Atlantis Online
March 29, 2024, 07:37:35 am
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: Ruins of 7,000-year-old city found in Egypt oasis
http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20080129/wl_mideast_afp/egyptarchaeology
 
  Home Help Arcade Gallery Links Staff List Calendar Login Register  

What would you contribute to science?

Pages: [1] 2 3   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: What would you contribute to science?  (Read 2271 times)
0 Members and 58 Guests are viewing this topic.
HereForNow
Superhero Member
******
Posts: 3279


HUH?


« on: October 23, 2007, 08:05:16 pm »

Joe Newman's
contribution to science-

1) Joseph Newman originally submitted his Patent Application in 1979 to an examiner (Donovan Duggan) who was later proven in a court of law to be technically incompetent in his own field of electrical engineering, and admitted under oath that he never really READ Newman's original patent Application.

2) That incompetent examiner told Newman that, "I will never be able to grant you a patent NO MATTER WHAT EVIDENCE YOU PRESENT." (So much for having an open mind to new technology.)

3) Newman then invited patent officials to come to his lab and see/test the technology for themselves. They refused.

4) Newman then invited patent officials to come to his lab ญญ at his expense ญญ and see/test the technology for themselves. They refused.

5) Newman then offered to bring prototypes to Washington, D.C. at his expense for them to test. They refused his offer.

6) Newman then transported an 800-pound unit on a flatbed truck over 1,000 miles to Washington D.C. (accompanied by Dr. Hastings), hoping that once he was they with the prototype they would agree to test it. They still refused.

7) The proven incompetent PTO examiner (Duggan) told Newman that his invention "smacked of perpetual motion." It was later determined in Federal Court that the examiner in question only briefly scanned his 70+ page Patent Application and admitted not having read it in detail.

Cool Newman appealed the decision of the initial examiner to a committee of patent examiners. They told him: "We believe your invention works, but your technical description is inadequate."

9) So Newman appealed THAT decision to a still higher board of patent examiners. They told him: "We believe your technical description is adequate, but your invention doesn't work."

10) Newman repeatedly tried to get them to test one of his prototypes, but patent bureaucrats refused.

11) It was at that point that he went to Federal Court, whereupon a technical expert and Special Master William E. Schuyler, Jr., appointed by a Federal Judge specifically concluded in his Report:

On March 3, 1986, as a result of the Court's questionable procedures, Joseph Newman made an Affidavit in support of a motion to disqualify Judge Jackson for his demonstrated bias and prejudice. On March 7, 1986, the District Court held a status conference to consider giving the NBS more time to test the energy machine in violation of the original 30-day time limit authorized by the U.S. Court of Appeals.

Immediately before the status conference began, Jackson's law clerk handed Joseph Newman's attorney John Flannery an order denying Joseph Newman's motion to disqualify Judge Jackson as insufficient, but without any discussion as to why the pleadings were factually insufficient. Judge Jackson then held attorney John Flannery in contempt for merely mentioning the pending motion to disqualify him. Jackson then gave the PTO/NBS until June 26, 1986 to test the energy machine --- 150 DAYS AFTER THE ENERGY MACHINE WAS ORIGINALLY DELIVERED.

Joseph Newman could not financially afford to be present with counsel and expert for the 12-hour workdays the NBS "claimed" they worked each day on testing the energy machine. It would have cost Joseph Newman over $60,000 to attend the tests and is one of the reasons that the U.S. Court of Appeals authorized the original 30-day test period limit. Former PTO Commissioner Mossinghoff misappropriated $100,000 to run the unprecedented tests which were in violation of the original order of the U.S. Court of Appeals. And according to the Patent Office, the tests cost approximately $75,000.00.

Although Joseph Newman has the "right" to attend the later, unauthorized tests on his now-confiscated energy machine, it was a "right" that he could not financially afford to exercise. Joseph Newman is not a large corporation. He is an inventor who lives by what he invents. Worse, the Patent Office said that they expect Joseph Newman to reimburse the Patent Office for ALL NBS tests!

 Angry

Yet through persistant efforts, Joe Newnam remained optimistic.
Representatives of the Energizer Corporation recommend
the largest load for their 9volt battery is a "TOY", and
they state that even a small toy is a "high, battery-draining device".


Even small toys can quickly deplete such 9volt batteries which are
typically used in low-load applications such as smoke detectors.


No way such a small battery would ever run a 7,500-LB MOTOR.  Right?


Wrong.


In the video below, the "Energizer Bunny" battery
not only runs the 7,500-LB Newman motor, but
it keeps right on running it --- not just for a minute, but for an hour!


This technology is proof that the strength of the motor's magnetic field
is dependent upon the VOLTAGE --- NOT the CURRENT!


And during the course of an hour, the batteries don't even heat up!


Conventional technology would say that such is not possible.


Yet, the Newman Energy Machine can accomplish that ... and much more.
In fact, the technology can be used to provide abundant, non-polluting,
inexpensive electromagnetic energy to power the world.


No more fossil-fuel-related pollution.
No more skyrocketing energy costs.
No more global warming caused by the use of hydrocarbon fuels.
No more nuclear reactor wastes.
No more coal-burning power plants.


This technology will provide abundant, inexpensive, non-polluting energy
to power homes, factories, automobiles, ships, planes, appliances ...
in short, the entire world can utilize this revolutionary technology.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-2699190582411275088&hl=en

Or for even more refferences to this and other exciting inventions that are not patented:
http://www.phact.org/e/skeptic/newlee.htm
« Last Edit: February 24, 2008, 11:37:48 am by HereForNow » Report Spam   Logged



Pages: [1] 2 3   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by EzPortal
Bookmark this site! | Upgrade This Forum
SMF For Free - Create your own Forum
Powered by SMF | SMF © 2016, Simple Machines
Privacy Policy