top

The engadget interview with Sean Mccarthy-- obvious lies.

Post new topic Reply to topic FizzX.org Forum Index | Skeptics, sceptics, and Cynics    Page 1 of 1

Tue Jul 17, 2007 5:26 pm PostPost subject: The engadget interview with Sean Mccarthy-- obvious lies.
maryyugo
Regular Contributor
Regular Contributor


Joined: 13 Jul 2007
Posts: 114

Reply with quote

Here:

http://www.engadget.com/2007/07/17/the-engadget-interview-sean-mccarthy-ceo-of-steorn/1#c5977186

And my take on it (in comments to the interview):

I wish someone had asked Sean why if the "technology" boasts an efficiency of 485% above overunity, it's so difficult to test! Elsewhere, these jokers have claimed a power density of 0.5 watt/cc. That's comparable to AA batteries! Anyone have a problem proving that an AA battery makes electricity? Why is it such a difficult task for Steorn's gadget?

Overunity on a scale claimed by Steorn is extremely easy to test. It would take a few physics/engineering graduate (aided maybe my a magician to help rule out trickery) a few days at most. It requires no jury. I can do it in a vacant parking lot on a weekend if they would simply produce the machine!

What we have here is very clever misdirection -- the problem isn't that testing is difficult, prototypes are unreliable, the public won't believe... none of that crap. The problem is that Steorn has been unable since the start of this farce to produce a single credible document, device, video or other evidence that they actually have anything. All there is are videos and interviews with the CEO. And those are obvious baloney-- very clever and engaging baloney but purely silly.

Oh... and Dr. Mike is from the USA, not Canada. And what he was SPECIFICALLY promised BY SEAN that he would have two days to examine the device before the Kinetica demo AND HE WAS ENCOURAGED TO "BRING A SCREWDRIVER". What's Sean's lame excuse for why that didn't happen? And here is a blatant bald faced lie by Sean:

"He [Dr. Mike] has no other basis, he has nothing else to work on, other than sitting and having a chat with us."

That's bullshit! Dr. Mike is a member of the Developer's Forum and has received documentation and supposedly propriatary information under a non-disclosure agreement (NDA). Dr. Mike can't reveal that information but he reviewed it and he says it makes no sense. So Sean is simply not telling the truth when he suggests that Mike's opinion was based only on "sitting and having a chat".

In addition, Sean had every chance to show Mike and others "the corpse" -- the device whose bearings had failed so that it could be independently duplicated. But he didn't. And there's no "NDA" disclosure issue there-- that device was to have been shown in public! And Dr. Mike was to have been allowed to "take a screwdriver to it".

The only possible conclusion I can see from the above obvious misdirection is that Sean is a subtle, capable, high skilled and complete liar and that this is probably the main skill he has demonstrated in this entire time-wasting and money-grabbing endeavor.

Once more: large scale overunity if it existed would be easy to test by electricity generation and/or calorimetry. It does not require a jury. It can be done in a few days by reasonably expert people who are not difficult to find. There's nothing to suggest overunity here and there is much to suggest deliberate lies and misdirection by Sean McCarthy.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
 
Wed Jul 18, 2007 1:13 am PostPost subject:
Magnatrix
Site Admin


Joined: 02 Nov 2006
Posts: 52
Location: Canada

Reply with quote

Mike is not a member of the developer's forum.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
 
Wed Jul 18, 2007 10:25 am PostPost subject:
exco
Regular Contributor
Regular Contributor


Joined: 03 Apr 2007
Posts: 190

Reply with quote

I disagree with mary on only one point.

The misdirection was not "very clever" as she claims. It was rather amateurish. All his statements were shot through with contradictions of previou statements. The reason he got away with it was not because he was good at spinning a yarn. It was because the people he was addressing it to were stupid enough to believe it. He had deliberately attracted people who WNTED to believe him.

By placing a large profile advert, he was able to address a huge audience and some of those would be daft enough to believe it. Whether he was able to extract any money from these people we shall probably never know. I don't suppose anyone is keen to own up to have been ripped off by this man if indeed they have been.

I don't think there was anything particularly clever in anything the man said or did.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
 
Wed Jul 18, 2007 5:01 pm PostPost subject: Mike is not a member of the developer's forum.
maryyugo
Regular Contributor
Regular Contributor


Joined: 13 Jul 2007
Posts: 114

Reply with quote

"Mike is not a member of the developer's forum."

Apparently that's correct. I was aware that he had signed an NDA and had some proprietary documents therefore I made a minor if unwarranted assumption. However, I have no idea how that would change ANYTHING else of any importance. Mike has been in detailed conversations under NDA with both Sean and many members of the forum and also with Hal Puthoff and members of his organization. It isn't likely that forum members know much that Mike does not.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
 
Post new topic Reply to topic FizzX.org Forum Index | Skeptics, sceptics, and Cynics
View previous topic
View next topic
Display posts from previous:   




You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum