(Redpill) Thread

I would like to make a dedicated thread for discussion of the (Redpill) topic that is being discussed in other threads on this site, since we are going a bit off topic on those threads. Bob Greenyer has been been posting videos on the new Homosymbion Youtube channel here: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC9qvu9Gi2PdDZpDS1LyMGig

Here are some new videos showing an experimental setup that I believe Bob has said have come from an Indian researcher. I’m not quite sure what to make of them, except I notice that you can see small dots and vortices moving inside the tube. Perhaps Bob can explain more about what is shown.

  • Frank Acland
  • Timar

    Please excuse me when I have to use definite and thus offensive words here, but I really can’t watch this any longer. I begg you all: Stop taking this (RedPill) paranoia seriously!

    In addition to the “theories” brought forth in his videos, Bob made
    several other claims on this forum, including the allusion that the
    Evil Powers, manifested in the Clinton Foundation, have caused the earthquake in Haiti and financially profited from it. Those Powers can and do cause earthquakes and floods “at the flick of a switch”
    and they do so to “harvest a big booty of poor unrepentant souls”
    because, as we know from his video, they feed on souls that are unable
    to love. The original version of that comment also contained a claim
    that they are about to destroy the whole state of Ohio via a massiv
    flood or earthquake, but Bob later removed that part. Recently, he
    implicitly accused a critical commenter on E-Cat-World to be Bill Clinton, and that he and Hillary go after him.

    Come one, could it possibily get any more obvious than this?
    Instead of developing co-psychosis – which many commenters here in a disturbingly uncritical affinity to paranoina currently
    seem to do – and starting to seriously discuss the somewhat less
    outlandish parts of those schizoid delusions, people should accept that
    Bob is suffering from a serious medical condition and confront him with this grim reality instead of acknowledging his delusions and thereby irresponsibly fueling his psychosis.

    Bob, please forgive me! My words that are certainly hurtful to you. Believe me that I honestly don’t write this with the intention to hurt, but to help you!

    Frank, you should not allow this to continue in this form! Bob needs professional help. The affirmation he currently receives on this forum is only further worsening his condition!

    • radvar

      Concur.

      Yes, Ken Shoulders has done some interesting work, which seems fully legitimate, well summarized here: http://www.rexresearch.com/ev/ev.htm.

      And yes, genius and madness often go hand in hand.

      But Bob is exhibiting what is at best an immature overexcitement at potentials, and at worst what you describe above.

      The first step to restoration of health is to admit that you have a problem.

      Unless Bob is willing to acknowledge the possibility of being at least somewhat delusional then I agree with your post that Frank is doing Bob and the community a disservice by maintaining this thread.

  • Dr.Mike

    Bob,
    After watching your video and reviewing others comments, I believe that you did a very poor job of explaining your theory, especially in having bits and pieces scattered
    over a greater than 5.5 hour talk and referencing other patents and work without explaining how they were applicable to LENR and existing LENR devices. In particular, you mentioned Adamenko’s patent, but neglected to explain how conditions within a LENR device can duplicate those described within his patent (very high energy and extremely short pulses of electrons). Also, how do the conditions within a LENR device fit the requirements specified within Ken Shoulder’s patent for the formation of EVO’s?

    Another issue with your presentation is its general tone. While it is acceptable to be excited that you think you now have an understanding of LENR, the tone of your presentation seemed to be that you now know everything, when in reality, all you have is an unproven theory. Your presentation would have been much more effective if you would have just presented a clear and concise theory and suggested some means of testing that theory. Why don’t you ask some of your close friends what they think of your recent videos? I believe their feedback would be valuable to you.

    While any new theory could be rejected if assumptions behind the theory are known to be flawed, there really isn’t enough experimental data on LENR to reject or accept
    any theory, including yours. Likewise, for a theory on LENR to be accepted by the scientific community the experimental evidence must show both that one theory is correct and that other theories are excluded. We are surely a number of years away from gathering the required experimental evidence to verify a LENR theory.

    Although I personally can’t agree or disagree with your theory since there is no experimental evidence to support or reject your theory, there was one point (and I think only one) that I happen to agree with you. That is, I believe it would best to develop a device that will only put out excess heat when some additional small amount of “extra energy” is continuously supplied. A feedback loop should adjust some parameter of the “extra energy”, such as amplitude, frequency, or pulse rate, to control the device’s output. The device would automatically shut down if this feedback loop is broken and/or if the “extra energy” is turned off.

    I have a few recommendations that you might want to consider:
    1. For any future talk take ten minutes or so to prepare an outline, then discuss that outline at the beginning of your talk so that interested persons can listen to those portions in which they are interested without having to listen to those parts in which they are not.
    2. Explain your theory in a written format (a Power Point type description would be
    satisfactory to start as long as it was well referenced). It certainly would be good to explain the physics behind the mechanisms that are making LENR work. Just referencing various patents does not explain how those patents are applicable to LENR devices.
    3. Now that you have a theory, explain why past MFMP experiments failed to produce the desired results, and explain how those experiments need to be modified to get the excess heat that you were looking for in the original experiment.
    4. Re-run at least a subset of previous MFMP experiments to show that the knowledge
    of your theory can enable positive results in the old experiments.
    5. Replicate LENR devices that have already been granted patents, for example, Rossi’s
    patent #9,115,913 B1 issued August 25, 2015.
    6.Run experiments that will demonstrate your theory at the exclusion of other theories. For these results to be meaningful you should be able to predict the results of these experiments prior to running them.
    6.Document the results of all experiments whether they produced the desired results
    or not. Perhaps someone reviewing the documented results of failed experiments will offer suggestions that will greatly help future experimentation.
    7.Based on your theory, predict what is needed to enhance LENR devices. Then build those devices to show that through the knowledge of your theory, a better device can be built.

    One problem that I see with future MFMP work is that you now have a very vested interest in proving that your theory is correct, rather than determining whether or not it
    is correct. Will the results of experiments that don’t support your theory be buried by MFMP? I sincerely hope not!
    Dr. Mike

  • wpj

    Saw the first video and decided to stick to the beer.

    • Bob Greenyer

      Probably best. I’ve got a few for later in the fridge. Staying at my friends house on top of a dormant volcano they own.

      • wpj

        As they would say in Postman Pat – “He’s so DRAM-ATTIC” (need a Welsh lilt for it to work)

  • Bob Greenyer

    June

  • Gerard McEk

    Maybe I have missed something in the AMA, but I did not see a clear recipe for LENR. I do believe LENR can be dangerous and as long as there is no good theory we should be very cautious with it. Muons, tachions, or EVO’s can be propelled away without noticing if we are not aware that we have to look for those. I have doubts that a microwave can initiate the fusion in a EVO soaked metal, maybe a (green or blue) laser can.
    To prove the connection with 9/11 will be hard and the story about the world of the spirits, will be impossible. It would have been better that you would not had shared that part openly, Bob!

    • Axil Axil

      A EVO produces monopole magnetism which converts protons and neutrons into mesons. Anything that produces anisometric magnetic flux lines will produce matter disruption.

      The reason to bring up the characteristics of magnetic field lines is not to engineer a LENR system based on magnets, but to reduce the variables in the LENR theory to the bare minimum as exemplified by the Cravens ball reactor which uses only a SrCo5 anisotropic magnet(powder), charcoal and deuterium. With all the theoretical underbrush removed, it seems to be possible to penetrate the LENR reaction to its core…that core being magnetic effects on the nucleus of the atom.

      The reaction in the golden ball does not require shock, pressure change, EMF stimulation and the other dozens of reaction complications that confuse the LENR reaction issue. There is a simple reductionist experimental process that can allow for an amateur scientist to penetrate deeply into the mysteries of LENR with simple equipment and the proper use of reductionist logic.

      The Cravens golden ball has fascinated me as a theoretical outlier but as the simplest LENR reactor, and the most fundamental.

      With the underpinning of the Cravens golden ball theory in hand; all other LENR theory can be analyzed under its revelations.

    • Bob Greenyer

      Hi Gerrard.

      If you accept that it is all based on electrons or more specifically some kind of concentration of them – then everything makes sense. All of the best working technology embodiments make sense with their claimed choices. I actually shared all the key information before (Redpill) and (Redpill) AMA in the form of element tables with animation or overlay to draw attention.

      The AMA was more to lay out how I could recognise the biggest experiment (till that date) conducted with the technology and then to walk through the implications – answering questions. There are so many different segments of different patents and articles involved. I have a photographic memory (about things I care about) and so I don’t have a problem seeing all these things in context. It is a large body of work to break it down to the bare essentials with enough corroborating evidence so that we don’t keep hearing the mantra “proove it” or “Conspiracy Theory” or “your mad”. All you need to know is in the papers I have published or linked to. In fact, other than storage of EVOs much of what is needed to generate massive energy concentration is embodied in the way HAARP works.

      Frank has asked me to take discussion of (RedPill) off ECW, so I will over the next week(s) write a detailed Steemit and all discussion will take place there. It is his site and I respect his decision.

      • Dodger

        Thank you Frank!
        Let’s keep ECW clean from this.

        • Bob Greenyer

          Ok Dodger, pretty obvious who you and Hillary are with your hidden accounts – you think you’re so smart – however, I am not into Doxxing. You may have intimidated Frank, but you wont intimidate me.

          Why don’t you and Hillary show proof of who you are – instead of just revealing your motives through your FUD and Ad hominems.

      • georgehants

        Morning Bob, please put up here a link to follow your work, not Facebook, You Tube etc. but a normal Website.
        It seems there may already be pressure on ECW to back away from your science.
        Many thanks.

        • Bob Greenyer

          Hi Georgehants

          It will be on Steemit – it is a normal website with blogging function – but the good thing is, that it is in the block chain – so that articles and comments / discussion can never be sensored – unlike here – to paint a narrative.

          I have had reasonable comments sensored – yet shills with closed accounts get their personal attacks left standing.

          • georgehants

            Bob as Adrian asks below how do we find t,your page on Steemit

            • artefact

              You can google steemit homosymbion. Cant put a link right now.

      • Josh G

        Bob, look at what I found: a paper on Shoulders’ EVOs from 2014 by none other than Miles Mathis. He talks about how they relate to his charge field:

        http://milesmathis.com/evo.pdf

        IT’S VERY SHORT — PLEASE READ IT WHEN YOU HAVE THE CHANCE!

        I will e-mail him to ask if he ever wrote any more papers on Shoulders’ work as he said he would at the end of that paper.

        • Bob Greenyer

          Thanks JoshG – I will take a look. Practically speaking, just like with Axil’s referencing SPP, there is no real need for confusing the issue with tangential descriptions of the same phenomenon – what is important is establishing what are optimal conditions for generation and maintenance of the EVOs

  • Bob Greenyer

    And what would you have us do?

    He has family engagements in March – so not possible then. We are planning around the CMNS conference in Italy.

  • James Thomas

    “Conspiracy theories are the favored tools of the weak-minded.”

    In my own experience I have found just the opposite to be true.
    It takes little if any thought to unquestionably accept an official narrative as being the facts without ever questioning or investigating significantly further. It’s intellectually lazy to simply follow the herd and remain in our comfort zone. Investigation into critical areas ignored by mass media and officials often turns what was comfortably simple and elementary into something uncomfortably deep and complicated.
    I found (and I believe that most others find) that looking seriously into relevant and controversial “conspiracy theories” is in no way a weak-minded endeavor, but rather a very intellectual and emotionally challenging process; A demanding effort that takes courage, time and considerable thought and pondering. It requires a burning desire to want to know the truth, and the willingness to be labeled a fool, and have your heart broken as the comfortable rug of “reality” is pulled out from under you.
    Weak-minded people, don’t go there. Here be dragons.

  • Zephir

    I don’t know in what Bob exactly got into, but his claims are more
    harmful for the credibility of LENR than the “evil elites” he is
    accusing to exectly doing this.

  • radvar

    Talk is cheap and Bob G has produced a lot of it.

    Despite all the effort Bob has poured into this somehow he had not found the time to produce a compact written synopsis with references that can be questioned and defended point by point.

    Almost as if he were avoiding a direct rational review of what he is claiming.

    Bob defends his own position by saying people have not listened carefully to his (self-admittedly rambling) videos and audios (which no I have not, it’s too painful…the long dramatic pauses in particular). The conspiracy theories are wholly unnecessary and substantiate nothing because they cannot be substantiated. The predictions of disaster are another form of adrenalinated attention grabbing.

    And then when people point out these concerns he complains about character attacks.

    Where have we seen this pattern of behavior before, recently?

    The illusion of power is extremely seductive. Weak minds regularly succumb to it. Thus the state of the world.

    Honestly, at this point I’m concerned for Bob’s well-being.

    And despite that, I would very much like to see that written synopsis.

    • SG

      Bob is kind of free-wheeling it as he goes, and laying all of his thoughts out into the open. We don’t have to agree with everything. What is important is that he has thrown himself into the mix of it, and plans on doing two black box tests with me356’s and “Echo’s” systems. If Bob can be a catalyst for those efforts, we will all gain something of tremendous knowledge-value.

      • Bob Greenyer

        You understand it SG – I find that if I don’t note it down, I have to re-think it later and might miss something. What is happening is everyone that CHOOSES to can interact with the process.

        I encourage people to not agree – I said it at the start of the AMA. But really, just saying ‘conspiracy theory’ doesn’t constitute an argument – I have given specific Tesla/Hutchinson/Shoulders explanations for the massive amounts of anomalies in that replicated event – yet to see anyone provide adequate alternatives.

        I’m with Dr Judy Wood – 30X published, she didn’t get it all the way – but maybe she new the reality after all – she has met Hutchinson.

        I tried to meet/speek to Puthoff/Little (worked with Shoulders since 1980 on EVOs) – Got response from Earthtech and an introduction, then nothing – told me what I needed to know.

        • Mike

          Bob – How do you square the circle when you say ” I’ve provided specific Hutchinson explanations” when his “work” has never been reproduced by anyone, anywhere……ever…

          And PS – The dustification of the spire on 9/11 never happened. You just got fixated on a specific viewing angle that provides the illusion it turns to dust.

          • Bob Greenyer

            A small and partial summary from Dr. Judy Wood

            ## John Hutchinson


            #1979
            Breakthrough with anti-gravity Field and disruption in metals ~ lévitation of objects, transmutation in metals. First material testing results of metal samples indicate that In the disruption process, the energy required to produce effects was at least one billion times greater than the 4,000 Watt input used. The results are known as the Hutchison Effect by the scientific community.

            #1983
            Start of U.S. Government interest. Demonstration of Hutchison Effect to U.S. Army Intelligence, and the Los Alamos Laboratory. Demonstration videotaped by these and other U.S. scientists. Metal samples taken for laboratory analysis. Test results were not released.

            #1986
            Canadian Scientific and Technical Intelligence Agency investigates Hutchison Effect. Further testing, leading to greater mastery of effect. North American and European laboratories indicate same results of atomic changes in samples.
            
700 demonstrations in 16 years.

            #1989
            Invited by European scientists to Austria and Germany. During 2-year period, new discoveries in subatomic physics and in elimination of radioactivity.

            #1993
            TVASAHI interview aired April 6, 1993 in Japan.
            Japanese book about Hutchison Effect published by Nobuo Yokoyama,as part of Tokyo Free Energy Project.
            Studies in theoretical physics of combining subatomic physics with space, time and energy.
            Model of Gravity Propulsion developed.

            #2000
            Premises were raided by the local New Westminster Police Department and other people with them photographed things in Hutchison’s apartment during the raid.

            Jim Cherry of “World Wireless Productions” (for Miramax motion pictures) witnessed the effect of the floor of Hutchison’s apartment starting to buckle or roll. This event was also recorded on video. Jim Cherry was with a team that included a News Week reporter and one from TIME Magazine.

            #2004-2005
            In the period 2004-2005, Bruce Burgess of Blue Book Films worked on another film project with Hutchison.
            Also in the period 2004-2005, Hutchison made attempts to retrieve copies of official reports about his experiments through FOIA requests in Canada and the USA, but nothing of value was released to him.
            Between June 2004 and April 2005, Hutchison experienced a significant increase in enquiries from a number of organizations such as NASA, the Pentagon and from SAIC. Some of them requested he send videos.
            Lama Lee, who lived quite close to Hutchison, reported to news crews about metal ornaments “dissolving” in her apartment, near the time he had done some of his experiments.
            Mayor M. Wright of New Westminster visited Hutchison’s apartment because he said he had gotten reports of concrete breaking or cracking and citizens being in distress, apparently following some of Hutchison’s experiments.
            April 2005, Hutchison spoke on Art Bell’s US “Coast to Coast” radio show and discussed the likelihood of the replication of his technology by other groups within the military.

            #2006
            In 2006 a group from National Geographic TV filmed odd vibrations and fires during Hutchison’s experiments.
            Also near that time, Nancy O’ Donnell a TV director and others from Chinese TV saw and/or filmed melting rubber and steel during Hutchison’s experiments.
            In 2006 several other groups filmed effects on Redbull cans and other effects on a toy ship. These effects included “lightning bolts” and water foaming.
            Again in 2006, videos of Hutchison’s experiments were shown to 400 staff officers at the Pentagon and it received standing ovation.

    • Bob Greenyer

      You can play youtube at 200% – then you can use 50% the time I gave to take.

      Radvar – it is so much work / references and I sketched it out in the AMA – of course, I could have gone to ground for 2-3 months – done all of that work for free (even cheaper than the talking – which you got for free) and then gone public – however that would mean anyone that might get something from it wouldn’t for 3 months – if that is 1000 people, then 3000 man months may be wasted.

      Perhaps, rather than complaining you didn’t get everything handed on a plate, you could transcribe points you think others would find useful – or go and look up the key references and alert others where to find them.

      I believe in getting it all out whilst it is fresh in my head and you practically got it real time – you got that process live, you are not forced to watch it. You can not watch it and wait for someone to make it easy for you.

      I posted many of the key papers and video links and an archive of most of the Kenneth Shoulders papers before hand. I did this so that people that cared could get up to speed – did you read them?

      Family chillin before sleepin, perhaps whilst I am taking a rest, you can do a synopsis, or find 11 people to take a 30 min segment each.

      • Adrian

        Bob, would it be possible for you to create an index to some of the key points, in the description of the video? People could then jump straight to these. Maybe someone can make up a list of these points and give you the timestamps.

      • radvar

        It is well known that the initial insights of science are often intuitive. However, the followups that last are all analyzable in terms of common-sense causes and effects.

        Human understanding is top down from big pieces to smaller ones. It always starts with and builds on a high level outline.

        If you cannot compose a synopsis and post it on G-Apps within a few hours then I don’t believe you understand it yourself.

        • Axil Axil

          I have offered Keith Fredericks an explanation for the tachyon like particles that he was seeing in his research. This explanation covers much of what Bob G is expressing.

          http://restframe.com/mm/posts/tm/#comment-3115273424

          I would be glad to back up this explanation with the hundreds of references that I have collected over the years. Also look at the ideas of Keith Fredericks which supports and adds depth to what Bob G is saying.

          Feel free to ask questions, others will benefit from a give and take.

          • Bob Greenyer

            Thanks axil

          • radvar

            Suggestion:

            On or about [date], Bob became aware of through [how] information via [media / experience / communication] about phenomena that he believes could be transformative in the fields of
            f1
            f2
            f3.

            The particular features of this phenomena that caught Bob’s interest are
            1
            2
            3

            The key parts of these phenomena that appear to defy mainstream scientific explanation are:
            i.a
            ii.a
            iii.a

            The primary reasons that Bob believes these phenomena deserve credence are:
            1
            2
            3

            The specific evidence that the above parts of the phenomena should be given credence are:
            i.b
            ii.b
            iii.b

            The main scientific theories that in Bob’s view these phenomena belong to are:
            A
            B
            C

            The critical factors in how these phenomena may be explained by the theories are can be found in the [subordinate theories/branches] that are documented in
            i.c …
            ii.c …
            iii.c …

            The key relationships that in Bob’s view link these elements together are
            I
            II
            III

            The areas that require additional exploration and explanation are:
            X1
            X2
            X3
            =================

            Again, if it takes more than a hour or two to write those things down, and (I propose) post them here, then I have difficulty believing that this subject matter is reflective of reality.

            I believe that most people, including myself, would have a great deal of tolerance for incompletenesses, approximations or errors in a first draft.

            • Axil Axil

              The subject of LENR is very complicated and multileveled. LENR deals with revolutionary science and the nature of the way the fundamental forces of space/time work as a replacement of supersymmetry.

              We really should start out at the beginning.

              The true nature of space/time is the base level of the theory of LENR. We should start there. To prepare yourself, understand how gravity is emergent from quantum entanglement. This also shows how the strong and the weak force are emergent by entanglement.

              The growing acceptance of Erik Verlinde’s work indicates to me a turning away from the particle based paradigm that has fixated physics and cosmology for so long. It is being more widely recognized that quantum entanglement forms the basis of reality and that the nature of space/time emerges from it. Like gravity, even the other previously considered fundamental forces of nature emerge from the properties of entanglement. This includes not only gravity but also the strong and weak forces which will be found to also emerge from entanglement.

              By manipulating entanglement, engineering may open up new vistas of nuclear force control. The field that is emerging to do this engineering is called Low Energy Nuclear Reactions (LENR).

              Bye bye supersymmetry.

              For background, see how gravity is affected by adiabatic reaction force. the same is true for the strong and the weak force.

              see as a primer:

              https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T1rxAhUl5BE

              • radvar

                I appreciate that this may be very interesting and very applicable. However, as I mentioned. effective functional understanding is top down analytic. You cannot teach trigonometry to people who don’t know geometry. I’d like to see Bob’s material start with Level 1 and 2, for which I provided a framework, above. Without that, there is no context in which to connect your contribution to Bob’s claims.

                • Axil Axil

                  The central concept in LENR is entanglement. The increase or decrease of entanglement is what effects the change in the power of the strong and the weak force. There has long been a school of theory in LENR that postulated that quantum condinsation and/or superconductive nature of space/time is the causal factor is the LENR reaction

                  See

                  http://www.larouchepub.com/eiw/public/1991/eirv18n24-19910621/eirv18n24-19910621_022-dr_giuliano_preparata.pdf

                  Dr. Giuliano Preparata was among the first to point out this connection. Dr Kim’s theories also centered around condinsation as a cause for LENR.

                  The EVO or more properly named polariton produces both monopole magnetic flux lines and quantum condinsation. The EVO is just one of many mechanisms that provide this causative reaction in the pantheon of LENR mechanisms.

                  The problem with LENR theory is that it is do multifaceted that it becomes confusing in it complexity. For example, their is a class of magnets that produce LENR effects.

                  The link I gave you to Keith Fredericks webpage concentrates on ultra dense hydrogen and the polariton that Keith is interested in.

                • radvar

                  Perhaps, however, again, no help for Bob.

                • Axil Axil

                  regarding: “I’m still surprised that most commentators are unable to address the relativistic aspects of the em-drive.”

                  The EMDrive also is an application of the Adiabatic reaction force. Microwaves decrease condinsation of the virtual particles in space time and therefore produce an Adiabatic reaction force as explained by Verlinda. This is the same mechanism that produces increased gravity force as seen in unexpected increases in galaxy rotation.

                • radvar

                  I appreciate that you have your own theory, however, again, I’m surprised that you do not even comment on Shawyer’s explanation, which relies on special relativity. Occam’s razor says it produces a much simpler explanation.

            • Bob Greenyer

              No problem, I am having a chillout for now – actually, if you bothered to look at the materials and sites that I posted and referred to, then you wouldn’t need to be spoon fed so much.

              At least Axil and Ged and Max Temple others are thinking rather than demanding something for nothing.

              But, I set out to prove LENR and then educate on it – a coalition of the not-compromised or vested interested or scared is obviously the way to go.

              But seriously, 1 hour to prove LENR to everybody’s satisfaction?? Such a straw man… Some people take 2 hours to switch on in the morning!

      • William D. Fleming

        Bob, I have followed your efforts with admiration to this point and will continue to do so. Though I have weak credentials and only a tenuous understanding of most of what is posted here, I am keenly interested in the field of LENR. My data plan doesn’t allow many videos but there is nothing that I have read about your productions that diminishes my respect for you in the least.

        Sir Arthur Eddington:

        The universe is of the nature of a thought or sensation in a universal Mind… To put the conclusion crudely — the stuff of the world is mind-stuff.

        We are no longer tempted to condemn the spiritual aspects of our nature as illusory because of their lack of concreteness.

        The scientific answer is relevant so far as concerns the sense-impressions… For the rest the human spirit must turn to the unseen world to which it itself belongs.

        • Bob Greenyer

          Thanks. I will flesh out the skeleton as time and energy permits.

      • radvar

        You speak of cost as if this were some sort of economic transaction. From the number of posts I would say that the time you have put into your recordings has been repaid several fold by people reviewing them.

        What is it that you are trying to accomplish? To simply gain attention, or to convey understanding?

        I provided a structure. All you have to do is fill in the content, even roughly, and the value of your time and effort will be multipled by an order of magnitude.

        The key variable, of course, is the initial value.

        • Bob Greenyer

          I will – but Radvar, seeing the event for what it truly was, was a little traumatic, plus I had to travel, make presentation, make a complete set of new channels so that I did not tar the rest of the MFMP with my choice to go public. Plan roll out of information + contingencies and back-ups and ensure that everyone had the key information available to them up-front.

    • Dodger

      Thank you @radvar!
      I agree 100% of your post.

      Bob’s state is concerning.
      Either he has a serious mental problem or he had this ideas all the time and only waited to go public with them until he has earned enough trust and credibility of our community.

      • Bob Greenyer

        That is slander – I would sue you for that if you would be so kind as have the guts to reveal yourself. Why does Frank allow this kind of personal attack and sensor hard facts?

        Everyone in the MFMP would testify that I did not have these views even 1 month ago. A house is not finished until the last roof tile is on.

        Typical CIA tactics – don’t you get board of playing the same old lines? Guess you’ll be interrupting me in my next presentation and calling me nuts.

      • Jas

        I have been following this Red Pill story over the last few days. I have watched all of Bob’s videos. I think I now understand what Bob is trying to tell us. It doesnt make me a crazy person. I stopped watchin TV a long time ago. So I am not drip fed the reality that I am supposed to believe in. I have not trashd my house or burnt my belongings. I have not pulled out my hair and smeared faeces the walls. Life goes on as normal. To the ouside world everyone of us here is a crazy. Remember that. You believe in excess energy from devices that most people would call Psuedoscience.

  • sam

    Hi Bob
    Can you expand on your videos.
    This is a comment from first video
    What is this doing?What are you showing?What is the significance?

    https://www.youtube.com/shared?ci=ywMV6ge_q1k

    https://www.youtube.com/shared?ci=vmfuGuFKrnw

    https://www.youtube.com/shared?ci=WvzBPjEmda8

    Thanks
    Sam

    • Bob Greenyer

      When I have had a rest – and uploaded all the videos for this, I will write a more detailed Steemit article with all videos. I am just revealing the vids as they get published.

  • Stephen

    Speculation:

    Well normally I like to look at what can be explained with old physics but I’m definetly not against new discoveries and ideas either. I have to say I do find EVO’s very intriguing even if I’m not sure yet about all the implications. When I first came here Axil drew my attention to similar Ideas about plasmons and entanglement which were always interesting… Even more so now I guess. EVO’s seem to be much more intriguing than I ever expected.

    I have often wondered whether locality can tell us something about fundamental particles. And if the differences between them could be explained by geometry if locality is taken into account. Could there be one kind of fundamental entity dominated by and generated In a local frame of reference but influenced by resonance interactions in the external frame. I would think it much easier for space to make one kind of particle in some local frame than many types.

    If you think of a particle as a spinning object it has an axis in one direction a rotational plane orthogonal to the axis. I suppose there would be 3 stable orthaganal states in the local frame of reference. Perhaps certain axis require higher energies relative to the external field or resonant environment to form.

    I wonder if you look at the rules of 3 in the standard model especially regarding leptons and quark families in the standard model. If the can be explained by geometry differences between a fundemental particles local frame and the external frame llike that? And bosons effectively be an expression of transitions and rotations in thos frames as energy is added of removed.

    Well that’s all speculative and undoubtably increadibly naive to a theoretical particle physicist. But the potential for a relationship between rules of 3 in the standard model with 3 dimensions of space have always intrigued me. And now I learn about EVOs well I just wonder what it could all mean

  • Bob Greenyer

    I did not predict this with Clairvoyance. This will be made to happen. Look at the narrative – preparing the minds for acceptance.

    http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-03-03/california-floods-trigger-big-one-geologists-warn-quake-risks-snowpack-rising-reserv

    • Kim G Patterson

      I understood every word you said on your red pill ama,
      and the implications there of.

      We need concensus to hold our realities, you have mine.

      Respect
      Kim

      • Bob Greenyer

        Thanks Kim – and well done, a lot of drivvel to listen through – as a tip, I tend to listen to youtube at double speed.

        As I have always said – I don’t care if I am wrong, I only care if I am right.

    • invient

      Bob, given the pyramidal shape of stibine, would it act as a concentrator or dissipator for EVOs?

      Second, do you think Konstantin Meyl’s ideas give the theoretical basis for EVOs? I have yet read the books from him that I have, but now want to start reading ken shoulders work… is Meyl still a relevant avenue to study?

      Thanks, keep your “will to power”… I’ve only recently found my passion for an unrelated area of study, and no ones opinion on the matter will change my aim.

  • Kim G Patterson

    I actually did listen.

    The meek shall inherit the earth.

    Bobs discourse was spot on.

    Respect
    Kim

    • Bob Greenyer

      Thanks Kim

  • Bob Greenyer

    That’s funny – made me laugh!

  • Bob Greenyer

    How very CIA _Jim, combining the word “late” passive threat with “conspiracy theory” derogatory term,

    How do you use rational argument to

    1. explain clean circular holes in 1 pane of 2 panes of double glazed windows in and adjacent building.

    2. Cars that have metal that is folded (which I know doesn’t happen) through ‘claimed’ fires when there is un-burned fabric?

    3. How do you explain the disappearance of a whole rock facade of an adjacent building – no rubble!

    4. How do explain the disappearance of 1000s ceramic toilet fittings

    5. How do you explain 50X tritium levels

    6. What excuse do you give for bringing in what looks like soil, scraping it around and then removing it again?

    I can explain all of these things – and the explanation is NOT a kerosene fire – I KNOW what they can do.

    I don’t expect an answer.

    • Stephen

      I appreciate you have some other angles on this I try to keep in open mind.

      But I do wonder could LENR and EVO’s be triggered by the collision like this if we consider the materials end energies present during and after the collision.

      I guess there have not been too many high energy impacts between two large metal objects like this. Would sufficient hydrogen be released and not burnt due to oxygen starvation to hydrogenate the metal in this extreme environment to potentially generate large EVOs?

      I wonder if similar effects were observed with the Russian Meteor a few years back.

      • Bob Greenyer

        Ok, perhaps you missed my explanation – it is in the (Redpill) audio – will be clearer when you see my hand waving video version if I can ever get it uploaded – this feels like a third world country here sometimes.

        EVO charge shot from bottom of plane – best way to store large EVO charge stably is in Gold – bolt hits aluminium cladding on tower – and like a light switch the EVOs propagate into the structure. With the right microwave planar spread – that particular part of the metal structure turns to jelly as Hutchinson demonstrated 100s times. Plane is not in field (Just projecting it) and maybe coated with non-conductive paint, and so can cut through like a butter knife.

  • Bob Greenyer

    You really think if I prove it your mind would change – it has already been done by others, if their results are not enough for you then nothing that I could do on a shoe string would be.

    2005 Adamenko’s patent.

    Production of 62Ni from two copper electrodes (long before Lugano)

    Production of high proportion of gold in collector grains

    2016 Egely’s reactor.

    Production of gold (unknown amount and unknown fuel but suspected to contain copper)

    Since you mentioned 9/11

    Care to explain how the stone facade of an adjacent building completely dissapears without any rubble?

    I can explain it and it is the same thing that could cut rock. Look at Kenneth Shoulders micrographs of EVOs boring clean through Alumina – seemingly with the alumina dissapearing. Egely has said he would share images showing ball lightening damage when he gets back to Europe.

    Care to explain how the new steels put in to repair an adjacent building rusted many times faster than science would determine?

    I can explain it, it is simple, the higher charged EVOs in place of the electrons cause faster oxidation.

    Rossi got snookered – he has to find a way around.

    Thanks for your advice on “just prove it”, but prove what exactly?

  • Dodger

    Bob is talking about dark forces which try to stop LENR research, while the same dark forces support DoD and others to do public LENR basic research.

    A bit contradicting heh??

    The whole behaviour of Bob Greenyer looks like HE(!!) is the one who’s trying to disturb LENR research by pushing the LENR field back into the esoteric, conspiracy, idiot, … edge of fringe science.

    Thank you Bob for destroying the last bit of credibility the field has gained by the year-long hard work of several individuals!!

    • Bob Greenyer

      Character attack. You did not have to listen. Are you seriously expecting to make people believe that the USPTO and broader scientific / research community have been behind LENR? Care to give a reason why SPAWAR was shut down?

      I expect they’ll be a whole load of hit pieces like this – but I am ready for it.

      The first thing people do is make bombs from new energy – what I did is make it clear that that is not going to be a selling point – since it has already been done. Therefore, it is only the peaceful stuff left. I am interested in the peaceful stuff – never been a fan of dying.

      Did you actually listen to the presentation?

      Take out the bits you disapprove of you know, the stuff people have opinions about and you have clear direction on how to deliver the effect. The fact is science is not about opinion, it works the way it works and in the case of Pons and Fleischmann – their science was crushed by a vote – and the same people are attacking another scientist that is touching on the most egregious use of the technology in living memory. Why is that?

      I gave a precise choice of elements with justification which is consistent with both theory and the embodiments that show the greatest results. A combination claimed to work that matches this guidance was unexpectedly demonstrated within 24 hours. Ways for stimulating it etc.

      It’s almost as if people don’t want LENR, they want NEVER – and a whole industry based around not delivering.

      You may think that real information will take things backwards, personally, I think a little consistent clarity is better – those that listen will go forward.

      By progress in the last year, do you mean successive co-opting, diversion, distraction and destruction of players?

  • Max Temple

    Message for Bob Greener,

    I’ve listened to your long AMA and I appreciate all you’ve shared. If you could contact Me356 today and ask for the frequency/waveforms he is using through his resistors to produce atomic hydrogen and then share that in the video you may make later today that would be awesome. I humbly ask you to attempt to acquire that information. Thank you.

    • Bob Greenyer

      He is not prepared to share that at this time.

      The sequence will be (as of now):

      1. When he is ready (soon I hope) we verify.
      2. If valid, then much wider verification
      3. Release.

      Ultimately it has to be a single pure act from him, he cannot be forced to do it. He reads here, so if there is something more he chooses me to share, then so be it.

  • georgehants

    Morning Bob hope you are well, looking forward to all your information, remember that dumb science cannot even replicate a complicated crop-circle under controlled conditions and many other clear anomalies, they just cover-up by laughing and go hide under the kitchen table.
    If you are just having a personnel experience then that is o.k. too, it is a difficult World.
    Best

  • Rene

    Frank, censoring my question without even bothering to ask me about it quite unbecoming. Contact me soonest. Thank you.