SECTION: Vol. 233 ; Pg. 154; ISSN: 0036-8075  LENGTH: 412 words

Newman's " energy  output" machine put to the test

 BODY:
   Newman's " Energy  Output" Machine Put to the Test

    What's a device with a battery pack, a magnet, and a coil wired together?
For the past 6 years,  Joseph Newman,  an inventor from Mississippi, has been
loudly proclaiming that it's a revolutionary machine which produces more power
than it uses.  The National Bureau of Standards recently issued its own verdict
after analyzing Newman's machine: "In none of tests did the device's approach
100%....  Our results are clear and unequivocal," the bureau said.

    Newman has gone to great lengths to try to win a patent on his  energy
output machine.  When the U.S.  Patent and Trademark Office indicated in 1984
that the device did not work, Newman sued the agency.  He hired a publicist,
andthe media often portrayed him as an underdog pitted against the
scientific establishment.  Then the court ordered Newman to submit the
machine to the National Bureau of Standards for testing.  Newman reluctantly
complied.

    A physicist and two electrical engineers from the bureau tested the machine
in a variety of ways to measure its  energy  input and output and used
instrumentation that is common in research engineering laboratories.  The sole
power source of the device was 116 9-volt batteries.  According to the test
results, the device's efficiency ranged from 27 to 67%, depending on the
voltage, the power drawn from the device, and the condition of insulating tape
on one of the parts.  (The tape kept burning from sparks generated by the
machine, which caused the efficiency to drop and had to be replaced
frequently.)    According to John Lyons, director of the bureau's National
Engineering Laboratory, the device basically converted direct current to
alternating current.  He noted that there are several machines already on
the market that dothe same thing, but they run at 90% efficiency or higher.

    Newman had court permission to observe the bureau's tests, but never
appeared for any of the experiments, which were conducted between March and
June.  His spokesman Evan Soule said Newman will ask the court to order the
testing of the test equipment.  Newman said in an interview, "I have no respect
for the National Bureau of Standards.  This is a conspiracy against me."

    The testing cost the bureau $ 75,000, which it hopes to recoup from the
patent office.  The patent office will submit the results to U.S.  District
Court for the District of Columbia, which will try the case in December.

.....
Back to the Joe Newman Page
 Joe Newman - free energy claimant accused of incompetance
Eric's history of Perpetual Motion and Free Energy Machines
 free energy with wires and magnets
Get more information on Free Energy claims via E-mail
Joe Newman - a response to his claims

From: the_poster@iname.com  Save Address  Block Sender
Reply-To: "Newman-L Mailing List" <newman-l@emachine.com>
To: "Newman-L Mailing List" <newman-l@emachine.com>
Subject: Your reaction
Date: Wed, 6 Jan 1999 02:26:28 -0500 (EST)

Hello to everyone on the list. This is "the Poster" again.

I told you Evan was frightened of words.

It was not too long ago Evan told us that if we have some criticisms, we should
call Joe himself, because the words of us cowardly critics "mean nothing to him"
unless we present them directly to Joe. Now, witness for yourself a frantic
spewing
of Newmanology from Evan and JOE HIMSELF, trying to distract their followers
from the message of my posting.

They are afraid of my words, because their position is so flimsy. Newman's house
of cards is in danger of collapsing from a few well placed puffs of logic. If it
were that their house had any substance to it, my attack would have fallen flat
lik
e a bug on a windshield.

But, given that there is no substance to their position, their only recourse was
to launch a battle of words centered on character defamation. How many times was
I called a "coward" or "liar"? Did he really have to say it so many times?
Weren't
you convinced the first time, or did he need to make sure you got the message?

And what if they are wrong? What if I'm not a liar? What would that mean?

The fact is they NEED me to be a liar. They need to brand me as a "liar",
"coward"', or even a "front man" for this fabricated 'Army of the Dark' that's
been out to get them for 30 years. Or else they might be revealed for what they
really are.

As for my anonymity, we've already seen a posting on this list about how Evan
calls up Joe's critics and verbally abuses them. I don't want him to have my
address. I simply do not trust him to be civil. Aren't his words ( and Joe's for
that matt
er ) proof enough of that? They are not nice people.

There is another revealing aspect to this whole battle: It's not an argument
over words, but an argument over technology. And the Newmans are trying to win a
technological argument with a battle of words. The fact is, and WHAT THEY WON'T
TELL YO
U is, that neither the Newmanites nor I stand any chance of winning this
argument with words.

They could, however, win this argument TODAY, by showing us what they've been
bragging about for so many years - by showing us WHAT THEY PROMISED TO SHOW US
at the two Phoenix demos: A demonstratable, measureable, verifyable, over unity
Newman m
otor. Not 1 or 10 or 20 or 30 years ago. Now.

The reason we haven't seen it, is because they don't have one. Let that rest in
your mind for a moment....
 if  they  had  one,    they  would  show  us.
 

They would hook up their dynomometer, and show us VERIFYABLE over unity. They
simply haven't got one.

BUT,
They do have their shell game and their excuses. THAT is why they fear any line
of reasoning directed against them. That is why they kick people off the list
for calling attention to their shortcomings.  That is why they are attacking
people who
 come to them with contradictory notions. Witness the desparate attacks directed
at others on this list, just today.

So I leave you with these points. If you step back from the Newman emotional
rhetoric and just look for a moment, take a long, calm, comfortable look at
them...... they are very revealing:

1) Joe called two separate demonstrations in Phoenix. He failed to provide the
"undeniable proof" he promised, at both of them.
2) They cannot defend themselves against their critics. When they are heavily
criticised, their only defense is to resort to school yard name calling, and
censoring a free people by removing them from the forum.

If you are a faithful, good hearted and trusting individual, who's heart rises
to the tone of their emotional sales pitch, then you are their target.

Please be careful. This is real.
 

Regards,

The Anonymous Poster.
Please feel free to copy, distribute, post, or reproduce this message to your
hearts delight.
Same goes for the previous one.

Evan Soule wrote:

"No, Rob, thank YOU for your comments.  They could prove to some, how
intellectually dishonest AND thick-skulled you are.  <But, of course, I
would disagree with them!>  And in your case, my reputation with you is
quite honestly of no concern to me.  I have DO, however, have respect for
those who ARE sincere, courteous, and intellectually honest.  And should
that include yourself, then I am appreciative."
 

In the spirit of intellectual integrity, I am going to ignore most of this
paragraph. Concerning your reputation, you are disgracing yourself in front
of this entire forum. You claim that you are here to make Mr Newman's
technology and happenings known to the list. How can you expect anyone to
believe the information you provide when you come off sounding like a
charlatan and a crackpot?

Now, I'm going to have to debunk this "intellectually honest" term that
either you or Mr Newman seems to have coined. I cannot find such a term in
any dictionary, so I'm going to break it down and attempt to understand what
you are accusing everyone of.

Intellect. From intellectus, to understand. adj. the ability to reason or
understand; high intelligence.
Honest. adj. truthful; trustworthy; sincere or genuine; gained by fair
means; frank; open.

Combining these two terms, one who is "intellectually honest" appears to be
one who can reason and understand a situation truthfully. I have a feeling
that your and/or Mr Newman are trying to stretch the definition to include
being honest about what one understands. Now, if that is the case, then
everytime you accuse me and others of Intellecutal Dishonesty, you are
saying that we understand the Newman machine, but we are untruthfully assert
that we do not understand (or believe in) the Newman machine.

That's a pretty strong claim, especially since you and Joe belong to the
party which cannot substantiate its claims with physically functional proof.
Intellectually Dishonest is a euphemism for saying that I am a LIAR.

My intellectually honest, frank, open, genuine understanding of your
situation is that Mr Newman is hung up on his theory of gyroscopic
massergies and has devoted a whole lot of time to inventing a device which
would support his theory. With so many years of effort invested, he will do
anything to keep his theories and efforts from being debunked. And so
whenever someone raises a criticism that is a little to close to home, he
tries to confuse the issue by arguing irrelevant topics. And of course, if
you don't have the time and ten grand to debate him, then you are an
intellectually dishonest coward who doesn't have the guts to put his money
where his mouth is.

It is a truly sad spectacle to see a publicly known figure sink to
subterfuge and name calling, propaganda and enshrouding the whole thing with
religion. The Newman Mythos is an eyesore, a burden to this forum, and until
there are functional units for sale, it is no longer worth my time.
 

>If Mr. Newman's technology in fact does what you claim here, it would be
>spectacular. I have not yet seen positive proof of said accomplishment, and
>therefore see nothing spectacular. More directly, I don't believe the
>"Energy Device of Joseph Newman" (apparently Joe loves seeing his name in
>print) produces greater energy than it consumes.

"Well, this IS interesting.  You have actually stated something that proves
(had I any previous doubt) that you do NOT understand his technology.
I will reply honestly to you (sarcasm, ridicule, and any personal attacks
aside) and say that I would recommend that you read his fundamental book
for yourself and THEN make up your own mind.  This will probably not happen
since you have made up your mind based upon your admitted cynicism and
apparent emotionalism."

Oh yes! The book. I'm glad you mentioned the book. Yesterday, I again
visited www.josephnewman.com and I saw the link to amazon.com. I actually
considered buying this highly toted peice of literature. So I head over to
amazon.com and sure enough, they can ship the book within 5-8 weeks. Even
though $79.95 is pretty hefty, I figured its a huge book, perhaps there is
something in it that will legitimize this high price. Then I see some
comments from various people who have bought the book. Please allow me to
quote a few:

"A reader from Salt Lake City, Utah , November 5, 1998
Some scientific discussion but mostly fluff
I was very disappointed with Joseph Newman's book for two reasons. 1) Less
than a quarter of the book was dedicated to a scientific discussion of his
"new" technology. The other three-quarters, 400+ pages, covered topics
ranging from conspiracies to religion. 2) There was not enough information
included in this book for even an experienced "do it yourselfer" to build a
prototype.
If you are scientific minded, looking for a thorough technical discussion of
Newman technology, you will be disappointed. If you are looking for an
interesting story of the life and times of Joseph Newman, you may enjoy this
book. "

"A reader from Southbridge, Massachusetts , October 2, 1998
An amazing study of the technical con game.
The prudent technologically savvy reader would say, "Okay, show us is this
fabulous thing." But NO!! first we want to tell you how this brave and
brilliant man has labored for decades. Making money on his books, personal
appearance, and lectures. How he is the equivalent of Aristotle and Einstein
together, how He will solve all the world's problems. "So, show us this
wonderful thing." But NOOOOOOO....first we need to show you scads of
affidavits and drawings and explain how GREAT scientists are always
ridiculed and not believed. "So, show us this wonderful device......" PURE
HOKUM. Great study of the techno-con. If you like to delve into scientific
frauds...it's a joyous study of the truly and hilariously corrupt. "

Now, Evan, I've gotta tell ya, comments like this don't make me feel very
good about spending nearly $80.  I would appreciate your comments on the
above two opinions. Are they correct? Or are they intellectually dishonest
too? I'm willing to bet they're right. You know why? Because Joe's website
is also just like these two people describe. There's tons of info about
Joe's life, Joe's suffering, Joe's eventual glorious triumph, Joe's
conspiracy theories, Joe's God, Joe Joe Joe Joe Joe Joe. But there isn't a
whole lot of hard information about this invention of his. Why would the
book be any different than the website? I'm still going to buy the book
because I wanna see just how bad it is. At this point, I wouldn't be
surprised if he simply printed his entire website, put it in a hardbound
book, and stuck an $80 price tag on the front.

Now, I'm going to be fair. There were also 3 positive comments at
amazon.com. Unfortunately, they only lend support to my theory (Or should I
say, the The Energy Device of Joseph Newman is Pure Bullshit Theory of
Robert Judd) that this whole thing is a crock. Here they are, the 3 positive
comments:

"A reader from Sydney, Australia , November 23, 1998
Excellent and Informative Book!!
I understand that a number of individuals in Europe and America have
constructed working prototypes of Joseph Newman's technology. They have done
this from having read Joseph Newman's book which contains hundreds of
photographs, detailed drawings, charts, graphs, reports, affidavits, and
descriptions of the technology.
I have found this book very informative and, for the first time I now
understand the essential nature of electromagnetism. I would HIGHLY
recommend this book to anyone with a sincere interest in science and in
being introduced to a truly revolutionary technology that can change the
world for the better. "

It looks like this reader actually believed all the theory and addidavits
and such. You know why people believe this crap? Because they want to. They
want to believe in it. They aren't reading it with critical thinking skills
in mind. People see something in print and assume it must be true. It is no
wonder Joe had to publish the book himself, no respectable publisher would
take it. NEXT!

"A reader from USA , October 18, 1998
I am a simple housewife with no degree
By God this makes me want to go to college and prove he's right!!!!!!! I'm
sick and tired of Politics, , the banks, the terroist, and the criminals
having more rights than the law abiding people of this supposed UNITED
STATES OF AMERICA!!! what kind of world are we headed for if we don't take a
stand NOW!!!! "

A simple, uneducated housewife believes you Evan! Looks like she probly
liked it because of the conspiracy theory element. Like I said above, people
believe this crap because they want to believe it.  She probly also liked
all the God stuff in it too.

"bjcoe@home2.mysolution.com from Gods country! , July 13, 1998
Logical, Informative, cutting edge technology.
Informative book explaining energy, economics, weather, gravity and many
other topics in plain english. Most of the tests can be reproduced with
relatively inexpensive materials and tools. This is technology that scares
the power brokers of the world. Instead of these power brokers helping
advance humanity, they a determined to stiffle this technology. But now you
can build or buy it for your self. p.s. This is my second book after
purchasing an earlier edition and several video tapes. Enjoy as you read
into the future"

Another unedcuated moron bought into all the tests and graphs and then the
conspiracy theory crap sealed the deal. It seems this one is hardcore
cultist in the Newman Mythos.  In fact, I almost wonder if perhaps you,
Evan, wrote this one. The grammatical structure and word choice match up
pretty well. Plus there's a plug for the earlier edition and video tapes.
C'mon Evan, confess, you wrote this one didn't you?

If I had ANY reason, at all, to believe Joe's book was a technical reference
book with nothing but hardcore facts, I would buy it. I'd buy it, read it,
and recommend it to others. Instead, the book is full of diversions
red-herrings, and propaganda. If I do buy it, I'm going to read it, laugh at
it, cut out the most preposterous parts, scan them, and create a website
conclusively debunking the Newman Mythos.
 

<<<However, when you state:
"I don't believe the "Energy Device of Joseph Newman" (apparently Joe loves
seeing his name in print) produces greater energy than it consumes."
Guess what?  I AGREE with you!
[Sidebar comment: he actually terms it the "Energy Machine of Joseph
Newman".  And, since he innovated it, it is factually appropriate to have
his name attached to it -- it has nothing to do with Joe "loving to see his
name in print."  Curiously, for example, the Ford Motor Company is named
after Henry Ford.  Curiously, we call it, "Newton's Law of Gravitation."
And, I always term the flying machine of the Wright Brothers the
"aeroplane" rather than the "airplane" out of respect for THEIR
nomenclature for THEIR OWN innovation.]>>>
 

I'm glad you brought this up. We call our trucks Fords. We don't call planes
The Flying Machine of the Wright brothers. The point is that Joe loves
seeing his name written everywhere.  Another thing, there is a big
difference between Joe Newman, and people like Henry Ford, Newton, and the
Wright brothers. I can get on a plane, buy a ford, and can prove Newtons
theories with simple highschool experiments. The only thing Newman has to
offer me is a set of plastic dumbells.

"I simply pass along information about what Joseph Newman is
saying/doing/planning/etc.  Period.  That's it.
Oh, I may make posts on other related or unrelated topics that interest me,
but the above is my primary purpose."

No, Evan, not true. If that is all you were here for, you would simply drop
occasional notices about Joe's work and events. Your actions speak
otherwise. You argue, refute, pass judgement, and much more. Personally, I'm
curious why you stick up for poor old Joe so much? Is he promising you stock
options? Paying you pretty good? Or maybe you're secretly in love with him,
I don't know. I'm just throwing ideas out here. What I do know is that you
aren't here to just pass along information. You enjoy stirring up trouble,
and because you distract SO MUCH and OFFER SO LITTLE, you are about one
message away from being filtered by everyone on the list.
 

"And, BTW Rob:  I am VERY humble before the grandeur and apparent infinite
magnitude of the universe.  It is an attitude of what the physicist Alvin
Lowi termed:  egocentric humility.  To paraphrase the great Isaac Newton:
"I seem like a small boy, playing on the seashore with a prettier shell
than ordinary, whilst the great Ocean of Truth lay all undiscovered before
me."
In the right frame of mind, with a glass of wine in one hand and a good
book like NEVER AT REST in the other, I could easily shed sincere tears of
understanding and appreciation at the profundity of Newton's statement."

Oh Jeez, a single tear rolls down my cheek for this touching melodrama. This
is irrelevant. Point is you come across like an arrogant phony and nobody
believes you. Stop wasting our time and your own.
 

"Your closing statement above is FAIR ENOUGH.  I will add, however, that
your statement "if the technology worked, it would be easy to find
financial backing...." is a statement which is indicative of one who does
not know previous events.  For example:  I was present when the primary
"head-hunter" for new technology for Chrysler Corp. (who happened to be Lee
Iacocca's 1st cousin) told Joe:  "Joe, we (he and his engineers who came to
Joe's lab in MS to test his prototypes) are VERY impressed with your
technology.  PLEASE call us when you have secured your patent rights."
Yes, Rob: those Patent Rights were ALL IMPORTANT to Iacocca --- regardless
of the significance or workability of the technology."

Of course a patent is important to a big money leech like Chrysler. If Joe
really wanted to benevolently help mankind, he would have searched out a
smaller company that shared his goal and would help him develop the
technology appropriately. Getting the shaft by a couple big name companies
is no excuse. Its passing the blame.
"Rob, if you have not said that you "doubt the true nature of the 'true back
spike of current" produced by Joseph Newman's Motor/Generator" then the
above paragraph does not apply to you.  The point of the above is that the
reductio ad absurdum statement is 'drama' to underscore the point that was
being made, i.e., that the back spike DOES consist of real current.
EEO>EEI is another discussion.  One which HAS been verfied by those who
demonstrated real intellectual honesty, tested, and verified the
operational nature of the prototypes."
Coining absurd terms like EEO>EEI and arguing back spikes are irrelevant. I
will not be sidetracked by this bullshit again.
"Guess what?  If you have the funding to launch commercialization then I've
got JUST the phone number for you:  (602) 657-3722.  Give him a call!  Joe
has stated that once he has such funding in place, production units will be
available within several months."

Did I say anything about me having commercial funding? NO. I said I would
buy a motor. If Joe is such a genius, he should be able to handle his own
financial affairs.

Send ANY further correspondence to my own email address,
canska@davesworld.net

I WILL NOT waste any more of the List's time with this completely fruitless
discussion.

>From: daveem@webtv.net (daveem m)
>Reply-To: "Newman-L Mailing List" <newman-l@emachine.com>
>To: "Newman-L Mailing List" <newman-l@emachine.com>
>Subject: Why so many excuses?
>Date: Wed, 22 Sep 1999 11:51:00 -0700 (PDT)
>
>Evan,
>I can appreciate you not wanting to be a continual letter translator, a
>direct phone call would be better, but in my last attempt to call Joe, I
>was told he did not have time to speak with me, and he has not answered
>my snail mail letter. I have now learned enough to ask the right
>questions, and I seemed to have come against a brick wall with Joe. I
>can not say for sure that Joes motor does not work because I have not
>seen it, but put your self in my shoes and ask your self these
>questions,and then tell me what I should think. Why does Joe leave out
>important data in his tests results? Why is it so many people on this
>list seem to all conclude that Joes motor does not work, including Sam
>Biss who helped Joe build the last one? Why is it those who challenge
>Joes theories are degraded rather than helped? Why did the tests done by
>the NBS conclude Joes motor did not work? Why is Roger Hastings now the
>enemy? Why is Stefan an idiot and liar? Why is Dennis Lee a thief? Why
>is Erick Krieg calling Joe a fraud, Why doesn't Joe have a generator on
>his motor to prove his point once and for all? In my initial
>experiments, I became so excited over my test results, that I called a
>national radio show to give credit to Joes work, But I have since
>learned enough to see I was mistaken. and I unknowingly helped mis lead
>many others. I never joined this list to attack Joe, I wanted to tell
>the world about him, and I believed his motor could change the world for
>the better, but Joe is obviously playing games, Here I am wanting to
>help the cause, but for the sake of my doubts, as well as the doubts of
>others, I had to ask some questions before I spread the gospel any more,
>but there doesn't  seem to be any answers for me.
>Evan,
>why do you stand up for Joe no matter what he does wrong? You sound
>pretty smart to me, and I can't imagin you don't see the contradictions
>in what he says and does, what goes through your mind each time one more
>perons gets thrown off the list? Are we to believe all these people are
>enemys of Joes work, employed by the oil companies? Are those of us on
>the list just worthless shit to you and Joe? people to be ignored? Why
>even have the list?
>When one of my friends does somthing screwey I question them, and I try
>to help them see their error. Do you ever question Joe?
>Dave Maltz
>
>Dave's Alternative Energy.
>http://www.homezen.com/powersys.html,
>
>Amazing 3700 hour white LED flashlights!
>http://www.homezen.com/powersys/minilite.htm
>