Share, , Google Plus, Pinterest,


Posted in:

Science and Free Energy Technologies

It’s intriguing to observe that people who maintain that free energy isn’t feasible or that it is a con have in no way attempted to construct such devices.

They never appear to have had direct contact with someone who is constructing or has constructed such devices. They always say things like I’ve heard that those who bought the plans to build X are disappointed and want their money back, or that ‘free energy’ contravenes the laws of magnetodynamics and thermodynamics.

True scientific method and its shameless inclusion of criticism, contrary theory and open debate makes possible the dismissal of the old and the acceptance of the new.

Unfortunately for us, the history of science has been the history of the suppression of inventions rather than of the bringing of enlightenment.

Fundamentally what is required is a paradigm shift in order to tap into new energy sources. If energy cannot be created out of nothing and only changed from one state to another how did it get there in the first place? And even if energy cannot be created out of nothing all we have to do is tap into the energy that is already there and convert it to a type we can use.

If necessary our entire modern physics may have to be rewritten. This is not a big deal. It happens all the time.

Let us not forget that the world was flat once upon a time, or that the Sun revolved around it.

You can find numerous scientific principles/laws that were discarded once they were no longer suitable. Science takes a long time to adjust itself to new paradigms for there are just as many vested interests in academia as there are outside it.

The old guard, many who have built their careers on the earlier hypothesis are going to fight tooth and nail to maintain their reputation and status within the community intact. They do not want to embrace change nor do the take kindly to those who may usurp their authority.

This is why people that go to universities may come out with their degrees or PhD and yet know nothing.

As a side note: It leads me to remember what happened to one of my grandfathers when he went to university and how he had his academic career cut short by one of his professors. My grandfather, a brilliant man had an inquiring mind and did not take things at face value. So instead of simply accepting what they were being taught he always questioned anything that he felt did not ring true. One of his professors who had taken umbrage to his questioning drew two converging line on the board and told him that they were parallel lines. My grandfather knew then that his academic career was over. No matter what he did he was going to be allowed to pass and left the university.

The topic of free energy along with that of perpetual motion has received a lot undue criticism and misrepresentation over the past years. If we consider that in the subatomic level all motion is perpetual.

One can recognize some amount of closed mindedness about a claim that seems to violate a few of the most basic laws in science. These laws take on a quasi-religious “scientific” superstitions which have ossified into scientific orthodoxy masquerading as an absolute, immutable truth.

This is especially understandable from some of the professors as they built their careers upon those laws. And they will do anything to retain the current status quo.

Peer review is one of academia’s weapon of choise to control discenting or alternative views in science, physics, medicine etc. Neutral academic peer review is nothing but a myth as dissenting arguments are surpressed and tossed out.

The closed-mindedness of many of these supposed men of science, their willingness to go to any lengths to defend a preconceived message, can still surprises me. The stink of their intellectual corruption and deliberate chicanery is often overpowering especially when the science is politicized.

The pursuit for free energy can be described as forbidden science. The materialism or absolute skepticism of the scientific establishment is detrimental to any scientific inquiry that thinks outside the box. This mentality is only interested in preserving funding for its own projects, those that will not rock the establishment.

There is an organized war going on in science between materialistic theory and anything that could be termed spiritual or metaphysical. Take for example, Masaru Emoto’s research into the energetics of water, although supported by photographic evidence, has been scoffed at by mainstream science because he has asserted that humans affect their surroundings with their thoughts. Nonetheless, within the world of quantum physics it is recognized that the simple act of observing has an effect on experiments being performed.

“The observations that are not explainable by current scientific theories are the most valuable, for they may propel the field forward in the next cycle of innovation, possibly to a paradigm shift.” – D. L. Jewett

It may be comforting to believe that science is an absolute discipline: immune from fads, fanatics and frauds, untroubled by extremists, evangelists, glory-seekers and bigots. Unfortunately it is not. Science is as vulnerable to the vested interests and biases of its practitioners as any corporate entity or political party as the ‘Global Warming’ (renamed ‘Climate Change’) scam has show only too clearly. Climategate has demonstrated to all that while science itself is valid, individual scientists can be corrupted by their own belief systems.

I’ll leave you with this quote from Michael Crichton:

“In the end, science offers us the only way out of politics. And if we allow science to become politicized, then we are lost. We will enter the Internet version of the dark ages, an era of shifting fears and wild prejudices, transmitted to people who don’t know any better. That’s not a good future for the human race. That’s our past.”

– Michael Crichton, “Environmentalism as Religion,” (A lecture at the Commonwealth Club, San Francisco, CA, September 15, 2003).

Alain Prudhomme write about the issues surrounding the micro-generation of renewable energy for homes as well as on the contentious and controversial issues surrounding global warming and climate change. You can find more resources at