed the general public? The current grossly-inflated image of Tesla is, again, an excrescence of the internet.


July 12, 2012

We feel that we would be lacking in our civic duty if we did not confirm that Ron’s house was indeed photographed, without his permission, using a very high-quality camera. Moreover, the culprits  placed those photographs on a website where anybody in the world can see them. If he wishes to have the name and address of the guilty parties, he simply has to ask nicely on his blog.

How Does his Spin-Cycle Survive?

July 12, 2012

Ron claims that centrifugal force does not exist. However, that does not matter because his theory replaces it. This theory has not been submitted to any mainstream physics journal of course, and would be laughed at if it were. Like Miles ‘pi = 4’ Mathis, he prefers to keep his world-shattering discoveries within the lunatic fringe, lest they be stepped on by nasty cruel reality. One thing worries us though: how does Mrs Ron spin her washing to acceptable dampness now that he has abolished centrifugal force? Is space-time particularly strongly curved in their kitchen? Perhaps one of those ‘O-level students’, who is so often conjured up for moral support, could solve this dilemma

Wasting police time

July 12, 2012

As a taxpayer I can’t stand to see my money wasted. And frivolous calls to the police or 911 is at the top of the list of senseless waste. Not only of money, but of the time brave men and women could be using to fight true crimes and emergencies.

I was glad to discover the UK laws seem to have the same view.


In England and Wales, one can be charged with the offence under Section 5(2) of the Criminal Law Act 1967[1] when one “causes any wasteful employment of the police” by “knowingly making to any person a false report” which:

  • Shows that a criminal offence has been committed,
  • Creates apprehension for the safety of any persons or property, or
  • Indicates that they have information material to any police inquiry.

The offence carries a maximum penalty of six months’ imprisonment and/or a fine.

The same applies to Northern Ireland according to Section 5(3) of the Criminal Law Act (Northern Ireland) 1967.[2]

For Scotland the High Court of Justiciary stated in Kerr v. Hill [3] that giving false information to the police constitutes a crime under common law.

Nous Accusons

July 11, 2012

Sometimes a person with some technical ability has early successes but then, for some strange reason, retires to the small Welsh village of Craigcefnparc, claims to know better than the mainstream physics community and to be able to produce amazing devices that are contrary to all known science. He is destined to go down in history as a crackpot (opinion of Professor R.V.Jones).

But enough about Harry Grindell Matthews.

Ron accuses us of all sorts of untrue ‘offences’ (for instance, none of us have ever lived in Barry) from the vantage point of what he imagines to be some sort of moral high-ground. The same high ground from which he individually vilifies great mathematicians such as Stephen Hawking, and collectively insults the world-class scientists of CERN.  He has no right to express any such elevated views on physics. He has no good reputation in the world of physics (and is rapidly tarnishing his previously good reputation in chemistry). Unfortunately, it is not obvious to the layman (including various civil powers) that there has always existed a community of disgruntled academics who deal in pseudoscience. In the past, its members were limited to expressing their views in the letters columns of newspapers or in low-level technical magazines such as Practical Mechanics. Recent technological changes (desk-top publishing, internet web-pages) have put much greater power into the hands of this lunatic fringe. In the ‘old days’, their constant complaint was that scientific journals would not publish their work. They have now solved that problem by founding their own journals, which exert vanishingly small editorial control, and where the traditional safeguard of peer-review has been reduced to rubber-stamping by similarly-minded crackpots. That is, by definition, peer review … but nobody with any sense is fooled by this trick of semiotics. The pseudoscientists do not like to be ‘outed’ by critics like ourselves but, rather than proving themselves to the mainstream scientific community via the time-honoured procedure of open discussion, they prefer to take on the mantle of the sleazy defence lawyers who are a stock-in-trade of TV cop shows. An American judge once passed down a legal judgement on whether Shakespeare wrote the plays which are attributed to him. ‘Barrack-room lawyer’ pseudoscientists hold onto the equally ludicrous idea that over-worked police can judge whether a criticism of blatant pseudoscience is malicious … or just the exercise of free speech by those concerned for the educational and scientific reputation of the country. We shall reiterate shortly why Ron has no right (moral or otherwise) to occupy higher ground.