http://educate-yourself.org/lte/joecelldebunker18mar04.shtml
March 18, 2004
----- Original Message -----
From: Susan & Peter Eliot
To: John Cross
Cc: editorial@discover.com ; Editor@educate-yourself.org
Sent: Monday, March 15, 2004 12:52 PM
Subject: Joe and his x thing energy cell
RE: Joe energy cell.
Thanks for passing along information from Click here: The
Joe Energy Cell by Ken Adachi I certainly hope someone at one of the scientific
journals or gee-whiz magazines takes the time to investigate and report on
this type of thing. Perhaps I'll make a request of just that kind of review
and comment from one of my subscriptions, Discover Magazine. Unlike magazines
like Science or Scientific American, which generally tax my short-term-reader
style of consuming information, I think Discover might reach me.
A couple of points relevant to the article on the Joe Energy Cell:
Information in the media stream, (including the article by Ken Adachi ),
that will attract meaningful attention must not contain in its body any denigrating
personal references to the character of those who are skeptical. Such content
is an immediate put-off to those who would likely do the most to advance the
cause of genuine development and utilization of such a claim of alternative
energy technology.
Another difficulty is the unapologetically anonymous nature of the origin
of the primary work. Those who wish to remain apart from the impact of notoriety
can interpose intermediaries or mechanisms to buffer ridicule or invasive
attention easily enough without resorting to "mystery-man" tactics.
Secretiveness raises red flags immediately and serves only to put many of
the public, scientific and industrial community on the defensive at best.
More commonly, I suspect those who would generate concurring testimony are
induced to dismiss claims from secretive or mysterious sources as being "crack-pot"
or not worth the time and energy it takes to ferret out the truth behind a
claim.
The above two points reveal my approach to the human condition as an organic
life form with altruistic capabilities on a physical planet: We are here and
can do what we want, but it doesn't seem to further our situation if we choose
to interact in such a way that we set up obstacles in each others' way which
demand some of us to suspend an effort toward intelligent investigation, shared
experience and communication. Indeed, to introduce a new idea in such a counterproductive
manner, regardless of the facts behind the claim or idea, serves to demonstrate
and further other capabilities of the human condition such as a desire for
attention, self-delusion, greed, or a wish for power and control over others.
Peter Eliot
----- Original Message -----
From: Editor
To: Susan & Peter Eliot
Sent: Monday, March 15, 2004 4:08 PM
Subject: Re: Joe and his x thing energy cell
Re: Why send this to me?
To read your lofty opinions on a subject of which you wallow in naiveté?
Ken Adachi
----- Original Message -----
From: Susan & Peter Eliot
To: Editor
Sent: Thursday, March 18, 2004 1:29 PM
Subject: Re: Joe and his x thing energy cell
Dear Ken Adachi,
Gee - how pleasant and magnanimous...
"naiveté"? Show me more, so I have something to work with,
like peer review references and further reading / links or discussions which
define such things as quantifying ways to measure negative attitude that makes
the Joe cell fail to work!!!
YOU'RE SURE TO GAIN FAVOR with such an attitude!
----- Original Message -----
From: Editor
To: Susan & Peter Eliot
Sent: Thursday, March 18, 2004 4:20 PM
Subject: Re: Joe and his x thing energy cell
Hello Peter,
I'm not interested in gaining your favor.
You're a naive ass if you think that people like Joe can promote, discuss,
advertise, patent, publish , 'peer review' (what a joke!!), debate, present,
or manufacture a free energy device without encountering an immediate and
real threat to their life, their freedom, their ability to earn money, and/or
jeopardize their family's safety.
Does the name Stanley A. Meyers of Ohio hold any meaning for you?
While Stanely was an extremely bright guy, he made the fatal error of clinging
to belief in the utter rubbish and foolsihness that you espouse. It cost him
his life. And it cost the world an opportunity to retrofit their car for about
$600 and run it with only water-any type of water, from distilled to sea water.
Not only cars, but ships, planes, rocket engines, in fact anything that runs
with a motor. Oh yea, his process allowed an unlimited extraction of free
electricity from the water.
How about Edwin Gray? Ever heard of him? He tried to do it 'your way' too.
He was murdered in Riverside county in the early 1990's after presenting an
auto angine that ran solely on Radiant energy back in 1973. If he wasn't blocked,
those engines would have been on the road by 1975
If you weren't such a self assured and wholly arrogant ass, I would tell
you the source of the 'attitude and orgone functionality ' reference to which
you allude. Well, OK. I'll give you a little hint: W.R.
Saionara, Ken
----- Original Message -----
From: Susan & Peter Eliot
To: Editor
Sent: Thursday, March 18, 2004 7:26 PM
Subject: Re: Joe and his x thing energy cell
Greetings, Ken
Well, we certainly got off on the wrong feet, didn't we? I'm certainly not
depending on gaining your favor, either. But in the interest of sharing information
and exchange of knowledge about the Joe Energy Cell, lets get past generating
the kind of "highly negative emotions or personality or character",
which could discharge Energy Cells! I admit that I haven't heard of neither
Stanley Meyers or Edwin Gray. Did Stanley have anything to do with the gizmo
to attach to / magnetize the fuel line in a car? I heard the fellow who came
up with that simple device had some trouble getting started, but now see the
rig readily available through Harbor Freight Tools. I concur that those who
buck the current of mass culture and power interests attract far too many
unwelcome responses.
My immediate question, after being unpleasantly surprised by your first terse
reply to my observations, is one you may wish to contemplate - Why do my observations
on the effect of your characterization of others or the impact of secretiveness
create such a hot-button for you? We don't have to like each other's opinions.
I doubt my opinions on these specific issues has relevance to the operation
of a Joe Energy Cell, which I trust is the more important fact to establish.
I was relating the impact on me of your derogatory approach and secretiveness
in general. Please at least work with me. As you are the only one I, as yet,
know of that has any connection with this technology, it is incumbent upon
me to make an effort to keep the communication line open.
Thank you for referencing the text, The Joe Phenomenon by Barry Hilton, the
videos and other materials in your article. I'd like to know about their availability,
so I can get other input. If you can help to make the work of Joe more easy
to follow and understand, rather than name-calling me along with others who
fail to recognize this knowledge, I would appreciate it. Could you provide
a bibliography and name sources for copies of the book, experimenter's guide,
videos and other literature you mentioned as well as ways to contact the authors,
(other than Joe)?
Of specific interest to me:
Are there working drawings, construction diagrams, photographs or stills
from videos which show variants of the Joe Energy Cell which have been known
to work? Have Joe Energy Cells been adapted to engines with fuel injection
rather than carburetion?
In the process of polishing some of the parts, what is used to do the polishing
and what degree of smoothness is necessary as a minimum goal? (I know smoothness
is quite relative - some new materials being developed for ceramic finishes,
when compared under electron microscope, make common glazes look like the
crates of the moon.)
Have you any updates on the acquisition / creation of correct kind of water?
What about proper containment, storage, transport and "shelf life"
of water before it is to be used?
To maintain a cell with a "boost" of 12 volt battery electricity,
what amperage needs to be applied? I suspect the amount of current available
for one minute must be important.
If you can help, thanks!
Peter Eliot
----- Original Message -----
From: Editor
To: Susan & Peter Eliot
Sent: Tuesday, March 23, 2004 11:10 AM
Subject: Re: Joe and his x thing energy cell
Hello Peter,
Since you decided to respond in a positive and open minded fashion, I'll
address your questions in a similar vein. I apologize for being so harsh with
you in my previous e-mails, but I had assumed that you were a skeptic of the
usual 'debunking' variety, a breed with whom I have little patience (I'll
explain a bit later why I feel that way). However, I also had another motive
for pricking you: I wanted to see how you would react. If you came back with
expletives and anger, it would have confirmed my suspicions, but since you
came back with sincere inquiry, I'm willing to invest the time to explain
my position.
Let's begin by examining your first e-mail, which consisted of four paragraphs.
While your first paragraph expressed a positive interest for more investigation
into the Joe cell, your remaining three paragraphs were devoted to skepticism
and criticism of my article. If I was a person who knew nothing about the
Joe Cell, or of ether physics, or the topic of free energy, and had only read
your e-mail, then I think I would come to the conclusion that the Ken Adachi
article wasn't worth reading as it was overly laden with 'denigrating personal
references...of those who are skeptical' and 'secretiveness' among other charges
(By the way, most of the statements that you made in these three paragraphs
are filled with implied assumptions and presumptions -undoubtedly inculcated
from your school days- which are flat-out mistaken; your reverence for skepticism
is one of them).
Here is your second paragraph:
Information in the media stream, (including the article by Ken Adachi
), that will attract meaningful attention must not contain in its body any
denigrating personal references to the character of those who are skeptical.
Such content is an immediate put-off to those who would likely do the most
to advance the cause of genuine development and utilization of such a claim
of alternative energy technology.
If we lived in a balanced world where science and scientists, academic institutions,
the government, etc. were TRULY interested in the pursuit of truth and the
advancement of knowledge to benefit humanity, then there would be
an appropriate place for intelligent skepticism, or better yet, a view towards
prudent and thorough inquiry and investigation. But that's
not the sort of world we live in. We live in a country where the free pursuit
of scientific knowledge, especially in schools, has been undermined, subverted,
and channeled into a narrow band of accepted 'norms' centered on the Einstein
model of the universe. This was not an accidental development. It was intentionally
set into motion and ushered into being by the Fabian Society of England beginning
near the turn of the 19th and 20th centuries. By the middle of the 20th century,
the Fabianists had infiltrated and co-opted every major institution of higher
learning in America to promote only the Einsteinian mechanical, chemical view
of a dead universe- devoid of spirit and the Aether.
Whenever we touch on the topic of science in America (or the western world
for that matter), skepticism is "King". The vast majority
of 'professionals' of science, whether they work in a laboratory or teach
in the classroom, or pontificate from their easy chairs, will automatically
exhibit a knee jerk critical response to new inventions, new information,
or new ideas and will automatically accuse the inventor of deceit
or quackery unless that inventor can demonstrate 'double blind', 'reproducible',
laboratory environment 'proof' employing the skeptic's instrumentation, the
skeptic's accepted theories, the skeptic's "laws" of science, the
'peer review' of similar minded skeptics, and their world view paradigms.
Anyone who dares not genuflect deeply before any of these altars, will soon
encounter a wall of scorn from Establishment science. That's not science
Peter, that's religion.
You are 180 degrees out of phase with reality when you say that my analysis
of the destructive role of skeptics is a 'an immediate put-off to those
who would likely do the most to advance the cause of genuine development...'.
Nonsense. Skeptics have never caused the advancement of anything- except maybe
the girth of their bloated egos.
The truth is just the opposite: conventional science skeptics have done more
harm than any group to destroy the enthusiasm and initiative of real inventors
and genuine scientists who stumbled upon something of value in their basement
workshops only to be met with establishment jeers when he attempts to explain
his invention in order to secure development funding. The handful of non establishment
inventors who do manage to secure funding in the beginning at least,
will soon have the money rug (or their life) pulled out from under them when
the Big Boys get wind of the project. This has happened repeatedly throughout
the 20th century: Edwin Gray, Antoine Priore, Stanley Meyers, Viktor Schauberger,
Thomas Moray, John Hutchinson, Philo Farnsworth, Harry Perrigo, John Searle,
Nikola Tesla, ...the list goes on and on and on.
New inventions which can clearly demonstrate a new phenomena of
energy (like the Joe cell) should be greeted with wonder and delight, not
skepticism or derision simply because the establishment knuckleheads (or the
inventor!) cannot adequately explain the theory of its operation.
The theory of why it works is not important when compared to the fact that
the damn thing works!!!
Why anyone in their right mind would stop dead in their tracks and tie themselves
in knots arguing about the theory of operation-when the device is free wheeling
right there on the bench, happy as a clam- is beyond me. Yet that's exactly
what happens when you allow the sacred cow of skepticism to dominate the parade
and just sit there in the middle of the road.
In your third paragraph, you said:
Another difficulty is the unapologetically anonymous nature of the
origin of the primary work. Those who wish to remain apart from the impact
of notoriety can interpose intermediaries or mechanisms to buffer ridicule
or invasive attention easily enough without resorting to "mystery-man"
tactics. Secretiveness raises red flags immediately and serves only to put
many of the public, scientific and industrial community on the defensive
at best. More commonly, I suspect those who would generate concurring testimony
are induced to dismiss claims from secretive or mysterious sources as being
"crack-pot" or not worth the time and energy it takes to ferret
out the truth behind a claim.
Here is where your naivety really takes center stage. It's hard to imagine
that an adult living in the year 2004 could actually say such things with
a straight face, but apparently you believe it, so I'll tell you 'The Rest
of the Story'.
The government has its surveillance tentacles imbedded in every square inch
of this planet. It is not possible to produce a significant anomalous
energy output or build a device that extracts substantial free energy from
the ether or build an antigravity device, or make anything that would revolutionize
our present dependence on electric companies, oil companies, etc. and avoid
government detection. Your notion that such an inventor can 'easily' avoid
'invasive attention' is precious beyond words. Government or Illuminati goons
will usually visit the intrepid inventor long before the public hears of his
work and have a little 'talk' with him. The 'talk' goes something like this:
"Check with us first before you go public with anything. If we approve,
you can do something on a small scale just as long as the technology is
not easy to copy and the application is limited. If you have something that
we want, we will take it from you , we will not pay you for it, and we will
forbid you from talking about it, unless you want to be imprisoned (or killed)
for breach of national security."
In earlier decades in America, the Illuminati might send in ringers posing
as collaborators or assistants and sabotage the equipment beyond repair (Moray),
or get their government stooges to put the inventor in jail on fraud charges
for 'deceiving' investors with a car that 'couldn't possibly run on (radiant)
free electricity' when it was conveniently arranged for newspaper reporters
(and photographers) to be present when Harry Perrigo was 'exposed' while demonstrating
his car for investors in the early 1930's. One of the 'reporters' tore the
backing off the front seat of the car while Perrigo went into his house to
get something and exposed a bank of 3 or 4 small, lead acid batteries. The
batteries weren't big enough to power an electric bicycle, let alone propel
a car at 80 miles an hour for hours on end (as demonstrated by Perrigo), yet
this was all the 'proof' that that DA needed to convict poor old Harry. One
can only imagine the genuine look of astonishment on Perrigo's face
when these planted batteries were 'discovered'.
In the case of Joe, he never sought publicity or profit from his invention.
The 5.5 hours of video tape showing Joe in the shop and on the road using
the Joe cell, talking about how it works, etc. were shot by amateurs. The
Joe video tapes cover a a period of five years, from 1993 to 1997. The man
never attempted to sell anything, not even the video tapes. Joe's humility
and altruism, and the fact that he lived in sparsely populated Australia,
is probably why the tapes were able to get into circulation before the Illuminati
goons had a chance to pay Joe the obligatory 'visit' (which did occur shortly
after the video tapes went public in 1998). Following the 'visit', Joe went
into hiding for nearly a year. He was worried that his family would be harmed.
The goons had stripped his shop bare to the walls: tools, cells, equipment,
etc... everything.
You last paragrapgh states:
The above two points reveal my approach to the human condition as an
organic life form with altruistic capabilities on a physical planet: We
are here and can do what we want, but it doesn't seem to further our situation
if we choose to interact in such a way that we set up obstacles in each
others' way which demand some of us to suspend an effort toward intelligent
investigation, shared experience and communication. Indeed, to introduce
a new idea in such a counterproductive manner, regardless of the facts behind
the claim or idea, serves to demonstrate and further other capabilities
of the human condition such as a desire for attention, self-delusion, greed,
or a wish for power and control over others.
Here again, you're spinning your wheels. These are high minded
words that sounds nice, but they have nothing to do with reality. You don't
seem to realize who the real players are behind the scenes. You talk
about obstacles that 'we' set up to thwart communication, etc. How foolish
can you be? You've accepted the cover story that everything is on the up and
up; that scientific investigation is open and honest, and that anyone who
develops a free energy device or any revolutionary invention for that matter
is going to be able to patent it, bring it to market, promote it, etc. That's
not reality.
First, the military/industrial complex and the so called secret
government have been hoarding (and keeping secret from the public) all of
the real inventions of merit for the best part of the 20th century. They simply
steal the technology from inventors who are not under their control. It the
guy balks too much, he's either intimidated, or abducted and placed under
mind control or he's killed. Any patent application that is submitted to the
US Patent Office is FIRST reviewed by the military and if they see anything
that even borders on advanced technology, they will take it from you and threaten
you not to talk about it or even work on it.
Some bright scientists/inventors are willing to work for them,
some are co-opted, and some are placed under mind control. The government
has been seeking out bright children for decades and have often programmed
those kids under mind control to serve their agenda. This is the real purpose
behind the personality assessment tests that were developed in the late 40's
and early 50's. Every SAT score for every child in this nation is reviewed
by government computers and those with advanced minds are monitored and and
targeted for induction into government service.
When you add on the advanced technology that was obtained from
extraterrestrials through treaty arrangements, the secret government and their
Illuminati pals have technologies that are roughly 100 years in advance
of anything that the public is being told about. The world could have been
enjoying unlimited free electricity and free telephone communications since
1910 with the building of Tesla's Magnifying Transmitter at Wardencliff on
Long Island. The system worked perfectly. All of the experimental bugs were
solved in the 1890's when Tesla spent a year at Colorado Springs, Colorado.
We could have been free of oil dependence even before we became oil
dependent. The government has equipment that can reverse any disease condition,
can reverse aging, can neutralize any radioactive substance, can travel in
antigravity spaceships, and can transport a man in time or space to any location
in the universe or on earth. We have particle beam weapons that are powerful
enough to blow a hole clear through a small moon! And that's just the tip
of the iceberg.
I hope you can now understand why I accused you of wallowing
in naivety in my initial response to you. The only way that someone can make
free energy inventions known to the public, and allow the public to take advantage
of the knowledge, is to GIVE AWAY the information freely and try to keep your
identity secret so the goons won't come after you. If you try to patent it
and market it, you will be taken down. A recent casualty was the Lutec free
energy device out of New Zealand. There was a big publicity splash a couple
of years ago, radio shows etc., and then NOTHING. And that's what always
happens whenever naive people cling to the illusions they've been conditioned
to believe-NOTHING
I'll send another e-mail with info about the Joe cell.
All information posted on this web site is
the opinion of the author and is provided for educational purposes only.
It is not to be construed as medical advice. Only a licensed medical doctor
can legally offer medical advice in the United States. Consult the healer
of your choice for medical care and advice.