Patent App. 11/527906; Filed 2006, published yesterday...

MarkRWC · Post by **MarkRWC** » Sun Jul 17, 2011 6:22 pm

Long time reader, first time poster.

I, for one, would definitely appreciate it if this thread could be 'unhijacked' and we could see/discuss Nebel's arguments.

chrismb · Post by **chrismb** » Sun Jul 17, 2011 6:24 pm

Joseph Chikva wrote:
KitemanSA wrote:Yes, I know from first hand knowledge that this can be hard when he posts nasty statements about you, but...
Hehe
Mr. Second Hand Informer knows from the first hand
And the hardest is that those "nasty statements" correspond to true.

MSimon, do we really have to carry on tolerating this?

His purpose, seemingly, is simply to disrupt threads. If he has any other purpose to post, then I do not see what it is. It doesn't inform, support, question, challenge. It is just inane antagonisms. Presumably this is because his own idea was summarily ignored by the whole forum, except [unfortunately] me who dared to question his comprehension of physics.

C'mon. Ged rid. Please.

If you don't, then this forum will go the way it goes. I can't carry on posting with this kind of interference in a discussion. It's like having a huge leach on your back, sucking the life and energy you have interest for out of you.

Joseph Chikva · Post by **Joseph Chikva** » Sun Jul 17, 2011 7:13 pm

chrismb wrote:...except [unfortunately] me who dared to question his comprehension of physics.

My dear Chris,
As you can see the stick has two ends. I did not complain when you said stupid even saying that I do not know the cornerstones of physics. Exactly my comprehension of physics is not very deep. But who claims? You?
Your comprehension is much weaker. Unlike you I know basics very well and also every day I work on my education. As I need that.
And unlike you my statements are well argued. At least I do not say nonsenses.

As you have already understood I will stop from myself.
Best wishes.

Enginerd · Post by **Enginerd** » Sun Jul 17, 2011 7:16 pm

MarkRWC wrote:Long time reader, first time poster.

I, for one, would definitely appreciate it if this thread could be 'unhijacked' and we could see/discuss Nebel's arguments.

Agreed. Do not feed the trolls.

Betruger · Post by **Betruger** » Sun Jul 17, 2011 7:17 pm

Atonement. Now we can move on to new topic discussion and if anyone pees on the floor again they bear consequences.

sbw · Post by **sbw** » Sun Jul 17, 2011 9:42 pm

Enginerd wrote:
MarkRWC wrote:Long time reader, first time poster.

I, for one, would definitely appreciate it if this thread could be 'unhijacked' and we could see/discuss Nebel's arguments.
Agreed. Do not feed the trolls.

+1

Joseph Chikva · Post by **Joseph Chikva** » Mon Jul 18, 2011 2:28 am

Betruger wrote:...they bear consequences.

Which consequences? Are you quite adequate?
Hanging, quartering, arrest or what?

rcain · Post by **rcain** » Mon Jul 18, 2011 4:02 am

JC - i have quite enjoyed some of your contributions on this board, on those occasions you have either

a) been quite funny
b) made some valid contribution to the discussion

at the moment you are being neither.

please grow up or shut up.

back to the topic.

Joseph Chikva · Post by **Joseph Chikva** » Mon Jul 18, 2011 4:17 am

rcain wrote:JC - i have quite enjoyed some of your contributions on this board, on those occasions you have either

a) been quite funny
b) made some valid contribution to the discussion

at the moment you are being neither.

please grow up or shut up.

back to the topic.

you also please grow up or shut up.
as I also have quite enjoyed with some of your contributions

applicability to an account of LENR phenomenon in general - well, seems quite a good place to start to me - even if it is 'mistaken' in some detail, its working in the right language, at the right scale. maybe the 'revised- WL', who knows.

rcain · Post by **rcain** » Mon Jul 18, 2011 5:00 am

the topic is 'Patent App. 11/527906; Filed 2006, published yesterday...'

could you please carry on any other 'conversations' elsewhere.

ps. does anyone have a link please to the patent info? (cant seem to retrieve it).

Joseph Chikva · Post by **Joseph Chikva** » Mon Jul 18, 2011 5:04 am

rcain wrote:the topic is 'Patent App. 11/527906; Filed 2006, published yesterday...'

could you please carry on any other 'conversations' elsewhere.

ps. does anyone have a link please to the patent info? (cant seem to retrieve it).

Here respectful Chris has mentioned another patent about God Power.
Also very interesting. And useful.

So, grow up or shut up yourself.

rashudo · Post by **rashudo** » Mon Jul 18, 2011 9:49 am

Chrismb please ignore the troll and concentrate on giving us a comprehensive summary of nebel's arguments. When you starve a troll of attention he will find new feeding grounds.

Joseph Chikva · Post by **Joseph Chikva** » Mon Jul 18, 2011 11:42 am

rashudo wrote:Chrismb please ignore the troll and concentrate on giving us a comprehensive summary of nebel's arguments. When you starve a troll of attention he will find new feeding grounds.

Chrismb has a nervous breakdown.
But I can feed you with corresponding patent application. I think that is the following:
http://prometheusfusionperfection.files ... tent08.pdf
Read and enjoy. Or eat and enjoy.

polyill · Post by **polyill** » Mon Jul 18, 2011 11:49 am

rashudo wrote:Chrismb please ignore the troll and concentrate on giving us a comprehensive summary of nebel's arguments. When you starve a troll of attention he will find new feeding grounds.

+1 yep. that would be the solution.

Betruger · Post by **Betruger** » Mon Jul 18, 2011 12:17 pm

The above isn't what documents Chris refers to.