MagneGas, Anyone?

Step right up for 3-card Monte...
Matthew Ellard
Real Skeptic
Posts: 26757
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2008 3:31 am

Re: MagneGas, Anyone?

Postby Matthew Ellard » Sun May 17, 2015 6:33 am

I had an unusual humorous experience. I worked for another firm on a project and without my knowledge they registered me on Linkedin and gave my email address. I then received an Linkedin email saying "people you may know" with the names of other Linkedin members and they offered Shelby Malvestuto, Marketing Manager at Magnegas.

I don't know why. I assume Linkedin uses some web-searching algorithm to throw up potential "friends" and my name appears with the word Magnegas. (However, only on this forum).

PennyDotson
Poster
Posts: 134
Joined: Tue Oct 07, 2014 9:35 pm
Contact:

Re: MagneGas, Anyone?

Postby PennyDotson » Wed May 20, 2015 4:54 pm

Boy oh boy I knew LinkedIn was going to mean the end of something for me. No more higher ground.

User avatar
isodual
Poster
Posts: 183
Joined: Wed Oct 24, 2012 6:50 am
Custom Title: Show me the Equation

Re: MagneGas, Anyone?

Postby isodual » Wed May 20, 2015 9:12 pm

OMG - Is this thing still on?? LOL

It’s OVER… it’s DONE. The original question of this thread, proposed 7 years ago, was “is Magnegas Real?”

THE ANSWER is now KNOWN to be YES: Magnegas is 100% real as the “miraculous” properties cynics here once argued were impossible, have been 100% verified to be 100% real.

You asked for credible evidence

Major Malfunction wrote:I say bring it on. Let's see a speed-cutting trial with 2" steel plate.


And you GOT it.
http://magnegas.com/wp-content/uploads/ ... port-2.pdf

What more could you ask for? Verification from the New York City Fire Department, City College of New York, General Motors, Duke Energy, Union Pacific and the United States Navy?? Lol. DONE.

If you morons now think you are going to be able to spin your way out of being exposed as the incorrigible-dope-charlatans you really are by switching over to saying “of course Magnegas works because it is a syngas” then you look even stupider than you already do by having to resort to going on record making the OUTRAGEOUS claim that conventional ‘syngases’ are well known to cut through 2” inch steel 38% to 100% faster than acetylene while requiring less Oxygen – as documented by Edison Welding Institute & US Navy.

Remember, I challenged you trolls to meet me FACE TO FACE down in Florida for a demonstration and you relentlessly taunted me saying how I was bluffing and it would never happen. Then a public DEMO was setup (a total of 2 open houses have now occurred) and each and every one of you cowards backed out.

So now its back to the tinfoil hat conspiracy theories developed by the Australian LOON Matthew Ellard stating that I am this ‘Francesco Fucilla’ guy?

THEN COME MEET ME FACE TO FACE and lets find out the truth.

Me and you Pepijn Van Erp. Lets END this once and for all and expose who the real FRAUD is here.

The HONOR and REPUTATION of you and your little ding bat Dutch Skeptisis girls club is now on the line. Will you represent or cower?

GULP… :shock: ya that’s right punk, you better be clamming up right now cuz you just got CALLED OUT. Lets see how well your “scientific” case that Magnegas is “pseudoscience” because you convinced yourself that I was secretly Dr. Santilli pans out. Feel free to bring J.M. Calo with you - though I doubt that guy is stupid enough to not realize how bad he screwed up and show up.
Google/Wikipedia is NOT a scientific instrument.
Update 11/15/16: The “miraculous” properties of MagneGas have now all checked out as real & a mass outbreak of selective amnesia has swept across the inhabitants of this board.


“If Santilli could produce a safe gas that burnt hotter than the hottest chemical flame Mankind has ever known, I'd have his baby.” - Major Malfunction 2013

User avatar
Poodle
Has More Than 8K Posts
Posts: 8220
Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2011 9:12 pm
Custom Title: Regular sleeper
Location: NE corner of my living room

Re: MagneGas, Anyone?

Postby Poodle » Wed May 20, 2015 10:40 pm

Found any magnecules yet, dingbat?

Your distraction technique needs some work. I advise you to go back to the beginning of this thread and read it through again so that you can rediscover your delightfully amusing claims. You appear to have forgotten a) what you said and b) what everyone else said.

Try harder.

(Punk? You called someone a punk??? :lol: :lol: :lol: ).

User avatar
scrmbldggs
Has No Life
Posts: 19745
Joined: Sun May 20, 2012 7:55 am
Custom Title: something
Location: sees Maria Frigoris from its house!

Re: MagneGas, Anyone?

Postby scrmbldggs » Wed May 20, 2015 10:45 pm

isodual wrote:Remember, I challenged you [insult] to meet me FACE TO FACE down in Florida for a demonstration and you relentlessly taunted me saying how I was bluffing and it would never happen.

And we were right, weren't we? You're the one that backed out on his offer by changing the conditions, IIRC. It was as real as magnecules.



isodual wrote:What more could you ask for? Verification from...General Motors...


When, where, who, how did they test, and what did they say the outcome was?


(Edit: Oops, emphasis mine.)
Last edited by scrmbldggs on Wed May 20, 2015 11:53 pm, edited 1 time in total.
.

Lard, save me from your followers.

Matthew Ellard
Real Skeptic
Posts: 26757
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2008 3:31 am

Re: MagneGas, Anyone?

Postby Matthew Ellard » Wed May 20, 2015 11:41 pm

isodual wrote:So now its back to the tinfoil hat conspiracy theories developed by the Australian LOON Matthew Ellard stating that I am this ‘Francesco Fucilla’ guy?


That's because you are Francesco Fucilla.

isodual wrote:THEN COME MEET ME FACE TO FACE and lets find out the truth.
Under what legal capacity are you able to invite anyone to a Magnegas demonstration? Please clearly state your legal connection to Magnegas Francesco.
:D

Will they also be showing us Magnecules?

User avatar
scrmbldggs
Has No Life
Posts: 19745
Joined: Sun May 20, 2012 7:55 am
Custom Title: something
Location: sees Maria Frigoris from its house!

Re: MagneGas, Anyone?

Postby scrmbldggs » Wed May 20, 2015 11:55 pm

.

Lard, save me from your followers.

User avatar
Gord
Real Skeptic
Posts: 29416
Joined: Wed Apr 29, 2009 2:44 am
Custom Title: Silent Ork
Location: Transcona

Re: MagneGas, Anyone?

Postby Gord » Thu May 21, 2015 12:38 am

isodual wrote:...meet me FACE TO FACE down in Florida for a demonstration....

YOU NEVER SENT THE PLANE TICKETS!!
"Knowledge grows through infinite timelessness" -- the random fictional Deepak Chopra quote site
"You are also taking my words out of context." -- Justin
"Nullius in verba" -- The Royal Society ["take nobody's word for it"]
#ANDAMOVIE

querious
New Member
Posts: 7
Joined: Fri May 15, 2015 8:53 pm

Re: MagneGas, Anyone?

Postby querious » Thu May 21, 2015 10:47 pm

Pepijn van Erp wrote:Concerning Kadeisvili - Just a month ago I found that Santilli had put a cv of him on his website, dated Dec. 2013 (link to pdf). It didn't contain any interesting personal facts, just a list of 'his' publications. Yesterday somebody sent me an e-mail informing me that this cv has been replaced (link to pdf). Only one line has been added:

Born January 9, 1960 – died January 16, 2014


Weird.. If Kadeisvili is an alias, then it's been in the works since 1992...

http://www.barnesandnoble.com/w/santillis-isotopies-of-contemporary-algebras-geometries-and-relativities-j-valdimir-kadeisvili/1000898292?ean=9780911767520&itm=1&usri=9780911767520

Matthew Ellard
Real Skeptic
Posts: 26757
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2008 3:31 am

Re: MagneGas, Anyone?

Postby Matthew Ellard » Fri May 22, 2015 1:26 am

querious wrote:Weird.. If Kadeisvili is an alias, then it's been in the works since 1992.
That's right. The same fake people have been used in earlier Santilli scams starting in the late 70's and early 80's. However as Santilli magazines publish these same scientific articles "dated" to the 70's, you need to consider all dates with skepticism and further research.

querious
New Member
Posts: 7
Joined: Fri May 15, 2015 8:53 pm

Re: MagneGas, Anyone?

Postby querious » Fri May 22, 2015 3:57 pm

Matthew Ellard wrote:
querious wrote:Weird.. If Kadeisvili is an alias, then it's been in the works since 1992.
That's right. The same fake people have been used in earlier Santilli scams starting in the late 70's and early 80's. However as Santilli magazines publish these same scientific articles "dated" to the 70's, you need to consider all dates with skepticism and further research.

What other aliases has he used prior to 1992?

querious
New Member
Posts: 7
Joined: Fri May 15, 2015 8:53 pm

Re: MagneGas, Anyone?

Postby querious » Sat May 23, 2015 12:44 am

isodual wrote:Me and you Pepijn Van Erp. Lets END this once and for all and expose who the real FRAUD is here.


Umm, I'm with Pepijn. Please show us that Santilli hasn't been using aliases since at least 1992 by providing proof of Kadeisvili's real existence.

And please don't come back with more of your sidestepping bluster. Either you admit he used aliases, or prove his existence.

Pepijn van Erp
New Member
Posts: 47
Joined: Fri Apr 20, 2012 8:32 pm
Location: The Netherlands
Contact:

Re: MagneGas, Anyone?

Postby Pepijn van Erp » Sun May 31, 2015 10:58 am

It's getting even more cosy in the comments section on my blog about Santilli/Kadeisvili. Now Fucilla (Anthony or Francesco) has shown up.

User avatar
Poodle
Has More Than 8K Posts
Posts: 8220
Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2011 9:12 pm
Custom Title: Regular sleeper
Location: NE corner of my living room

Re: MagneGas, Anyone?

Postby Poodle » Sun May 31, 2015 2:53 pm

Hi Pepijn - You're still doing a great job, judging by the increase in the Santilli noise level (measured on a Santilli Noise Level Meter calibrated by my grandmother's cat).

Keep up the good work!

querious
New Member
Posts: 7
Joined: Fri May 15, 2015 8:53 pm

Re: MagneGas, Anyone?

Postby querious » Sun May 31, 2015 7:00 pm

Pepijn van Erp wrote:It's getting even more cosy in the comments section on my blog about Santilli/Kadeisvili. Now Fucilla (Anthony or Francesco) has shown up.

Whoever it is writes like a mentally ill person having a temper tantrum. Of course, they still don't actually deal with the issue of whether Santilli used aliases, which was the main point of your blog post!

User avatar
Gord
Real Skeptic
Posts: 29416
Joined: Wed Apr 29, 2009 2:44 am
Custom Title: Silent Ork
Location: Transcona

Re: MagneGas, Anyone?

Postby Gord » Mon Jun 01, 2015 3:31 am

Pepijn van Erp wrote:It's getting even more cosy in the comments section on my blog about Santilli/Kadeisvili. Now Fucilla (Anthony or Francesco) has shown up.

He's writing poetry!

Having read some of the nonsense you write about,
In my opinion you should find a new horizon in life !!!
In fact, I strongly recommend
That you change profession altogether as you are clearly
Totally ignorant as to the facts of life !!!
Just writing the word “fringe science”,
Tells me you know very little about nothing !!!
It matters not that santilli has made some
Fairytalish statements, I can assure you , that the non fringe scientists (as you
May cathegorize them ) are 10 times more fringe than santilli !!!
In fact u challenge you to give me a list of non fringe scientists and
I will show you from publications made, they are 10 times more fringe
Scientists then santilli !!!
In order to avoid writing a book on the subject, start watching football
It is the closest analogy to describe the present state of the art as to science and fringe science !!!

Full of imagery, but it doesn't rhyme. I'll give it a grade of C.
"Knowledge grows through infinite timelessness" -- the random fictional Deepak Chopra quote site
"You are also taking my words out of context." -- Justin
"Nullius in verba" -- The Royal Society ["take nobody's word for it"]
#ANDAMOVIE

User avatar
scrmbldggs
Has No Life
Posts: 19745
Joined: Sun May 20, 2012 7:55 am
Custom Title: something
Location: sees Maria Frigoris from its house!

Re: MagneGas, Anyone?

Postby scrmbldggs » Mon Jun 01, 2015 4:29 am

life life nothing santilli santilli science !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!
.

Lard, save me from your followers.

databarn
Posts: 1
Joined: Mon Jun 29, 2015 4:41 pm

Re: MagneGas, Anyone?

Postby databarn » Mon Jun 29, 2015 5:23 pm

[quote="Poodle"]Found any magnecules yet, dingbat?

Your distraction technique needs some work. I advise you to go back to the beginning of this thread and read it through again so that you can rediscover your delightfully amusing claims. You appear to have forgotten a) what you said and b) what everyone else said.

What he posted was clear and concise, what you posted is distraction with no substance. Try stating something against any of the statement in his post, instead of random he said she said.
Thanks isodual for a straight forward post but you should have listened to Winston Churchill — 'Never engage in a battle of wits with an unarmed man.

User avatar
scrmbldggs
Has No Life
Posts: 19745
Joined: Sun May 20, 2012 7:55 am
Custom Title: something
Location: sees Maria Frigoris from its house!

Re: MagneGas, Anyone?

Postby scrmbldggs » Tue Jun 30, 2015 12:04 am

Gotta close a quote with [/quote] to make it work.

Welcome to SSF.
.

Lard, save me from your followers.

User avatar
Poodle
Has More Than 8K Posts
Posts: 8220
Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2011 9:12 pm
Custom Title: Regular sleeper
Location: NE corner of my living room

Re: MagneGas, Anyone?

Postby Poodle » Tue Jun 30, 2015 1:13 am

databarn wrote:
Poodle wrote:Found any magnecules yet, dingbat?

Your distraction technique needs some work. I advise you to go back to the beginning of this thread and read it through again so that you can rediscover your delightfully amusing claims. You appear to have forgotten a) what you said and b) what everyone else said.

What he posted was clear and concise, what you posted is distraction with no substance. Try stating something against any of the statement in his post, instead of random he said she said.
Thanks isodual for a straight forward post but you should have listened to Winston Churchill — 'Never engage in a battle of wits with an unarmed man.


Hi Isodual :lol:

How's things going for you? I've told you before that 'straightforward' is a single word. What you posted was unadulterated bilge, as always. What I posted, on the other hand, was almost poetic in its purity and accuracy.

Matthew Ellard
Real Skeptic
Posts: 26757
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2008 3:31 am

Re: MagneGas, Anyone?

Postby Matthew Ellard » Tue Jun 30, 2015 1:42 am

Poodle wrote:Hi Isodual.
Exactly. (World's worst attempt at disguising a sock puppet through "polite language")

frankbjorn
Posts: 1
Joined: Wed Aug 12, 2015 11:06 pm

Re: MagneGas, Anyone?

Postby frankbjorn » Wed Aug 12, 2015 11:30 pm

Being that Magnegas is lighter than air, it would be preferable to us for cooking on board ships. Now that more and more week- end sailors are using propane gas stoves to make a hamburger or hot dogs, more and more boats will blow up from leaky valves and heavier than air propane. Just saying.

Matthew Ellard
Real Skeptic
Posts: 26757
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2008 3:31 am

Re: MagneGas, Anyone?

Postby Matthew Ellard » Thu Aug 13, 2015 1:08 am

frankbjorn wrote:Being that Magnegas is lighter than air, it would be preferable to us for cooking on board ships. Now that more and more week- end sailors are using propane gas stoves to make a hamburger or hot dogs, more and more boats will blow up from leaky valves and heavier than air propane. Just saying.


Fair enough. You are saying that natural gases, like methane, float up into the atmosphere unlike propane gas, which can settle in the hull and risk an explosion.

However, I don't think Magnegas is used in any cooking stoves, so the point is moot. Although Magnegas advertises that it can be used in cooking, I can't see any examples of this being done and the cost doesn't make sense as a replacement.

User avatar
Major Malfunction
Has No Life
Posts: 11441
Joined: Wed May 10, 2006 6:20 am
Custom Title: Dérailleur Énigmatique

Re: MagneGas, Anyone?

Postby Major Malfunction » Thu Aug 13, 2015 1:19 pm

Sounds like a serious problem that needs to be addressed right away!

Give me some stats for boat explosions from cooking compared to say, running the engines on liquid petroleum products.
This being was produced using the same process as other beings, and therefore, may contain traces of nuts.

User avatar
Monster
Perpetual Poster
Posts: 4998
Joined: Sun Jun 15, 2008 7:57 pm
Location: Tarrytown, NY, USA
Contact:

Re: MagneGas, Anyone?

Postby Monster » Thu Aug 13, 2015 1:58 pm

REDACTED. (I misunderstood what I quoted.)
Last edited by Monster on Thu Aug 13, 2015 3:26 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Listening twice as much as you speak is a sign of wisdom.

User avatar
Major Malfunction
Has No Life
Posts: 11441
Joined: Wed May 10, 2006 6:20 am
Custom Title: Dérailleur Énigmatique

Re: MagneGas, Anyone?

Postby Major Malfunction » Thu Aug 13, 2015 2:40 pm

Burning MagicGas produces oxygen! Yay!
This being was produced using the same process as other beings, and therefore, may contain traces of nuts.

Bullfighter
New Member
Posts: 15
Joined: Thu Dec 24, 2015 11:35 am

Re: MagneGas, Anyone?

Postby Bullfighter » Thu Dec 24, 2015 11:56 am

Hi guys,

Before you ask, no, I am not another sock puppet of Santilli/MagneGas/isodual. In fact, I've quite enjoyed the thorough thrashing of the quackery for the past 5 years and 25 pages. I am posting to share with you some recent negative articles on MagneGas, the company.

http://www.thestreetsweeper.org/undersu ... nside_Risk
http://seekingalpha.com/article/3768216 ... t-downside

Of course, the company has done nothing to refute the articles except threaten lawsuits. I am sure you guys will find them a great read.

User avatar
Major Malfunction
Has No Life
Posts: 11441
Joined: Wed May 10, 2006 6:20 am
Custom Title: Dérailleur Énigmatique

Re: MagneGas, Anyone?

Postby Major Malfunction » Thu Jan 07, 2016 1:08 pm

If they were serious, they'd ask serious independent serious labs to seriously verify their "findings". Seriously.

I happen to know a guy who knows a guy who knows a guy with the biggest GCMS you can clap eyes on. It takes up a whole room.

I might be able to convince him to test it, if I just had a sample.

But they won't allow serious labs to test it, will they? Why not?

Obvious BS.
This being was produced using the same process as other beings, and therefore, may contain traces of nuts.

User avatar
Gord
Real Skeptic
Posts: 29416
Joined: Wed Apr 29, 2009 2:44 am
Custom Title: Silent Ork
Location: Transcona

Re: MagneGas, Anyone?

Postby Gord » Thu Jan 07, 2016 3:22 pm

Bullfighter wrote:http://seekingalpha.com/article/3768216-magnegas-strong-sell-on-opaque-offshore-entities-insider-enrichment-and-paid-stock-promotion-minus-92_9-percent-downside

Even if you assume MNGA is a legitimate company run by people you should trust with your savings, the current valuation of 113x trailing revenue means the stock is still -92.9% overvalued using a "best case" valuation. Simultaneously, global cutting gas juggernaut Praxair (NYSE:PX) presumably "passed" on MagneGas years ago when it was available for virtually nothing and instead is now aggressively marketing next-gen "StarFlame C" cutting gas nationwide, which is estimated to cut ~20% faster than MagneGas while costing at least -50% less with many other benefits. Meanwhile, core MNGA patents issued at company inception are expiring soon, rendering any hope of long-term upside a moot point. Further confirming this view, the company's insiders are aggressively dumping their stock into the temporary stock promotion despite MNGA's insider history of failing to disclose its trades to the SEC on a timely basis. Without further diluting shareholders, MNGA will go bankrupt as cash burn and losses continue to accelerate.

Woof.

All this and woo-woo physics, too! That Santilli guy sure seems dastardly now.
"Knowledge grows through infinite timelessness" -- the random fictional Deepak Chopra quote site
"You are also taking my words out of context." -- Justin
"Nullius in verba" -- The Royal Society ["take nobody's word for it"]
#ANDAMOVIE

Matthew Ellard
Real Skeptic
Posts: 26757
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2008 3:31 am

Re: MagneGas, Anyone?

Postby Matthew Ellard » Sat Jan 09, 2016 2:46 am

I've been reading the recent posts and exchanged a couple private messages recently. I just want to make a couple comments.

What is the final goal?
This is a skeptic forum and indeed, Magnegas's claims and other aspects of the enterprise, have been truly debunked and the short comings detailed in public, as people's opinions. That's probably as far, as this forum can probably go.


If Magnegas, was indeed a "pump & dump" that, through misleading information and unconscionable conduct, deliberately and with intent, deceived investors, then that is a complex legal argument. If I was an investor and I wanted my money back, I would have to gather information both for and against such an activity, within the framework of the law. That's something done best in private with legal representation, perhaps after finding other like minded investors, to share legal costs. At best, individual members of this forum, through their own volition, could supply "bits & pieces" of minor supporting evidence, such as "laboratories" really being country hotels and stuff like that.

If the final aim is to "take on Magnegas" through an internet campaign, then that's a bit murky. The Santilli people work through different countries, in different languages and using paper published "science" documents. We can't compete with an older established network, in different media, to the media we use. We don't even know who all the targets are, to set out an effective campaign. Therefore, it may be a better idea to focus on one, black & white, negative issue, that can easily be proven and go "blow smoke into the cave" by broadcasting this where the Santilli people promoted Magnegas. This may invite other dissatisfied investors to join in a legal proceeding, if there is a contact. That may force the Santilli people to come to you, rather than you chase the Santillis. However, this is high risk, as these people may be quite nasty and litigious. (That;s the problem with public pump & dump companies. The directors can spend endless amounts of the firm's money, fighting legal matters, with no personal exposure to themselves,)

I wish everyone Good luck, with their goals. :D

Bullfighter
New Member
Posts: 15
Joined: Thu Dec 24, 2015 11:35 am

Re: MagneGas, Anyone?

Postby Bullfighter » Sat Jan 09, 2016 11:57 am

Major,

Here are all the composition reports I have been able to find:

MagneGas 1 (original MSDS from 2011, sourced from loupgarous on Page 1)
Hydrogen 69.5%
Carbon Monoxide 28%
Methane 1.4%
Nitrogen 0.67%
Oxygen 0.22%
Trace Gases 0.21%

MagneGas 1 (revised MSDS dated 9/17/2013)
Hydrogen 55-65%
Carbon Monoxide 30-35%
Carbon Dioxide 1-2%
Trace Gases 0.5-1%

MagneGas (from MG Europe website, includes a very detailed report at bottom conducted by Atlantic Analytical Laboratory)
http://www.magnegas.eu/sites/default/fi ... inal-1.pdf
Probably the same one posted by loupgarous, but gives Heat of Combustion and Physical Properties as well.

MagneGas 2 (original MSDS dated 4/10/14)
http://www.tricowelding.com/msds_downlo ... 2_msds.pdf
Hydrogen 35-45%
Ethane 23-28%
Carbon Monoxide 13-17%
Ethylene 8-12%
Methane 3-5%
Trace Gases 2-3%
Carbon Dioxide 1-2%

MagneGas 2 (revised MSDS dated 3/10/2015)
Hydrogen 50-60%
Ethane 9-15%
Carbon Monoxide 8-12%
Ethylene 7-12%
Methane 4-8%
Trace Gases 2-3%
Carbon Dioxide 1-2%

MagneGas (CCNY Flame temperature report, Internal Vapor Analysis performed by Oneida Research Services 3/23/2012)
http://www.magnegas.com/docs/MG-Flame-report.pdf
Hydrogen 57.8%
Nitrogen 16.9%
Methane 12.4%
Water Vapor 1.11%
Unknown 11.8% <- Pretty high for a testing lab, ain't it?

Navy Test in 2014 ("second generation alternative fuel" created from virgin methanol)
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source= ... NcCn-WXAiA
Hydrogen 55-65%
Nitrogen 30-35%
Acetylene 3-5% <- as loupgarous deduced on Page 1
Methane 2-4%
Trace Gases .5-1%
Water Vapor 1000-2000 ppm

(edit: added original MagneGas 2 composition)
Last edited by Bullfighter on Sun Jan 10, 2016 9:21 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Poodle
Has More Than 8K Posts
Posts: 8220
Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2011 9:12 pm
Custom Title: Regular sleeper
Location: NE corner of my living room

Re: MagneGas, Anyone?

Postby Poodle » Sat Jan 09, 2016 10:10 pm

Well, well. From those analyses, it appears that the constitution of Magnegas depends completely upon the material being zapped by the super Magneprocedure (which appears to be anything at all).

Those magnecules must be all over the place.

Magneficent!

User avatar
Major Malfunction
Has No Life
Posts: 11441
Joined: Wed May 10, 2006 6:20 am
Custom Title: Dérailleur Énigmatique

Re: MagneGas, Anyone?

Postby Major Malfunction » Sun Jan 10, 2016 3:11 am

One of the main things you're buying when you buy a brand is consistency of product. Think McDonalds. MagicGas can't even handle that. Says something about the brand.
This being was produced using the same process as other beings, and therefore, may contain traces of nuts.

Bullfighter
New Member
Posts: 15
Joined: Thu Dec 24, 2015 11:35 am

Re: MagneGas, Anyone?

Postby Bullfighter » Sun Jan 10, 2016 7:37 am

While we're still on the topic of gas composition, I'd figure I should calculate the BTUs for each of these compositions.
[%v/v * Gross Heating Value (BTU/ft3)]
http://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/heati ... d_823.html

MagneGas 1 (original 2011 composition)
330 BTU/ft3 (same as figure given in analysis by Atlantic Analytical Laboratory)

MagneGas 1 (2013 composition)
325 BTU/ft3 (since H2 and CO have similar values, I'm using the assumption of 100% H2)

Navy Test (2014)
326 BTU/ft3 (assuming 5% acetylene, 4% methane, 65% hydrogen, 26% nitrogen and inert gases)
276 BTU/ft3 (assuming 3% acetylene, 2% methane, 65% hydrogen, 30% nitrogen and inert gases)

MagneGas 2 (2014 composition)
914 BTU/ft3 (28% ethane, 7%, CO, 12% ethylene, 5% methane, 45% hydrogen, 3% CO2 and inert gases)
769 BTU/ft3 (23% ethane, 17% CO, 8% ethylene, 3% methane, 44% hydrogen, 5% CO2 and inert gases)

MagneGas 2 (2015 composition)
745 BTU/ft3 (15% ethane, 12% CO, 12% ethylene, 8% methane, 50% hydrogen, 3% CO2 and inert gases)
579 BTU/ft3 (9% ethane, 12% CO, 7% ethylene, 7% methane, 60% hydrogen, 5% CO2 and inert gases)

Common Fuels for Comparison
Acetylene (C2H2) - 1498 BTU/ft3
Butane (C4H10) - 3077 BTU/ft3
Propane (C3H8) - 2572 BTU/ft3

For the SI master race, 1 Btu/ft3 = 8.9 kcal/m3 = 3.73x104 J/m3
Other considerations / calculations: https://neutrium.net/heat_transfer/heat-of-combustion/
Last edited by Bullfighter on Sun Jan 10, 2016 9:29 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Gord
Real Skeptic
Posts: 29416
Joined: Wed Apr 29, 2009 2:44 am
Custom Title: Silent Ork
Location: Transcona

Re: MagneGas, Anyone?

Postby Gord » Sun Jan 10, 2016 7:51 am

What are the margins of error on those tests, I wonder.
"Knowledge grows through infinite timelessness" -- the random fictional Deepak Chopra quote site
"You are also taking my words out of context." -- Justin
"Nullius in verba" -- The Royal Society ["take nobody's word for it"]
#ANDAMOVIE

Bullfighter
New Member
Posts: 15
Joined: Thu Dec 24, 2015 11:35 am

Re: MagneGas, Anyone?

Postby Bullfighter » Sun Jan 10, 2016 8:31 am

The analysis done by Atlantic Analytical Laboratory seems pretty accurate to me. I don't suspect foul play there. After all, the composition fits the exact description of a syngas. The revised composition for MagneGas 1 is still similar to the original.
http://biofuel.org.uk/what-is-syngas.html
http://www.hgxb.com.cn/EN/abstract/abstract17574.shtml (sample composition of a soybean oil-derived syngas)

The Navy doesn't specify exactly who performed the composition analysis of the "second generation" fuel, but I'm going to assume they were the ones that did.

The composition report from Oneida Research Services seems odd considering the 11.8% "unknown" gas part. In fact, any % unknown is odd considering AAL had sensitivity down to 0.001% of volume. Probably 11.8% magnecules?

I have no idea who performed the MagneGas 2 test, but from the looks of it, they've seem to have started just mixing natural gas into it given the sudden presence of ethane, ethylene, and methane. And judging by this patent, it looks like I'm right.
Warning: carbon nanoparticle technobabble rabblerabble ahead.
http://patents.justia.com/patent/20150315504

Matthew Ellard
Real Skeptic
Posts: 26757
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2008 3:31 am

Re: MagneGas, Anyone?

Postby Matthew Ellard » Tue Jan 26, 2016 11:05 pm

Here is the next Santilli Scheme.
Basically, Mr Santilli has invented a brand new telescope that has found inhabitable planets. I can spot four lies immediately.


http://www.thunder-energies.com/docs/IT ... -15-15.pdf

http://thunder-energies.com/index.php/c ... -article-8

Bullfighter
New Member
Posts: 15
Joined: Thu Dec 24, 2015 11:35 am

Re: MagneGas, Anyone?

Postby Bullfighter » Tue Jan 26, 2016 11:19 pm

I love how their single concave lens produces a focal point at the same location as a convex lens.
For those unfamiliar with optics:
http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hb ... ydiag.html

And they couldn't bother to produce an accurate refraction diagram of light in water! Ugh!

Matthew Ellard
Real Skeptic
Posts: 26757
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2008 3:31 am

Re: MagneGas, Anyone?

Postby Matthew Ellard » Tue Jan 26, 2016 11:54 pm

Bullfighter wrote:I love how their single concave lens produces a focal point at the same location as a convex lens.
For those unfamiliar with optics
My jaw dropped when I saw the diagrams.

Someone on the JREF forum found this "gem" first. It's obviously early days and ground work for the scam, or just "surrounding fluff" to give Mr Santilli credibility.


http://www.internationalskeptics.com/fo ... t=santilli

Bullfighter
New Member
Posts: 15
Joined: Thu Dec 24, 2015 11:35 am

Re: MagneGas, Anyone?

Postby Bullfighter » Wed Jan 27, 2016 12:05 am

It was also "introduced" by our friend donborghi/isodual on Thunderbolts.

http://www.thunderbolts.info/forum/phpB ... 413a3699f7


Return to “Scams and Con Games”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest