-----------------------------
>Tom wrote:
> Russ,
> The info that David Hamel has been given is very impotant to us as a
>species. You should take the info as a technical knowledge only. Don't try
>to figure out where it came from or whom, this applies to all of the UFO
>field. In the 50's and 60's you had a lot of these so called contacties who
>wanted to give us a bunch of knowledge and other mumbo jumbo.
-----------------------------
I agree. If we are given the real thing, I do not care what the claims are, of
how the inventor got the information. As I said previously I keep an open mind
there.
-----------------------------
> I always take
>it into a technological approach , if it can be duplicated or theoretically
>possibly then build it and prove that person correct.
-----------------------------
I agree, but that is only good up to a point. When we spend to much time
trying to build their devices (only to have them not work), we cannot spend
enough time on the devices which may turn out to be the real thing. A lot of
simple devices get set aside trying to build the more exotic devices that are
based on false or over stated claims. It all comes down to the fact that the
inventor claims to have built a working device, but is never successful in
duplicating it for others to see, yet they still ask other people to build
these devices.
-----------------------------
> For Hamel he passed my
>test with flying colors - his Hamel Spinner. Just take a large round magnet,
>a smaller magnet that will fit on a steel ball bearing, and the ball
>bearing. Place the smaller magnet on top of the ball bearing and then place
>the larger magnet on top. The ball bearing will then spin with the magnet on
>top. This is in a sense what Hamel is doing but on a bigger scale with some
>OLD WORLD craftsmanship to keep it spinning.
-----------------------------
I understand the principle that is being shown with the Hamel spinner. My only
point here is that it is not anything new. The same effects can be shown in
hundreds of ways, with or without magnets, and as such, it alone does not prove
any technology. I think David probably only uses it to show the principle
behind his other devices, and not as a new technology in itself. I belive that
it is that effect that he is trying to get with his Energy Generator and Flying
Saucer, but to have magnetic instability take the place on his hand. It is an
interesting idea, and might even be possible, thus the reason why I cannot
determine if it will work based solely on the plans.
-----------------------------
>The effects that he states
>happened to his one craft are the SAME as SEARLS. Since you now have a
>correlation between 2 indepedant researchers who both have about the same
>type of device then who cares where it came from, just so it works!
-----------------------------
This can go both ways as well. If you have read any of the conspiracy theories
out there about aliens, etc, you may be surprised to see many, many
correlations between the stories of several independent people. This gets more
people interested, and scamsters know this fact. If I were trying to
perpetrate a scam, I could easily do research and claim similar effects as
stated by many other inventors, but this would not make it true.
-----------------------------
> Searl says his info came from a dream, Hamel says his came from a
>dream, I don't care where it came from just as along as you can DUPLICATE
>it. Yes, Searl uses $10,000 each semiconductor magnets but it works and has
>been proven to work.
-----------------------------
The problem is that I have not seen anything DUPLICATED as of yet....
-----------------------------
>If you have any doubt about this stuff look at the Levitron. I think that is
>close to what is happening.
-----------------------------
I do not see the connection there at all....
-----------------------------
> My only problem has to do with this thing in
>space. I think you might have to look at Lazar's interpretation of the
>gravity amplifiers and how they were used to shed some light on that aspect
>of it. This repulsion/attraction might work for a short distance but what
>happens when you get out in the middle of nowwhere and the dam thing has
>nothing to push/attract to? Your stuck. It would only be good for a Surface
>to Space transport system and nothing else. I guess you should start with
>the basic craft for terrestial flight first before worrying about interspace
>flight.
> Yes, a lot of people are working on the Hamel device because it is
>simple and the rewards are many if we can get it built and controlled. Hamel
>has used his own terms for his technology which we have to interpret into
>scientific and laymans terms to be any use to us. If you get / see the Hamel
>tape , Visitors From Planet Kladen (?), then you will begin to understand it
>further. It took myself 3 times to watching the video before I could start
>to comprehend ,
-----------------------------
I definitely would like to view this video at some point, if for nothing else,
it might be interesting SciFi...
-----------------------------
>1 What he was saying, 2 What he means/terms, 3 To put it
>into perspective with other researchers. If you look at the Biefield Brown,
>Seversky, and Searl devices in detail and correlate some of their info you
>will come to some startling conclusions. Jerry Decker has some of these same
>correlations also.
> Correlations
> 1. It takes between 30kv and 50 kv to lift 1 ounce of material ( Ion
>propulsion with straight electricity.)
> 2. Spinning propulsion is more effecient ( frisbee )
> 3. Electricity effects - glowing / ionization of the surrounding air.
>(On missiles they do this to quench the Sonic Boom of a warhead reentering
>the atmosphere and reduce the drag.)
> 4. Simplicity in how it works, but complex in making it- Comes back to
>old world craftsmanship and not mass production yet.
>
> Just a few things to ponder Russ. Hamel is a nice man he just wants to
>build his craft and finish his project/ tinkering . It is us who want to
>take the project and build one for ourselves. It is we who want to "SteaL'
>it. For good or bad thats the way it is. At first David wanted to share but
>too often as the case becomes people get the most of you.
>
> tom
>
I agree with a lot of what you say here. The main point being as you stated in
your last sentence: "too often as the case becomes people get the most of
you"... As I stated previously, my intent was not to pass judgement on
Hamel. It was mainly to get more information so that maybe we can move a step
closer to proving or disproving his claims. I for one, would be much happier
to find out that his claims are true...
-Russ
-------------------------------------------------------------
To leave this list, email <listserver@keelynet.com>
with the body text: leave Interact
list archives and on line subscription forms are at
http://keelynet.com/interact/
-------------------------------------------------------------