User talk:Prebys
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Welcome!
Hello, Prebys, I am ZappaZ 
and it is my pleasure to welcome you to Wikipedia.
Editing articles in Wikipedia can be a very rewarding experience. Just become acquainted with some basic information on what is Wikipedia and how the community works. You can start by reading The five pillars of Wikipedia, to orient yourself.
I hope you like the place and decide to stay and contribute to build the best encyclopedia ever, here are a few good links for you:
I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! By the way, please be sure to sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~) to produce your name and the current date, or three tildes (~~~) for just your name. If you have any questions, you can post to the help desk or ask me on my talk page. I will be happy to assist you.
Again, welcome! --ZappaZ 17:56, 13 September 2005 (UTC)
Contents |
[edit] Thanks! Bearden
Hello - Thank you so much for your recent updates to the Tom Bearden article. You stated what was said, and sourced it. Really good job! Thanks, Jens Koeplinger (talk) 04:15, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Awesome
Good work on that citation!Kmarinas86 (6sin8karma) 20:17, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Bury the hatchet
It was a rough ride on the PMM issue with the WFC. I attempted to point something out and it's an issue that could easily creep up. If I could think of it, others could come to the same conclusion and start changing things without consulting the true experts. I'm sorry for being antagonistic. It was part ignorance and part acting on my behalf and I hope the article can be understood as a teaching/research tool for people who will inevitably come across the WFC.I55ere (talk) 17:01, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
[edit] JobeHinnid
You are obviously aware that your contributions are directly viewable right? Therefore if you are such an expert on Tom Bearden why are removing my references repeatedly when you should know full well that I'm stating facts. Part I of the Energy from the Vacuum documentary series is all about Tom Bearden, he narrates it and is featured in it. The Internet Movie Database credits him as a writer on the production, did you look that up Mr.Co-Intel Pro? Have you yourself ever tried building a vacuum energy device, no, you haven't and therefore you're feigned interest in this person and subject is exposed. You have absolutely no business editing the pages of true patriots and true Americans. —Preceding unsigned comment added by JobeHinnid (talk • contribs) 05:58, 16 May 2008 (UTC)
[edit] free energy suppression
Hey hello, you wrote:
- Please stop removing all the comments you don't like from the Talk:Free energy suppression page. Removing the comments of a dozen editors all at once clearly falls under the heading of "vandalism" and will be reported as such if it happens again.Prebys (talk) 20:24, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
I'm sorry I deleted your comments, I didn't think you wanted to work at the article.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Talk_page_guidelines#How_to_use_article_talk_pages Keep discussions on the topic of how to improve the associated article. Irrelevant discussions are subject to removal.
Take this for example in the context of describing the suppression of Yull Browns work:
- I won’t even bother touching the conspiracy aspect of this. He didn’t invent Brown’s Gas. It’s just a name for a stoichiometric mixture of oxygen and hydrogen. It also isn’t free energy. It’s just the Water Car scam played from a different angle. — NRen2k5, 15:07, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
The author is uninformed and preforms irrelevant original research. He introduces something he refers to as "the water car scam" concluding mister Brown to be a fraud. This kind of insults and fraudulent accusations can just be removed, NRen2j5 did not make his accusations evident. We don't debate on this level. I think the author was just having a bad day. Yull Brown spend his whole life drawing attention to the technology he was eventually murdered and now we have a world energy crisis.
NRen2k5 thinks he can do away with clean nuclear energy calling the documentation ow that is really bad while one has to be a licensed nuclear physicist to even work with radioactive materials.
The DEO observed the experiments then (3 months later) claimed they had seen nothing. Dan Halley observed their evasive behaviour and documented his observation which was published by the [planetary association for free energy].
The article needs false accusations like the water car scam from media sources not original research.
Arthur Rubin decided to call my good friend Hudchison a fraud on his talk page as his motivation for deleting the references. User_talk:Arthur_Rubin#unsourced_BLP_violations Accusing people of being a fraud without having anything to show for it is a fraudulent activity. Arthur's only comment on Talk:Free_energy_suppression reads:
- There's no reference for the accusations of fraud that I can find. If accurate, please link references to the appropriate statements. I see your version has a better tone, but I saw an unsourced change in content. — Arthur Rubin | (talk) 08:05, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
You wrote things like this:
- Of course, Zero Point Energy is also a handy, impressive, buzzword because people can google it and get lots of genuine hits, just like they can google the words with which someone like Tom Bearden peppers his exhortations. It's just that when you put them together, they're meaningless. This sort of semi-meaningful techno-babble dates back at least to the Keely Motor, in the late 19th century, which Keely claimed drew energy from the "luminiferous ether" (actually not a totally crazy claim at the time). In fact, it drew energy from a hidden pneumatic system. 19:38, 16 May 2008 (UTC)
And you write:
- These beliefs seem to feed primarily to the huge overlap in conspiracy communities; that is, people who believe in massive free energy cover ups also tend to believe in UFO cover ups (not to mention Moon Hoax cover ups, Philadelphia experiment cover ups, 9/11 cover ups, etc, etc). Thus, the "reality" of UFO's is used to bolster the "reality" of ZPE. It's probably OK to leave it here. When I get some time, I'll try to improve the wording. 17:04, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
I have posted more then enough material to falsify your accusation that my believes seem to feed primarily on the huge overlap in conspiracy theories; that is I believe in the free energy cover ups because I also tend to believe in UFO cover up and I also believe in the Moon Hoax and I believe in the Philadelphia experiment coverups, 911 cover ups etc etc and that I thus use the reality of UFO's to bolster reality of ZPE.
I think it's great how you have managed to tell me how I feel about everything (lol) but I think I have posted enough material to falsify your telepaty. No offence of course. I'm just trying to explain why I had deleted this. The contributions didn't look like progress of the article to me. You say I cant just delete peoples comments because I don't like them. But I love your comments and I should delete them when you are not talking about the article.
Wikipedia:Talk_page_guidelines#How_to_use_article_talk_pages
If you don't agree then you can revert it again and that will show me you did want to discuss the subject. The discussion seems pretty much dead to me, removing the original research based bashing of the inventors seems perfectly kosher to me.
The current page is growing towards un informed sources calling each inventor a loon and a goobly gook scam fraud insane lunatic etc etc And it's full of lies to justify all this. If anything it doesn't build towards any article I want to work at. If all response I get is no response I cant be asked to write anything.
I can answer questions and I can search references but if other authors do not cooperate by doing a bit of research of their own and posting some constructive sources then the article will suffer from what ever obstruction they apply to it's progress. The page is not for original personal attacks. You need to cite insults from sources.
Like " the fuel injected lunatic " [[1]][[2]]
I don't see any UFO's here? Do you? haha Here is a short wiki on the suppression: [[3]]
You say "play nice or don't play at all." Yes, I shouldn't have reverted your comments if you want to work at the article. But false accusations are not suppose to go on the talk page, there has to be proof then you can accuse people of things. I know you are not obligated to do anything but please keep things clean and honest.
Thank you, Go-here.nl (talk) 23:27, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
