Car Powered By Water A Reality (link)

Page 4 of 4 [ 58 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4

yesplease
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 28 Dec 2006
Age: 43
Gender: Male
Posts: 517

26 Apr 2008, 1:15 am

velodog wrote:
yesplease,

Denny Klein claims the following:
1) Turned the mickey mouse molecule into HHO (something other than water ). Do you believe it? I don't.
2) The original article is dated Sept. 6 2006. They claimed the car would be available in two years. Now on the hytechapps website they claim a car system will be available in 2009. Do you believe they will meet that deadline? I don't.

3) States that he can drive a car 100 miles on 4 ounces of water. Do you buy that? I don't.
Why are you asking me? You already know, somehow, w/o me stating anything along those lines, that I believe all the things you're asking me about. Why are you even bothering with WP in the first place? Go shock the world with your telepathic abilities. :lol:
velodog wrote:
Denny Klein claims to have converted H2O into HHO, which is apparently NOT water vapor. And it is apparently not two H2s to a one O2 ratio in the conventionally accepted manner that those molecules would normally exist.
How is it not either of those? From what I've read on the article and site, Klein has not defined what HHO is at all in any strict scientific manner.
velodog wrote:
Do you believe that the burden of proof of such extraordinary claims rests with Denny Klein?
What extraordinary claims? All they've done is ramble on about vague things in equally vague terms. The only extraordinary claim I've seen is the one you made about my beliefs. So velodog, how do you know that I believe the supposed claims you cited?
velodog wrote:
yesplease,

Denny Klein claims the following:
1) Turned the mickey mouse molecule into H-H-O you believe it, I don't
2) Will have a car on the market in 2 years that has a portable electrolytic unit to convert H2O to H-H-O you believe it may happen, I don't.
3) States that he can drive a car 100 miles on 4 ounces of water, you buy that, I don't.



iamnotaparakeet
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 31 Jul 2007
Age: 38
Gender: Male
Posts: 25,091
Location: 0.5 Galactic radius

26 Apr 2008, 8:13 pm

Yesplease, one of your earlier posts was amphibolic; that is probably why velodog figured you thought in that manner. What are your views, if you don't mind?



yesplease
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 28 Dec 2006
Age: 43
Gender: Male
Posts: 517

26 Apr 2008, 10:32 pm

iamnotaparakeet wrote:
Yesplease, one of your earlier posts was amphibolic; that is probably why velodog figured you thought in that manner. What are your views, if you don't mind?
Then why didn't that poster initially ask me to clarify what I meant? In any event, my point was that, just like other devices that can allow for increased engine efficiency and in some cases energy storage, electrolysis of water and storage/use of the hydrogen gas can result in increased vehicle efficiency under certain conditions.



iamnotaparakeet
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 31 Jul 2007
Age: 38
Gender: Male
Posts: 25,091
Location: 0.5 Galactic radius

26 Apr 2008, 11:50 pm

yesplease wrote:
iamnotaparakeet wrote:
Yesplease, one of your earlier posts was amphibolic; that is probably why velodog figured you thought in that manner. What are your views, if you don't mind?
Then why didn't that poster initially ask me to clarify what I meant? In any event, my point was that, just like other devices that can allow for increased engine efficiency and in some cases energy storage, electrolysis of water and storage/use of the hydrogen gas can result in increased vehicle efficiency under certain conditions.


You ask, "Then why didn't that poster initially ask me to clarify what I meant?" I can know what's on velodog's mind, but usually when people insult others it is for an ego boast and to supposedly make themselves look more intelligent than they really are.

Here's a question for you: is it easier to build or to destroy?



yesplease
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 28 Dec 2006
Age: 43
Gender: Male
Posts: 517

27 Apr 2008, 12:15 am

iamnotaparakeet wrote:
You ask, "Then why didn't that poster initially ask me to clarify what I meant?" I can know what's on velodog's mind, but usually when people insult others it is for an ego boast and to supposedly make themselves look more intelligent than they really are.
I can't rule out what you're stating, since assuming I'm an impartial observer of myself would be as nutty as a fruit cake to say the least. However, that being said, IMO it's very frustrating when people state I've said or believe things that I've never said or believed in order to prove some point, and I lash out if they do this consistently. This is because IME, if I don't, people tend to continue this behavior, and construct what they believe I said, or what my opinion is, in order to prove some point, regardless of what I stated and the convo goes round and round...
iamnotaparakeet wrote:
Here's a question for you: is it easier to build or to destroy?
Depends... Can you provide more information?



velodog
Gold Supporter
Gold Supporter

User avatar

Joined: 15 Mar 2008
Age: 64
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,374

27 Apr 2008, 2:49 am

yesplease wrote:
velodog wrote:
Denny Klein claims to have converted H2O into HHO, which is apparently NOT water vapor. And it is apparently not two H2s to a one O2 ratio in the conventionally accepted manner that those molecules would normally exist.
How is it not either of those? From what I've read on the article and site, Klein has not defined what HHO is at all in any strict scientific manner.
velodog wrote:
Do you believe that the burden of proof of such extraordinary claims rests with Denny Klein?
What extraordinary claims? All they've done is ramble on about vague things in equally vague terms. The only extraordinary claim I've seen is the one you made about my beliefs. So velodog, how do you know that I believe the supposed claims you cited?
[quote="velodog"]

1)As to how I read the article and determined that Denny Klein was not talking about water vapor or standard H2 and O2 as products of electrolysis. 2nd paragraph, 3rd line "Aquygen is water or H2O, broken down and turned into HHO gas, something scientists once thought impossible."

Since I have not heard of any scientists disputing the existence of water vapor, or H2 and O2 as the products of electrolysis, I concluded that HHO was not referring to either of those.

2) Further down the page "Klein sees a totally Aquygen powered car sometime in the future.With that, he says you could drive 100 miles on 4 ounces of water."

This is not vague to me. This is a definite distance of 100 miles driven, with a definite quantity of 4 ounces of water as the only fuel required. This claim does seem extraordinary to me. As far as what you believe, I have no idea.



yesplease
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 28 Dec 2006
Age: 43
Gender: Male
Posts: 517

27 Apr 2008, 2:39 pm

velodog wrote:
1)As to how I read the article and determined that Denny Klein was not talking about water vapor or standard H2 and O2 as products of electrolysis. 2nd paragraph, 3rd line "Aquygen is water or H2O, broken down and turned into HHO gas, something scientists once thought impossible."

Since I have not heard of any scientists disputing the existence of water vapor, or H2 and O2 as the products of electrolysis, I concluded that HHO was not referring to either of those.
That is of course assuming that Klein understands what scientists, in general, think is impossible. Considering that the article is lacking in the science department, to say the least, that assumption may not be true. Do you have any evidence that Klein understands what scientists in general believe wrt this subject?
velodog wrote:
2) Further down the page "Klein sees a totally Aquygen powered car sometime in the future.With that, he says you could drive 100 miles on 4 ounces of water."

This is not vague to me. This is a definite distance of 100 miles driven, with a definite quantity of 4 ounces of water as the only fuel required. This claim does seem extraordinary to me. As far as what you believe, I have no idea.
I don't see where the only substance required is four ounces of water. All it says is that someone could drive 100 miles on 4 ounces of water. It doesn't state that is only what it's using.



pakled
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Nov 2007
Age: 66
Gender: Male
Posts: 7,015

27 Apr 2008, 9:02 pm

I dunno...all I know about chemistry is from some Time/Life books (the Elements)that my parents got in the 60s. I seem to remember Francium as being extremely short-lived; the picture for that element just showed a notation in a notebook...;) But it would go boom quite nicely...;)

We'll see what happens. If it is the wonderful alternative to ICE that we've been promised, I'm sure the car companies would have already dispatched assassins to take care of the inventory...;)



MysteryFan3
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 8 Jun 2007
Age: 67
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,156
Location: Indiana

27 Apr 2008, 9:13 pm

Well, I didn't expect this much controversy when I linked this news item. After reading the posts, I searched for more information. There are a lot of arguments on the Web about this, too. One link is to a bunch of experiments posted on YouTube for home-built HHO generators, some hooked up to cars. They're interesting to watch.

I don't know if this will pan out, but kudos to the inventors out there for trying. :D


_________________
To eliminate poverty, you have to eliminate at least three things: time, the bell curve and the Pauli Exclusion Principle. Have fun.


nutbag
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 27 Jan 2007
Gender: Female
Posts: 2,582
Location: Arizona

28 Apr 2008, 12:21 am

They are not inventors. They are scammers.


_________________
Who is John Galt?
Still Moofy after all these years
It is by will alone that I set my mind in motion
cynicism occurs immediately upon pressing your brain's start button