Water Fuel Secrets

[Aaron]

get the distinctions right

But at least Aaron allows for dissent

I don't care about disagreements but I won't tolerate blatant lies. Jon Abel claims Meyer never mentioned Nitrogen in any of his documents. I proved that Meyer has many references to not just "non-combustible gases" but actually defines these non-combustible gases as nitrogen.

Being that my claims are true and his are false and on top of that he claims I'm selling bogus information, which I'm not, he will have a lot of legal problems to deal with - retaliation is one thing, but slander/libel/defamation of character is another when it is based on lies. Everything I said about Jon I can prove and actually have already done so. I'm not talking about the stupidity of his little schoolboy insults. I'm talking about claiming that I'm selling false information.

You're also stating something that shows a misunderstanding. If you're talking about total output compared to what is input into the circuit from only the power supply, that is COP or coefficient of performance (NOT EFFICIENCY). If you're talking about total output compared to total input (both power supply and free environmental input), then you're talking about efficiency. With something like this, there will NOT ever be over 100% efficiency, but there can be over 1.0 COP.

The main reference to the red car if you don't take it out of context is that the inlet valve of mixing ambient air with the hho and magnetic field is changing the fuel into something that has a controlled burn.

[jonabel1971]

Did I say you specifically were banned, Einstein? You are gonna have to show me where I said that - I don't remember saying that.

Otherwise, your questions relate to people who are selling things and getting patents.

I'm not interested in patents, or selling things. But, go for it, if you feel you have something working. I've seen what capitalism does to new technology - and to the people trying to sell it.

As long as it still says Stan Meyer is a fraud on Wikipedia, new patents around similar tech are going to cause inventors trouble.

Why do you think JL Naudin gives it away?

Instead of bringing forth the locations - in Stan's documents - where Aaron purports that Stan mentions "Nitrogen", Aaron has chosen to continue claiming that I am a fraud. He still hasn't produced any quotes by Meyers about Nitrogen. 50 patents, a 200 page Tech Brief, and numerous movies.
Not one quote.

I don't think Aaron wants to read any of it - so he just makes it up as he goes along. Right, Aaron?

Aaron may not consciously THINK he is lying, but if you do a search of Meyer's documents, you will see exactly how many times Nitrogen is mentioned.

Aaron is the only one who will have to deal with legal problems, since he continues to try to sell his own ideas - and then slap Meyers name on them. Stan would have rolled over in his grave if he could see the nonsense that Aaron continues to spew here.

Aaron can sue me if he wants, because no lawyer would take his claims seriously. Lawyers aren't gonna fight when they realize that Aaron hasn't done any research into his claims.

Anytime Aaron says ANYTHING about Meyers that can be captured (as on this forum) - that isn't a direct Meyers quote - and he can get in trouble legally by mis-representing the work of a dead man.

Aaron either doesn't realize that - or chooses to ignore his actions.

Again, Stan's tech is open-source - a "take and give" situation. Sites like this need open-source information to exist. The fact the Aaron is saying ANYTHING on these sites before or after selling a book is risky.

He doesn't know any better.

Aaron claims that I AM going to have legal problems - after he got scared that I mentioned the same thing to him. Unfortunately, he doesn't realize that he can't fight open-source - something he doesn't quite understand. No matter how much money you throw at it. Sand in one's fist.

If there's no money made in the process of showing the flaws of Aaron's work - what lawyer is going to fight that?

I don't use money as a weapon, as Aaron does. I use it to build my own stuff - so I have something to test and show others.

Einstein, go get your patents if you wish. But, personally, I would recommend against it.

I think that attitude just forces people into a corner - at least with new technology like Meyers. And, it scares new people away from wanting to do it themselves. And, as you know, there's too many people willing to yell "Fraud!"

But, having a patent or copyright tends to "empower" some. It will put you in the same boat as Aaron - if that is what you want.

The problem really stems from people who feel they can say whatever they want - without consequences. Even if there is no credibility what-so-ever, Aaron can put questions in sheepish minds by adding the word "Secrets" to his book titles. That's the insanity of it.

He's using old, crappy psychology as a marketing ploy to sell books to the lazy, uninformed, and greedy. If what he says sounds too good to be true.....be willing to call him on it. He's the one benefiting financially from printing this stuff.

But at least Aaron allows for dissent--you have to grant him that. He reinstated my post questioning his statements, and I thought you'd been banned?

------
Jon: My interest in your work boils down to the following Q's:

Would your system even need to exceed 100% efficiency (energy output > energy input) to be commercially viable? Given the auto industry's recent announcement of an R&D shift toward hydrogen, wouldn't improving upon conventional electrolysis be sufficient to apply for patent protection? In addition, of the terawatts of electricity generated globally, how much is unused simply because we lack a way of storing it, an 'energy currency' as Jeremy Rifkin describes it.

I'm unconvinced Stan Meyer's WFC ran on nothing but water, especially given that Aaron, who claims to know Meyer's work well, doesn't see the need to clarify the discrepancy between his posts on the topic (they appear to be the same car--both red and both with lawnmower carbs):

"It runs on 100% water with a pinch of salt..."
"They make it look like water fuel, but 2 gallons of gas an 2 liters of water..."

[jonabel1971]

Why open-source wins.

Here you go, everybody.

This 1 webpage has downloads of Stan's 51 patents, news articles, and the Tech Brief. It looks like his brother's stuff is also there.

Search out the word "Nitrogen" in these files, and you will see how truthful Aaron is.

Stan's Patents

[Ein~+ein]

Jon: You didn't answer my questions... nor read my post carefully probably because Aaron distracted you. If he's not helping or hindering you from achieving your goals, ignore his comments.

Recall what your original purpose was for joining this forum, state it, and stick to it. My goal was to find out if there was anything to the numerous claims being made:
1. Is your system more efficient than conventional electrolysis?
2. Would it need to exceed COP 1.0 to be commercially viable?
---------------
Aaron: Thanks for explaining the difference between COP and efficiency.

[Ein~+ein]

Jon: You didn't answer my questions... nor read my post carefully probably because Aaron distracted you. If he's not helping or hindering you from achieving your goals, ignore his comments.

Recall what your original purpose was for joining this forum, state it, and stick to it. My goal was to find out if there was anything to the numerous claims being made.

So, once again:
1. Is your system more efficient than conventional electrolysis?
2. Would it need to exceed COP 1.0 to be commercially viable?
---------------
Aaron: Thanks for explaining the difference between COP and efficiency.

[jonabel1971]

1. I don't know - because my flow gauge was wet.

2. I don't know - because (as I said) - I am not worried about commercializing it.

3. Go ahead and ignore Aaron yourself. Maybe I'm not here for the reasons you think?

Jon: You didn't answer my questions... nor read my post carefully probably because Aaron distracted you. If he's not helping or hindering you from achieving your goals, ignore his comments.

Recall what your original purpose was for joining this forum, state it, and stick to it. My goal was to find out if there was anything to the numerous claims being made:
1. Is your system more efficient than conventional electrolysis?
2. Would it need to exceed COP 1.0 to be commercially viable?
---------------
Aaron: Thanks for explaining the difference between COP and efficiency.

[Aaron]

Stan Meyer Nitrogen

Here you go, everybody.

This 1 webpage has downloads of Stan's 51 patents, news articles, and the Tech Brief. It looks like his brother's stuff is also there.

Search out the word "Nitrogen" in these files, and you will see how truthful Aaron is.

Stan's Patents

Jon Abel is a liar making fraudulent claims about Meyer. Those documents on that website spell out Nitrogen in quite a few places.

Here is one Meyer's patents that spell out exactly what I have said from the beginning and that Jon Abel denies. Anyone can search that patent number at Espacenet - Advanced search for example and pull this one up. There are MANY patents from Meyer where he spells out what I have said.

[jonabel1971]

Hey, you found one, Nature Boy. Good for you.

I knew I could get you to finally look up the information - and share it for free.

When your credibility is on the line - that's what you have to do.
That why we started this exercise so long ago - just to prove that you can't always sell it.

Sometimes, you HAVE give it away - even if it's for your own good. My point about capitalism is proven.

Jon Abel is a liar making fraudulent claims about Meyer. Those documents on that website spell out Nitrogen in quite a few places.

Here is one Meyer's patents that spell out exactly what I have said from the beginning and that Jon Abel denies. Anyone can search that patent number at Espacenet - Advanced search for example and pull this one up. There are MANY patents from Meyer where he spells out what I have said.

[jonabel1971]

Work is done

Hi EVERYBODY,

My work is done here. You'll find me on YouTube. Aaron makes it impossible for real researchers to share their work here.

Honestly - without better ways to organize alternative energy discussion websites, it is easy to see that they will continue to do more harm then good.

And, they have shown me something over the last month - they are filled with the lazy, greedy, deprived, and uninformed people - including the moderators.

I would NEVER have done my research if I had been actively using these sites during my time at NDSU. The behavior on Aaron's site especially makes me feel dirty - and I need a shower now.

I found no reason to join these groups in the past, but people asked me to. All I sense here is people with too much time to complain - and not enough time to do any research themselves.

I gave away enough information for anybody to get themselves started down a path of Meyer's research - cheaper and simpler than most. You don't need any books - such as the one's they sell here - to get these machines to work. You just need patience and courage.

Again, people will call you a bomber directly to your face.

I recommend finding friends through RWGResearch.com (an open-source site). Russ and his friends have been kind enough to compile much of the information, which has filled in numerous blanks that kept this technology obscure for many years.

When I expand my research further, I'll be getting most of the information from Russ's site - due to no pressure, selling, or abuse from the founders. They have a weekly (semi-weekly?) TV chat night where you can watch Russ work on his stuff live.

I also recommend JL Naudin's website. This gentleman is the current living master of bifilar circuits, and measuring their behavior. The amount of work this man has put into showing how to obtain accurate results is astounding. Much can be learned from his methods, but he is a hard man to reach.

Again, neither site tries to sell you anything.

Adios.

[Aaron]

Jon Abel exposed

Hey, you found one, Nature Boy. Good for you.

I knew I could get you to finally look up the information - and share it for free.

When your credibility is on the line - that's what you have to do.
That why we started this exercise so long ago - just to prove that you can't always sell it.

Sometimes, you HAVE give it away - even if it's for your own good. My point about capitalism is proven.

You have been exposed as a fraud, period, and that is what hundreds of thousands of people around the world will clearly see.

You weren't trying to get me to post one for free so don't try to act like you were - you're fraudulent claims are exposed and you are stooping to the lowest levels to save face - anyone not brain dead or in a trance can see that. You had access to that same group of patents just like everyone else and you claimed from the BEGINNING that you read them all and there are no references to Nitrogen.

You're psychologically incapacitated and are suffering from some serious delusions - I already posted a bunch of free references in the water fuel secrets thread in Meyer's own words from the beginning and you still denied those! So trying to convince anyone that you actually wanted me to post something for free when I already did multiple times is a display of the low mental gutter that you are operating from.

And you're so blind to your own BS that you forget that in the ionization thread and others, I ALREADY posted many of these references including graphics from Meyer's patents that discuss NITROGEN - and this was years ago. I've been giving this out for free since before you probably ever heard about Meyer.

It is one thing to stand your ground but it is a whole other thing to prove to everyone how stupid you are and to what low levels you'll stoop to. Your logic is deficient of any common sense or critical thinking whatsoever. Basically, you accomplished several feats that include but are not limited to proving you are a pathological liar.

And the most obvious one that anyone with common sense can clearly see, and that you are completely oblivious to, is this simple fact that flushes your whole degenerate claim down the toilet about proving a point about capitalism - it is really simple... From the beginning of your so-called "replication" thread, you have denied that Meyer ever said anything about Nitrogen and this was all BEFORE I ever released the report Water Fuel Secrets.

So only a zombie would buy your BS that you're trying to prove some point about capitalism. All your denials and claims that Meyer never said anything about Nitrogen were PRIOR to me offering Water Fuel Secrets for sale and everybody knows that to be a fact - this is all public record and defeats your blatant, bogus, mentally degenerate claim to save face that you were trying to prove a point. You either suffer from short term memory loss or you really are a pathological liar, fraud and con.

[pentarbe]

living master?

I also recommend JL Naudin's website. This gentleman is the current living master of bifilar circuits, and measuring their behavior. The amount of work this man has put into showing how to obtain accurate results is astounding. Much can be learned from his methods, but he is a hard man to reach.

Again, neither site tries to sell you anything.

Who are you in bed with?

I guess you haven't heard that his "open source" website is to draw in other people who share their work online and then he goes to patent it as his own at the French Patent Office. Do the patent searches and you'll see all the "open source" technologies he has patented over the years!

[Aaron]

Stan Meyer Nitrogen

Aaron has chosen to continue claiming that I am a fraud. He still hasn't produced any quotes by Meyers about Nitrogen. 50 patents, a 200 page Tech Brief, and numerous movies. Not one quote.

I don't think Aaron wants to read any of it - so he just makes it up as he goes along. Right, Aaron?

You just don't quit - read this: http://www.energeticforum.com/226680-post2.html

"

• and other non-volatile gasses such as oxygen and nitrogen. The hydrogen gas with the attendant non-volatile gasses in a controlled ratio are fed via a line to a controlled air intake system. The combined hydrogen, non-volatile gasses, and the air after intermixing are fed to a combustion chamber wherein the mixture is ignited. The exhaust gasses of the combustion chamber are returned in a closed loop arrangement to the mixing chamber for the mixture of volatile as the non-combustible gasses.
• [0006] More specifically, the generated hydrogen gas is fed to a gas mixing chamber, wherein the hydrogen gas is inter- mixed with non-combustible gasses. The mixture is fed to a carburator (air intake mixture) system.
• [0007] The gas mixture is'fed through nozzle to chamber in a jet spray. Valve or gate controls the amount of air intake to the jet spray. The gasses combine with the air to form a gas mixture of hydrogen, non-volatile gas, and oxygen. The mixture now combustible, but not volatile, is entered into a combustion chamber"

Meyer defines non-volatile NITROGEN as a non-volatile gas.

He also defines the non-volatile gases as being synonymous with using the term non-combustible gases.

The gases combine with AIR to form a gas mixture of hydrogen, non-volatile gas (NITROGEN) and oxygen. The mixture now combustible, but NOT VOLATILE, is not entered into the combustion chamber.

Plain water gas from the cell is EXTREMELY VOLATILE. That is just the way the so-called HHO gas is. It becomes NON-VOLATILE by blending it with NITROGEN! And THAT is the key to how he ran an engine on water, air and electricity. He wasn't making big amounts of gas. He started off with common flat plated electrolysis cells with pulsed DC. No VIC and all the resonance business. That all came after and is NOT foundational to the real foundation of Stan Meyer's technology. the real foundation is a simple pulsed dc electrolysis cell gas production is diluted with NITROGEN. Without the nitrogen, the water gas is very volatile and is not in the preferred combustible state that is needed for an engine.

So if you see anyone claiming that the resonant circuits of Meyer's to create water gas efficiently is the place to start with Meyer's technology in order to get it to work, they actually just skipped all the foundational steps that Meyer started with and went straight to the resonant circuits without even considering that it was never what made his slow burning flame, the foundation of his work, to begin with.

Nitrogen - Nitrogen - Nitrogen

So now you know, if you already didn't, that when Meyer talks about the thermal energy, THAT is what he is talking about. Making the water gas non-volatile or slow burning.

And all the graphics I posted - anyone that has even the most elementary experience with searching Meyer's patents knows these images are throughout his patents. And anyone that READS the abstract, description and claims of the patents with these images will see Meyer talked repeatedly about NITROGEN!

I posted this graphic years ago right in this forum and gave patent numbers. Anyone can search the patent number that mentions Nitrogen - right here for free for the last several years - without charge!

[Jeff Pearson]

you may also notice that "non combustible gas" is in quotations in many of Meyer's patents. In one of the old patents, he specifically defines said non combustible gas as nitrogen.
Samuel Ruben patent #1431407 is very interesting. replace carbon monoxide with nitrogen in his example. This technology goes way back

[Aaron]

Meyer's synthetic fuel

you may also notice that "non combustible gas" is in quotations in many of Meyer's patents. In one of the old patents, he specifically defines said non combustible gas as nitrogen.
Samuel Ruben patent #1431407 is very interesting. replace carbon monoxide with nitrogen in his example. This technology goes way back

Hi Jeff,

Meyer does say you can use carbon dioxide or argon to dilute the fuel, but he specifically says that this is not feasible for the average expert so it isn't practical at all. Also, the nitrogen gives a more desirable chemistry.

He does define the non-combustible gas as nitrogen and also says that "burned air" is also non-combustible gas.

With carbon monoxide, that is the basic molecule that attaches to hydrogen for the classic syngas such as wood gas, etc... Meyer actually uses the words SYNTHETIC GAS for his fuel creation of hho + air + exhaust.

One thing I have experimented with quite a bit is electrolyzing graphite as the positive terminal to create a nano-colloidal carbon solution. It was for a battery additive, but doing this also lets you get 500-1000% above Faraday while creating a hydrocarbon fuel. I wasn't using this as a fuel, but it is created during the process. It is known that carbon electrolysis can create more water gas for less input since a single cell can operate down at 0.1-0.2 volts instead of the common 2v range.

Nunnerley was using carbon dioxide in a similar manner but for fuel purposes - he discusses this a bit in some of his threads.

[Aaron]

Water Fuel Secrets

If you purchased Water Fuel Secrets (http://www.waterfuelsecrets.com), go to the download page and get the updated version 1.1. I added 13 pages of references from Meyer discussing the magnetization of the fuel, nitrogen and references where he admits he is creating a synthetic fuel, meaning he is NOT running his dune buggy on hho.

Upgrades are included.

The book is $7 but will go to $11 soon so if you purchase the book now, you'll get upgrades no matter what the price increase will go to. I'll be raising prices in the next week.