Two Answers and a Question

I've decided to take the poll off the blog. I've noticed the politically inept are voting early and often. Serious comments are welcome. I consider a serious comment one that addresses a point.

John Collins responded to this blog with a simple 'why?' The purpose was as incomprehensible to him as the laws of physics seem to be. The answer is quite simple. When you had the opportunity to check a personal attack against me you choose to defend the attacker with, "I'd like to jump to Clarkie's defence." When you questioned my motive at BAUT with, "I wonder why you appeared on this forum bessler007. Was it spite for being thrown of another forum?" you couldn't have been more wrong. It wasn't the result of being "thrown off", it was the manner it happened.

You took it further with this lie, "I don't know why - I have done nothing to you." That's a lie. You had just lied to everyone reading the thread about being a moderator. I've already supplied those facts with screen shots. Are you really that dense to think you can lie to my face and suppose you "haven't done nothing to me?"

So there's your answer to the first question. The audacious gall and manner you attacked my credibility with, caused me to consider yours. Could you post a question in that private forum of scuz buckets (that you moderate) for me? Ask if I've redeemed myself yet. If not I'll keep working at it.

Your question from the Are you optimistic ?

I'm sure I'm going to regret this, but what, Bessler007, is your explanation for the success of Bessler's wheel? You seem to be saying that the laws of thermodynamics have been broken.

The evidence for Bessler's success is circumstantial. Put another way, there is no material fact to support his claim and any solution to perpetual motion is both highly unlikely but to the point stands on its own merit. There would be no rational connection between the two. The italicized emboldened words are technical legal terms. If you'd like to rebut, your answer should consider them with their appropriate meaning. I can't imagine why you would have any regrets with that.

So I've taken the time to give you the two answers to the questions you've asked and I'd like to ask a question in return. It's the least you could do.

How do you like me now?

Copyright © 2007-2009 bessler007

Proper Credit

It is proper to give credit where it's due. Although I'm still thinking about this I'd like to thank John Collins for putting the idea on the table.

The implication that I am involved in a fraud is offensive to me and I'm sure would be equally offensive to other members here if they were subjected to such innuendo.

I'm not sure how John arrived at the implication. I previously agreed with another posters comments:

Never attribute to fraud that which can be explained by credulous hope.

John leaped from 'credulous hope' to 'involved in a fraud' but I need to think about it more before I take that leap of faith with him

The link above is from a thread John entitled Bessler's "perpetual motion machine". I've read the thread and I never saw evidence describing this alleged machine. There were a lot of calls for some but none came. They were calls to the author of the dubious book entitled ‘Perpetual Motion; An Ancient Mystery Solved?’ I'm sure a lot are still wondering what evidence there is the ancient mystery was solved.

There is a new book in the works with the proposed title 'The Orffyreus Code, A Blueprint for Free Energy'. I think the titles from the recent thread to the former book to the proposed one might indicate a pattern of fraud but as I began I never gave it much thought until John mentioned it. John deserves full credit for this idea. Thanks John.

The economic interest John has with his inaccurate view of contemporary physics demonstrated by his philosophical attempt to rewrite the science sans mathematics (and the sight of formulae and equations can deter) combined with creating confusion about his writings with inaccurate titles is derived from selling books. I have no idea how good a living it is yet that's beside the point.

Should I be mentioning these facts? Do they vilify John? It would be kinder to John not to discuss these unpleasant facts but their discussion is kinder to those that might be snookered in to giving him some cash for his books. I suppose that's the greater good.

The site, besslerwheel, has an economic interest in persuading people to suspend rational thought and take a leap of faith into the cult of Bessler by accepting donations through paypal. The third pillar of that cult showing up in the private forum John moderates (screen name ovyyus) sells books also.

John has taken the time to ask me three questions and in the next entry I'd like to answer those questions. I began this blog stating I was interested in feedback and to accomplish that I'm going to include a poll. I really am curious.

Thanks for taking the time to read the blog. If you have any comments please leave them.



Copyright © 2007-2009 bessler007

Pay no Attention to the Man behind the Curtain

John Collins demonstrates his authoritative manner of dictating reality in this thread from BAUT entitled Bessler's "perpetual motion machine". He made a very feeble attempt to dismiss my statement that he is 'crank leadership' with this comment:

Well,well, so bessler007 has turned up here! Just to correct some false information, I am not and have never been a moderator on besslerwheel.com nor any othe forum and neither do I wish to be - too much hassle in my opinion.

That dismissal is at odds with this screen shot from the forum.


It might be John piled up these stats at the forum:

Joined: 05 Nov 2003
Last Visit: Sun Dec 23, 2007 8:36 am
Total posts: 950
[2.09% of total / 0.63 posts per day]
Find all posts by John Collins
Word Count: 123,338
129.83 average words per post

...without knowing he was a moderator. One needs to be a member and logged on to get that screen shot. NB his name shows up green and the legend indicates that is a moderator designation.

If that isn't damning enough there is this screen shot of a report from their data base indicating John is the moderator of a private forum within BesslerWheel:

This shot points to the heart of the crank leadership and in the next entry I'll explain their financial interest in this cult.




Copyright © 2007-2009 bessler007

Coercive Tactics

I'd like to speak to the last point of the definition:

• designed to advance the goals of the group's leaders to the actual or possible detriment of members, their families, or the community.

and specifically to the point of 'possible detriment'. If it were possible to demonstrate PM, that would be one of the most astounding discoveries in physics of all times. One member of the leadership at BesslerWheel has a site that attempts to explain physicists don't know what they're talking about. He also started a thread at BesslerWheel with the same theme. John Collins explains this contrary philosophy at his site here and at BesslerWheel with the thread Why Gravity wheels don't violate the laws of Physics.

I am documenting all the links I cite. I know sometimes facts have a way of disappearing.

Would it be detrimental to a person having discovered the impossibility of PM to not fully appreciate what they had discovered? I think so yet you can make up your own mind. The facts speak for themselves. In these two links I see a concerted effort on John's part to muddy the waters of the 'believers'.

If you read the first page at BesslerWheel and the first response the administrator/owner, Scott Ellis, exemplifies another point of the definition

• powerful group pressures

... in the edit of the post and the language used:

[edited by scott: deleted space wasting attachments. Mik, please control yourself so I don't have to.]

Right on the hills of that edit comes one from an other of the leadership:

Nothing to criticize with a negative view, with the exception of your first response! I received one comparable on another thread from the same member.

I don't think 'believers' is an inaccurate description of what the leadership expects of the members of that forum. John begins the thread with:

I've written down my thoughts about why I believe Bessler's wheel is possible and doesn't break any rules.

These examples show how members are treated if they fall outside the mold of a true believer. There are many other examples. In the next entry I'll document what I see as collusion among the leadership with an economic interest in this cult.




Copyright © 2007-2009 bessler007

The Cult of www.BesslerWheel.com

This is much harder than I initially thought. Organizing the facts and presenting them in a coherent manner isn't easy. Maybe the first place to begin would be to cite a definition of a cult then point out where I see that in the leadership of some perpetual motion (PM) seekers. This definition is by Louis Jolyon West and from wiki:

"A cult is a group or movement exhibiting a great or excessive devotion or dedication to some person, idea or thing and employing unethically manipulative techniques of persuasion and control (e.g. isolation from former friends and family, debilitation, use of special methods to heighten suggestibility and subservience, powerful group pressures, information management, suspension of individuality or critical judgment, promotion of total dependency on the group and fear of [consequences of] leaving it, etc) designed to advance the goals of the group's leaders to the actual or possible detriment of members, their families, or the community."

Now in my opinion this definition fits BesslerWheel.com to a 'T'. That's just my opinion. With that and five bucks you can get a coffee at StarBucks. What I intend to do is to take parts of that definition and post actual facts and let you make up your own mind. Why? I was asked that by one of the crank leadership. It is a good question.

The 'why' is this. I'm interested if anyone else has noticed what I have. Simply for confirmation of what I see. I'm curious. I don't feel limited in any way by these folks. They are no threat. I am honestly interested if anyone would agree with my conclusions.

The first part of the definition:

A cult is a group or movement exhibiting a great or excessive devotion or dedication to some person...

is answered in the name of the site; Bessler. It is dedicated to the vindication of his claim of having discovered perpetual motion. The site is dedicated to Bessler. Is that excessive? I think so but as I mentioned you can make up your own mind. I have observed that people that come to the site not showing due reverence to Bessler are immediately judged with the reputation system. Their reputation goes in the red. That is one of the dynamics of the structure I don't have evidence of. You could join the forum and attack Bessler as a fraud and see for yourself. You will soon see how the community thinks of your opinion no matter what your case.

The reputation system is an undemocratic tally of opinion where the more reputation you have the more your vote counts. I suspect at times leadership votes in unison on some matters. I also suspect some in leadership have sock puppets that vote them into leadership. I do have evidence of that.

That evidence supports these points of the definition:

employing unethically manipulative techniques of persuasion and control

use of special methods to heighten suggestibility and subservience, powerful group pressures

I'll close with this thought. Even in the highly unlikely possibility someone would discover perpetual motion at a table top scale that would in no way vindicate Bessler. He was sufficiently vague in all he said as to obscure any meaning or connection to a solution. I mention that because I imagine the possibility isn't as unlikely as most thinking intelligent educated people might suppose.




Copyright © 2007-2009 bessler007

I am a Crank

Hello, my name is Bessler007 and I am a crank. I insist on being thought of in those terms for a reason. In the unlikely event I happen to discover a supernatural mechanism that will demonstrate perpetual motion I don't want it to ever be forgotten physicists know this is impossible. I'm using 'supernatural' in the sense of 'outside scientific explanation'. I have never attempted to employ fairies or ghosts in any model I've built.

What I've learned is people often want to spin the facts for some reason or other. I think a good way to avoid that is to look at the terms of a record. Although 'crank' is a pejorative, it would take more than name calling to bring me around to a point of view.

There are several reasons for starting this blog. I wanted a place I could post ideas and have a chronological record of them. I also always wanted to have access to those same ideas. A key reason for this blog is to detail what seems to me to be the cult practices of perpetual motion (PM) seekers. I never gave the matter much thought in the last 4 years or so of being around the cult but recently I was shunned. That was a real eye opener. I started looking at the tactics of the leadership. They are very similar to cult practices.

When I finish presenting the facts of the matter I'll begin with an explanation of why I think perpetual motion is possible. I'll share some very general ideas that I suppose are original. From time to time I'll insert a poll to get some feed back.

Thanks for visiting the blog and I hope you enjoy it.



Copyright © 2007-2009 bessler007