Stirlingengineforum.com

Matt, IMO, seems to be our resident agent saboteur. I suppose he considers it his patriotic duty to protect US oil interests or something.

Matt, are you a Russian spy? Or maybe an agent from The Matrix? The gig is up!

Tom, that is mean and uncalled for. But sells better than the truth.

Secret agent 014 (twice as good as 007) just got back from another API meeting (and not the news group) where they were joking about Uncle Tom claiming he thinks that "hot air rises". However, every time I weigh a (sealed) can of air it weighs the same regardless of temperature. Heck, even when I change the amount of air in MY can, it weighs the same regardless of temperature !!! Thus (drum roll, please) I can only conclude from MY simple experiment that each gas molecule always weighs the same. How does this guy justify hot air rises when it obviously does not via my strictly controlled scientific yadda-yadda-yadda observation/study...

In desperate need of illumination - regards, 014

Thanks Matt. Good example of an inconclusive experiment. Maybe Tom will learn from that. Maybe not?

Maybe Matt could tell us again why "Uncle sugar" or the SEC or US military goes after free energy garage inventors to destroy them.

He seems to know all about it.

If you guys are so sure of your "Carnot" fairytale nonsense, why waste all your time on some obscure model engine forum trying to debunk a retired lawnmower mechanic just trying to build a better Stirling engine?

We are not trying to debunk you. You do that on your own. We are trying to add science and discuss new ideas. You keep asking why, we try to answer. Real science always helps.

Why are you here, fear of being debunked? Fear of being correct? I like your brain storming reports. Quite frankly you have intriguing and creative inspirations. It gets me to look at things from a completely different viewpoint. Thanks.

Fool wrote: ↑Wed May 01, 2024 7:19 am We are not trying to debunk you. ...

A blatant lie.

Nearly every post you've made in this forum since you arrived as "fool" has been almost invariably directed at proving me wrong.

Including this one:

You have "real science" and you are only trying to "help".

Your moniker is appropriate, but should include arrogant - - - -.

You think you and your so-called "scientific" opinions so-called "Laws" and general idiocy are infallible and beyond questioning.

That isn't Science, it's playing God.

I'm sorry you feel that way.

Fool wrote: ↑Thu May 02, 2024 5:16 am I'm sorry you feel that way.

How would you like me to feel?

Appreciative of your constant badgering, insults, accusations, long rambling posts full of mischaracterizations, strawman arguments and pure nonsense that wastes mine and everyone else's time and fills the forum with rubbish?

Thanks for keeping the signal to noise ratio here at a high pitched 100 decibel shriek.