Archive for December, 2013

Crothers as Crackpot-Detector

December 31, 2013

“Many thanks to Stephen Crothers for this interesting paper, which I will study carefully and post on the blog.

Dear Readers,

Here is a very interesting paper:

Robitaille, P.-M.

Forty Lines of Evidence for Condensed Matter — The Sun on Trial: Liquid Metallic Hydrogen as a Solar Building Block

Stephen J. Crothers”


Just as anybody who mentions Searl, Tesla, etc., in a favourable light, reveals himself to be a crackpot, anybody referenced positively by Crothers is sure to be a nutter:


Turner-Thomas Demoted

December 31, 2013

“I signed this petition, sent on by Arthur Turner-Thomas, and started by Aaron Davies of Swansea, and I am posting it on the blog. I recommend that the slaughter of rare species be stopped, not only in Wales, but in all the 169 countries from which people read this blog. Slaughter of innocent animals is the slaughter of humankind itself. The worst culprit by far is of course the wind turbine scam.”

How nice to see that Ron has finally agreed that we are correct, and has ceased to accord bogus credentials to the former ‘colonel (SAS, hon) Sir Arthur GC, VC, etc.” Ron will no doubt eventually admit that perpetual-motion scams are being perpetrated by Hill and Rossi. As for the slaughter of innocent animals, we always assumed that his ‘cousin’, her friends and her relatives were responsible for a great deal of that.  Who can ever forget the sight of his ‘cousin’ killing an animal, up close and personal,  using that little weighted stick that she carries ‘on safari’?


Christmas Puzzle #1

December 23, 2013

A woman is 21 years older than her child. In 6 years time, the child’s age will then be 20% of the age of the woman at that time. How far away is the father, what is the state of the woman and … most importantly … how does that state resemble the past, present and future states of ECE and AIAS? Answers on a postcard to Nephelokokkygia. 

Rule of Thumb Confirmed

December 23, 2013

“Alex Hill mentioned that his company has already developed counter gravitational devices. I believe that Sean MacLachlan has observed personally some Alex Hill devices and has taken notes. So ECE was developed following experimental data: the inverse Faraday effect, energy from spacetime and working counter gravitational devices. Many responsible sceintists and engineers have seen the devices working, some are working in the world’s largest corporations (Fortune Fifty). ”

A safe rule of thumb to apply is that, if a crackpot has a perpetual motion machine in his workshop or theory, he is pretty sure also to have an antigravity machine … and vice versa. He is also likely to take an interest in unlikely cancer-cures (e.g. the Priore and Angelus nonsense). It is this transparent greed for fame and fortune that helps to distinguish the pseudoscientist from the scientist. The above quote confirms this rule. One should not get too excited by the news of big-company involvement, even if it were true. Over two decades ago, British Aerospace invited a loony inventor into its research division so that it could test his gyroscopic reactionless space drive. It is unlikely that this would have happened without pressure from the loud-mouthed and incompetent engineer, Eric Laithwaite.  The machine did not work of course; the proverbial ‘bright schoolboy’ could have told them that. Such naive behaviour by big companies does not increase respect for the gadget: it diminishes respect for the company.


Take Me to Your Lieder

December 15, 2013

“Oh Isis and Osiris lighten
With wisdom this newly wed pair,
The wanderer to your path is bidden
Patient, strong in danger’s lair.”

Better get a German (or Swiss) to look at that. That translation seems to have gone ‘off message’. We get:

 O Isis and Osiris, bestow 

The spirit of wisdom on the new pair.

She who links to hers the wanderer’s steps,

Strengthens them with patience ‘gainst danger.  

Some Advice to Tugboat

December 14, 2013

If you are going to prattle about pseudoscience, at least try to get the basics correct. You should insert ‘rest’ before your every mention of ‘mass’ in connection with photons. That is what the crackpot theory is about, or were you not told? Missing out ‘rest’ will make it difficult for your layman-victims to understand why ‘photon rockets’ have always been considered a physically viable, if technologically remote, propulsion possibility. Even Ripley’s Believe-it-or-Not has sometimes pointed out that the photon radiation from the Sun would knock a man off his feet at a range of 50 miles. Quite a feat (pun intended) for a mass-less particle. Why the apparent discrepancy in conventional theory? Well, you see, there is this concept called ‘special relativity’. You should look it up one day. So, point one is to try to get the nomenclature right at least. We recommend re-recording everything. And while doing that, you might like to make the pronunciation correct as well. Your French pronunciation is bad, and inconsistent … and the less said about your attempt at ‘Wiechert’ , the better.  

Poetry Corner

December 13, 2013

“This reminds me strongly of “The Magic Flute” with incantations to the gods:”

How appropriate it is that the next line is: “Lasst sie der Pruefung Fruechte sehen.” See, even Mozart realized the importance of proof.

Nail in the Coffin Department

December 12, 2013

“Many thanks to Steve Bannister for this very interesting information. I will study in detail tomorrow. There should certainly be an experimental Nobel Prize going for LENR and spacetime energy.”

If one really wants to undermine ones credibility, there is no better way than being published in, or even using as support, the pseudoscientific rag known as Infinite Energy magazine.  It specializes in perpetual motion, but also has space for antigravity, alternative health and conspiracy theories. When the original editor was murdered, the magazine tried to suggest that he was assassinated because of his pushing of cold fusion. It turned out that the murderer was a relative of his; thus contributing to the general aroma of sleaze which hangs over crackpot ‘science’. Of course, there is nothing wrong with buying (used, from Ebay)  the magazine; there is an almost complete collection in our library. It is an inexhaustible source of fun. By the way, we do not consider Nature or Science to be scientific journals: they are mere magazines which contain a few original papers. Here are a few clues: scientific journals are not sold at a reasonable price at news-stands, they are not full of glossy colour photographs, they are not full of advertisements for products and jobs, and they do not have a newspaper-style letters column. 

Pseudoscientific Debate

December 10, 2013

“This is a paper submitted to a journal, with a copy sent to the other side of the debate, and an answering paper. Otherwise it is a paper answered in another journal by another paper. Anonymity is, of course, not allowed, full name and address and affiliation required. Nothing else counts as professional debate.”

Crackpot papers are not sent to real journals, because the papers in question do not meet basic scientific standards. They are instead sent to journals founded by other crackpots, or by the author himself. The co-authors are also crackpots. The references are to previous pseudoscientific work by the author or his friends, or to well-known scams. Peer-review consists of a nod from other crackpots. The ‘affiliations’ are usually private addresses, ‘research institutes’ which are typically the author’s home, or companies where the author and his dog are the only directors or – occasionally – addresses where the author is not known at all. The academic background of the author is either non-existent, in an unrelated discipline or bogus (degree mills are a routinely-used resource). In case of dissent, voiced in a real journal, the crackpot paraphrases his original incorrect reasoning, publishes it in a loony magazine, and claims to have routed his critics. The pseudoscientist does not believe in debate, because he is allergic to free speech and will often resort to legal threats in order to intimidate legitimate critics. 

Yet More Perpetual Motion

December 10, 2013

Electrical oscillations in a metallic “sending coil” radiate inductive photons toward one or more “energy-magnifying coils” comprised of a photoconductor or doped semiconductor coating a metallic conductor, or comprised of a superconductor. Electrons of low inertial mass in the energy-magnifying coil(s) receive from the sending coil a transverse force having no in-line backforce, which exempts this force from the energy-conservation rule.

(Our emphasis) Hmmm, who could have made such a silly claim in a patent application (HK1133055*)? Step forward, William N Barbat; the same one who does not believe in the Big Bang**. We have nominated him for a Nobel Prize (just to make a point). Ron should make him an AIAS Fellow immediately. We are, by the way, very pleased that all of these outlandish references are being archived: we would not like it to be easy for them all to be deleted when some future investigative journalist takes an interest in the embarrassing fact that pseudoscientists are awarded accolades in the UK.

* See also WO2007103020. In this application, Barbat cites a patent application from Paul M Brown. He was the drug-dealer who was killed while racing his car illegally on public roads. Oh brave new (perpetual motion) world that has such people in it.

**Tifft (cited by Barbat) himself does not claim that his data disprove anything.