• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Why is there so much technology surpressed?

I could be living on the Starship Enterprise D by now if those filthy government types got out of the way.

I could be battling evil holodeck Lincoln as we speak. :(
 
Palandro said:
lol, here is shows you have no clue at all.
I told you it would be surpressed, so one cannot mass produce this at the moment, don't you read?

And Bill Gates?

Really???????????????? the enormous super psychopath???? who owns the WHO, the CDC and what not?
He is a killer, really. Seen what that psychopath has done to children in Africa?

There is a reason why these psychopathic idiot is called Kill Bill!

View attachment 67287267

Please, get Real!


who are these people?
Click to expand...
That rambling nonsense has nothing to do with the topic of the thread. Present your evidence.
 
Palandro said:
An enormous amount of technology is surpressed. If there was no surpression we would be so much further.
But it seems there are some powerhungry idiots ( it's called 'government', see my other thread.) who do not want to give us (the masses) more freedom etc.
Click to expand...
Supressed
 
Palandro said:
lol, here is shows you have no clue at all.
I told you it would be surpressed, so one cannot mass produce this at the moment, don't you read?

And Bill Gates?

Really???????????????? the enormous super psychopath???? who owns the WHO, the CDC and what not?
He is a killer, really. Seen what that psychopath has done to children in Africa?

There is a reason why these psychopathic idiot is called Kill Bill!

View attachment 67287267

Please, get Real!


who are these people?
Click to expand...

What exactly is stopping you from mass producing this technology if you know people who work on it?
 
lwf said:
What exactly is stopping you from mass producing this technology if you know people who work on it?
Click to expand...

Reality
 
Palandro said:
An enormous amount of technology is surpressed. If there was no surpression we would be so much further.
But it seems there are some powerhungry idiots ( it's called 'government', see my other thread.) who do not want to give us (the masses) more freedom etc.
Click to expand...

There are plenty of historic examples of industry suppressing technology. When you have a vested interest - when your profits come from older, less efficient technologies - then it pays for you to buy out newer technologies and suppress them.
 
MamboDervish said:
There are plenty of historic examples of industry suppressing technology. When you have a vested interest - when your profits come from older, less efficient technologies - then it pays for you to buy out newer technologies and suppress them.
Click to expand...

Present some of these historic examples, please.
 
zyzygy said:
Present some of these historic examples, please.
Click to expand...

While I'm not inclined to do your research for you, many come to mind.

As just one example, when I was a young man, all car batteries required service. You had to check the water level in them by unscrewing every cell, and filling it up. If you didn't, they would dry out and become unrecoverable. The maintenance free battery was invented 20 years before the public ever saw it. The invention was bought out by a prominent battery manufacturer, and put on the shelf for at least 2 decades - because they rightly felt that they would sell more batteries as owners failed to properly service them.

The fact is, it has never been unusual for industries to quash innovation when it interrupts their profits. Just look at how many alternative energy companies have been purchased by the fossil fuel industry.
 
MamboDervish said:
While I'm not inclined to do your research for you, many come to mind.

As just one example, when I was a young man, all car batteries required service. You had to check the water level in them by unscrewing every cell, and filling it up. If you didn't, they would dry out and become unrecoverable. The maintenance free battery was invented 20 years before the public ever saw it. The invention was bought out by a prominent battery manufacturer, and put on the shelf for at least 2 decades - because they rightly felt that they would sell more batteries as owners failed to properly service them.

The fact is, it has never been unusual for industries to quash innovation when it interrupts their profits.
Click to expand...

I agree here, but it goes even deeper.

Just look at how many alternative energy companies have been purchased by the fossil fuel industry.
Click to expand...

I tend to disagree here, because there are no problems with fossil fuel, but of course I might be wrong, maybe you can give an example.
 
Palandro said:
I agree here, but it goes even deeper.



I tend to disagree here, because there are no problems with fossil fuel, but of course I might be wrong, maybe you can give an example.
Click to expand...
Mash is that you?
 
I have been working in high tech R&D for nearly 4 decades, and I have to say there are lots of
avenues of research that look very promising from the outside.
As you start to dig into them, there is always some limitation, some new requirement.
Many times, the gap between the theoretical and what we can physically do, is simply too wide.
Other times, you might be able to make something, but it costs more than it's value.
I have heard that a Particle accelerator can make lead into gold, but it costs hundreds of time more than the gold is worth.
The only thing in your list that is even plausible true is cold fusion, because the patent office has been rejecting
any patents that have any reference to cold fusion.
You can read about Dr. Randall Mills, journey,
News & Updates | Brilliant Light Power
 
longview said:
The only thing in your list that is even plausible true is cold fusion, because the patent office has been rejecting
any patents that have any reference to cold fusion.
[/url]
Click to expand...

Why the only thing? btw the list is way longer. Did you know it is possible to get water out of rocks, e.g. in the desert?
and there is soo much more.Or get water out of any form of air. be it in the desert or anywere else?

For you working in R & D, I agree there is a huge gap between theory and practice. Unfortunetaly most 'scientist'don't get that. You see the same thing with solar pannels and wind turbines. ( see my other thread.) People are unaware of all the practical things that come with that.They can't see it just doesn't work at all.
 
MamboDervish said:
While I'm not inclined to do your research for you, many come to mind.

As just one example, when I was a young man, all car batteries required service. You had to check the water level in them by unscrewing every cell, and filling it up. If you didn't, they would dry out and become unrecoverable. The maintenance free battery was invented 20 years before the public ever saw it. The invention was bought out by a prominent battery manufacturer, and put on the shelf for at least 2 decades - because they rightly felt that they would sell more batteries as owners failed to properly service them.

The fact is, it has never been unusual for industries to quash innovation when it interrupts their profits. Just look at how many alternative energy companies have been purchased by the fossil fuel industry.
Click to expand...

In other words, you can present no examples. What a surprise!
 
Palandro said:
Why the only thing? btw the list is way longer. Did you know it is possible to get water out of rocks, e.g. in the desert?
and there is soo much more.Or get water out of any form of air. be it in the desert or anywere else?

For you working in R & D, I agree there is a huge gap between theory and practice. Unfortunetaly most 'scientist'don't get that. You see the same thing with solar pannels and wind turbines. ( see my other thread.) People are unaware of all the practical things that come with that.They can't see it just doesn't work at all.
Click to expand...

Except that it does work fine.
 
Palandro said:
free energy (overunity devices), cancer treatments, cold fusion (yes it works), the neurophone, the work of Dr Reich, (orgon), the work of Nikolai Tesla and the list goes on and on and on and on...
Click to expand...

Lets start small.

You state "free energy".

Where? When? What? Who?

What "free energy" do you imagine?
 
Palandro said:
Why the only thing? btw the list is way longer. Did you know it is possible to get water out of rocks, e.g. in the desert?
and there is soo much more.Or get water out of any form of air. be it in the desert or anywere else?

For you working in R & D, I agree there is a huge gap between theory and practice. Unfortunetaly most 'scientist'don't get that. You see the same thing with solar pannels and wind turbines. ( see my other thread.) People are unaware of all the practical things that come with that.They can't see it just doesn't work at all.
Click to expand...
My point is that in most instances, it is not some grand conspiracy suppressing technology, but basic physics and material science limitations.
And you can only get water from air, if there is water in the air, and the lower the humidity the more difficult it is.
 
longview said:
My point is that in most instances, it is not some grand conspiracy suppressing technology, but basic physics and material science limitations.
Click to expand...

yes, partly true. And this is exactly why 'science' is structured as it is.So, yes there is a huge global conspiracy.

And you can only get water from air, if there is water in the air, and the lower the humidity the more difficult it is.
Click to expand...

Hmmm, no there is no difficulty at all, and it is very easy, and you get extremely clear water.
 
Palandro said:
I agree here, but it goes even deeper.



I tend to disagree here, because there are no problems with fossil fuel, but of course I might be wrong, maybe you can give an example.
Click to expand...

Hmm. I'm surprised you'd concede the former, and think that the latter is somehow a stretch. Fossil fuel is no different than any other industry - with the obvious exception of being much bigger and much more powerful than most. Fossil fuel has been notorious for doing anything and everything in its power to obstruct any emergent technologies that might compete with its profits for over 100 years. And yet you'd expect them to be different . . . now? Why? Would you suspect that industries that think nothing of poisoning the planet for profit, and lobbying for the overthrow of governments, would somehow be above absorbing competing energy technologies to protect their financial interests? Really? What is that based on?

I was first exposed to the idea of technological suppression by industry roughly 50 years ago. I had an acquaintance at the time who had a shop in Hudson County NJ. He was a bright fellow, Air Force veteran, and a very good chess player. He and his partners invented a plastic bicycle. It was lighter weight, faster to build (most of it was molded, so less assembly labor) and had other advantages in its resilience to abuse and ease of maintenance. I think he called it The Original Plastic Bike - O.P.B. - or something like that. They made a very clever and convincing TV ad for it which involved a truck running over the thing, and then a fellow just picking it up and riding away on it - undamaged. It just bent under the load, and flexed back into shape, and voila! - and that was just a prototype. They had patents on everything, from concept, to materials used, to manufacturing techniques.

Have you ever ridden a plastic bike? Of course not. The partners sold their idea - lock, stock and barrel - to a large prominent bicycle manufacturer - I believe he told me it was Royce Union - and they all made a fortune, each one clearing 6 figures. That was a lot of money 50 years ago. But the reason you've probably never even heard of the OPB is because it was not in the financial interests of the bike manufacturers to completely throw their industry under the bus - so to speak. They continued to make much heavier steel bikes that rusted, and, when they bent, went on the scrape heap and had to be replaced.

I dare say there have probably been hundreds of examples of industries buying up emerging technologies and patents, and shelving them because it was more profitable to do so. But as you'd expect, once they're bought out, the general public never hears about them - or they're only allowed to emerge decades later. Like the maintenance free car battery.
 
MamboDervish said:
Hmm. I'm surprised you'd concede the former, and think that the latter is somehow a stretch. Fossil fuel is no different than any other industry - with the obvious exception of being much bigger and much more powerful than most. Fossil fuel has been notorious for doing anything and everything in its power to obstruct any emergent technologies that might compete with its profits for over 100 years. And yet you'd expect them to be different . . . now? Why? Would you suspect that industries that think nothing of poisoning the planet for profit, and lobbying for the overthrow of governments, would somehow be above absorbing competing energy technologies to protect their financial interests? Really? What is that based on?

I was first exposed to the idea of technological suppression by industry roughly 50 years ago. I had an acquaintance at the time who had a shop in Hudson County NJ. He was a bright fellow, Air Force veteran, and a very good chess player. He and his partners invented a plastic bicycle. It was lighter weight, faster to build (most of it was molded, so less assembly labor) and had other advantages in its resilience to abuse and ease of maintenance. I think he called it The Original Plastic Bike - O.P.B. - or something like that. They made a very clever and convincing TV ad for it which involved a truck running over the thing, and then a fellow just picking it up and riding away on it - undamaged. It just bent under the load, and flexed back into shape, and voila! - and that was just a prototype. They had patents on everything, from concept, to materials used, to manufacturing techniques.

Have you ever ridden a plastic bike? Of course not. The partners sold their idea - lock, stock and barrel - to a large prominent bicycle manufacturer - I believe he told me it was Royce Union - and they all made a fortune, each one clearing 6 figures. That was a lot of money 50 years ago. But the reason you've probably never even heard of the OPB is because it was not in the financial interests of the bike manufacturers to completely throw their industry under the bus - so to speak. They continued to make much heavier steel bikes that rusted, and, when they bent, went on the scrape heap and had to be replaced.

I dare say there have probably been hundreds of examples of industries buying up emerging technologies and patents, and shelving them because it was more profitable to do so. But as you'd expect, once they're bought out, the general public never hears about them - or they're only allowed to emerge decades later. Like the maintenance free car battery.
Click to expand...

ok, thanks. Wel I was thinking you were referring to 'fossil fuels' because of the co2 crap. We need fossil fuels and they are not destroying the planet, but that is another discussion.

You wrote:

I dare say there have probably been hundreds of examples of industries buying up emerging technologies and patents, and shelving them because it was more profitable to do so.
Click to expand...

Yes, but it is probably way more. Anything that makes us less dependent on a industry it is attacked or removed.
So, it is all about power. We are being kept dependent by the surpressing of technology.



With regards to your last sentence:

Seen the video:

"Who killed the electric car?"
 
Palandro said:
ok, thanks. Wel I was thinking you were referring to 'fossil fuels' because of the co2 crap. We need fossil fuels and they are not destroying the planet, but that is another discussion.

You wrote:



Yes, but it is probably way more. Anything that makes us less dependent on a industry it is attacked or removed.
So, it is all about power. We are being kept dependent by the surpressing of technology.



With regards to your last sentence:

Seen the video:

"Who killed the electric car?"
Click to expand...

I seem to recall watching it way back when it came out - at the end of the last millennium. I don't remember much detail, but perhaps I can revisit it sometime this weekend and resume the discussion.
 
MamboDervish said:
I seem to recall watching it way back when it came out - at the end of the last millennium. I don't remember much detail, but perhaps I can revisit it sometime this weekend and resume the discussion.
Click to expand...

ok, would be nice.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom