🚀 go-pugleaf

nos wrote ...
> You seem to be missing the whole point.
>
> Knowledge is judged on it's own value not on who presents it. The standard
> editorial disclaimer in both Nexus and New Dawn is that the articles are
> provided as an ALTERNATIVE to mainstream science/media.

So the complete lack of cites of NEXUS in the mainstream scientific media
means either ;
1) NEXUS is publishing revolutionary articles that for some reason are not
given any credibility in the scientific community.
2) NEXUS is publishing the scientific equivalent of soap operas. It hooks the
reader with juicy ideas, but there is really no substance underneath.


> Because money is tied up in mainstream science there is no scientific
> honesty (there is some but ultimately things like ENERGY will answer to
> needs of the TNC's).
>
> If Nexus publishes an articled drawing on factual knowledge - no matter how
> much it conflicts with accepted beliefs it still must be considered on its
> OWN merits.
>
> nos

But the NEXUS articles I have read are complete CRAP !
Factual knowledge requires peer-reviewed support otherwise it
is personal fiction.

Like the articles about running your car on water.
Have you converted your car to water power ?
Why not, it's all perfectly possible according to NEXUS !

And the NEXUS articles about infinite energy.
There was a vague description of the circuit required to get an
excess of power out of a circuit with a battery.
Has anyone managed to build such a machine (recently) ?

I considered the articles I have read on their own merits.
If the information published in NEXUS was meritorious, then
I would expect at least one person to have utilised it.

But I know of NO machines using the technologies that
NEXUS have published.
(Perhaps except for the hydrogen car that Jo B. Petersen was
promoting some time ago. And what happened to that fantastic
technology, eh ?)

Slinger