Water Powered Car Inventor Murdered

Alright guys, I've got something to share with you. There was a man named Steve Meyer that lived in Grove City. He is no longer with us, as he was killed in '98 pretty sure it was only on local news programs, which is why the damage is localized and only a couple of people actually know about it.

What he did was he combined water and electricity. It turns into a gas called HHO, which can power a car for 100 miles a gallon on...water. Yes, essentially free power. All it costs is 1500$ to equip your car, and you'd never have to go to a gas station again.

He was from Grove City, Ohio, just a couple of miles away from me. My father knew the guy, and trust me, his water car was not bullshit. It worked, and it was absolutely amazing. Revolutionary, something that would solve so many problems and make life so much easier.

He was repeatedly threatened by Oil Companies, bribed 1 billion to shelf his idea, constantly pressured by the government who was breathing down his neck. Well, one night at a restaraunt to celebrate his invention and it's sale in a couple of weeks so that it would go into mass production. He took a drink from his glass, ran out into the parking lot and died. He was poisoned to death by our government. This can be seen easily, because just a few days later they took all of his assets, patents and inventions and shoved them in a government vault never to be seen again.

What I want to know from you guys, is do you think that this is right? You probably say, "Oh, that's messed up" But do you really care? Do you honestly give a damn that the government you know and love is holding you back and witholding technology that could potentially turn this world into a utopia?

Site with Videos: http://easygrowhouseplants.blogspot.com/2006/12/inventor-of-water-powered-car-murdered.html

Actual Patent: http://www.google.com/patents?id=fPEbAAAAEBAJ&printsec=abstract&zoom=4&dq=%22stanley+meyer%22

Stan Meyer's Site: http://waterpoweredcar.com/stanmeyer.htm












Guys, please keep in mind that I am not some crackpot conspiracy theorist. I'm not just yelling, "AAAAH! GOVERNMENT EVIL GOVERNMENT BAD SOMEONE HELP OMG!!!" okay? You guys will see, in time, the corruption of our government and the foul weeds that choke this garden. The viel has been swept from my eyes, and hopefully soon yours too. Because do you know what it means when everyone starts seeing this for what it really is?

Revolution. It's coming.

I am not a conspiracy theorist. There are only three things that cannot be hidden long; The Sun, The Moon, and The Truth.

electrolysis and the piston were invented in the 19th century

It wasn't actually HHO, HHO was just a short name for it, it was actually called brown's gas, and the hydrogen chains would be like 15-18 hydrogens long, not two.

>>3
you can't have hydrogen chains 15-18 long

Obviously this is all just bullshit.  There is no such molecule as HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHO since Hydrogen doesn't chain with itself other than HH (combining their electrons to complete the lowest shell).   H+HOH can happen in water, but that's largely a temporary matter since it requires a spare Hydrogen atom to weakly align with the slight polar field of a water molecule.  Other than that, water contains H0H and shifting polar arrangements of that molecule.

For $1500, people would have almost killed each other to end up at this guy's door to get their cars equipped to stop using gasoline.

"The government stole all the research" doesn't happen unless there was no research to steal.  If you put your mind to it, could you hide and copy/distribute research notes such that they wouldn't be lost?  Of course you could.

Once again, we have just another "free energy" con artist whose efforts will naturally be taken up by related con artists who will always need to steal money like he did.

ITT retards who don't understand physics yell conspiracy.

ITT retards get trolled

hydrogen chains is the chemistry/physics version of "why'd the chicken cross the road".

I don't know....

...that patent doesn't looked faked to me, guys.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stanley_Meyer

#9, you don't understand patents.  Other than for outright "free energy" devices which violate the laws of the conservation of energy, the US Patent Office doesn't require a working model of the patent.  Modern "free energy" inventors don't even make overunity claims in the patent, since the USPTO would deny them immediately.

In short, any such patent is just bullshit since there's no way to prove the claims in such patents without a working model, which isn't required.  The patent filers use other terms, like "magnetic rotational array", to describe their "invention" (which is just a contraption that looks impressive enough to fool stupid investors).

Somebody should patent one of the constructions in a MC Escher drawing just to make the point.

Patents are pointless in 2000 an australian man patented the wheel which was invented during the stone age

>>12
Patents and copyrights are a capitalist tool of oppression against the people.
The rich use them to prevent equality of the standard of living.
Ever played tetris? In Soviet Russia it was free for everyone but in the imperialistic countries you had to pay for it.

this is bullshit.

#13, imitation is the most sincere form of flattery.  Thank you.  :^)

At any rate, the present corporation-dominated system of patents and copyrights is what is the aberration here, not the concepts of patents and copyrights on their own.  The US Congress has acted in direct contravention of the "limited terms" specification for US copyright by continuing to extend terms to longer and longer times just the suit the near-expiration IP of corporate clients.  As an example, literally they will never let Mickey Mouse expire to join the public domain as was originally intended with copyright law.

If patents and copyrights were scaled back to where the common man could take advantage of them, then they would be tools of preserving individual liberty ... both of man and company.

>>13
In soviet russia they had a 50s level of agricultural technology during the late 80s famously aditted by gorbachev in response to the bold Reagan's offer of star wars anti-ICBM technology when he said "You offer us this technology when you won't even give us the technology fpr cattle milking machinery!".

>>14
Most major R&D can only be performed by teams of scientists with funding from big business, if the businesses didn't get any returns from the patents they fund then technological progress would grind to a halt.

>>16
One word. MIR.

>>17

You mean that piece of garbage which they FINALLY managed to get rid of few years ago?

#16, we had some fairly good technological progress before the imposition of the corporate-dominance model.  That implies that there was an extant state of returns for the historical model for patenting.  On top of that minor point, there is the larger point of "trade secret" which is not mentioned in the media.  Even in the age of patenting in America, trade secrets had a major presence.  A TS is like a patent except that you keep your IP secure yourself.  Obviously this is best achieved with mfg processes instead of what's inherently in the finished product.

So ... "technological progress" is not wholly dependent upon Big R&D, and neither is it wholly dependent upon patenting.  Those things are now important for how fast technological progress goes, but without them we wouldn't be left adrift.

Now, getting RID of patenting is not a good solution since the base agreement of patents is the same:  "Mr Inventor, tell the public all about your invention, and we'll grant you a solid monopoly on marketing it for a fairly long period of time."  Patents are good for everyone, as long as corporations don't dominate the entire patenting process.  Since they do now, it's up to use as "We the People" to further regulate the patenting process to put a large block on corporate participation.

Alas, the word "regulate" is the Nigger-of-Washington today, so that's boffo for my statements.

>>19
But then coorporations will not fund research. Technology has give everyone a longer healthier richer life and we must see where it takes us. Even the most vile despotisms and anarchies of today yield a better lifestyle than the most libertarian and developped regions 100 years ago.

Even if coorporations keep technology to themselves eventually it will leak out and someone else will patent it, the rewards are too great and during that period they will have made so much money they can research a lot more.

#20, there are two things wrong with your reply.

1. Corporations HAVE been doing R&D under these conditions.  I'm only relating the past.  The past contained R&D.  Q.E.D.

2. Corporations are relying more and more upon just taking the government for granted with R&D.  That's the kind way of saying they are forcing the public to pay for their R&D.

Let's talk about "eventually".  Note well that there's a modest "eventually" in the current patent system, but that doesn't seem to bother corps from using them.  So, they either keep a trade secret and "eventually" it becomes known, or they reveal it via a patent and "eventually" the term of the patent expires.  There's no practical difference there, except in cases seen today when patents don't protect popular designs (like those aluminum, fold-down scooters that the kiddies love so much).  Yet manufacturers keep producing despite all manner of piracy.  Hmm.  Perhaps there's another flaw in your argument.

AT ANY RATE, I never said to get rid of patents and the patent system.  What I DID say is to stop the corporate dominance of the system such that individual inventors are being completely squashed.  Corporations had it good all along.  Now they just want it "gooder" than before, and that's just GREED, and it results in social cost (i.e. cost to you and I ... please note the theft of public research as I noted above).

>>18
Another word. Skylab. Now compare expected lifetime and actual lifetime of the two, and you shall see the truth and the truth shall set you free. Or at least make you feel like an ignorant idiot.