How about this..

[Drich]

Desse made the mistake assuming I did not know what closed loop meant in relation to power generation. He probably did a simple generic google search and a general electrical definition.. as he not being a legit engineer simply did not know any better.

You do not know anything about Deese. You are just assuming that he isn't a legitimate engineer because he does not agree with you (all the while not realising that no one agrees with you).

I work with engineers daily. deese is way way to closed minded and intentionally uninformed which in of itself is not his tell.. his tell is his lack of a basic vocabulary. you can not be anyone who has been educated or ever work on any more than one thing. He seems to know what he knows but it is like he worked one job and knows everything about his one task.

How can one who claims to know engineering ( a very broad field) fail to understand a term like close loop. it means something different in EVERY SINGLE DISCIPLINE of engineering and design. If you only worked on cars day in and day out you would know that word pertained to a car reading off it's sensors or working from a pre programmed set of parameters. OR in a car it could also be used to describe the air conditioning circuit. So he is not even a basic car mechanic or if he is he specializes in one part of the car which is not something a modern mechanic can only do. Because the word closed loop means something different in every discipline, an engineer would research the specific application before he commits or speaks. Engineers mind set is not to persume or assume but to align their work with know science or values. it is to take an idea and then research to proove his ideas are right. Desse would have researched closed loop power plants if he knew this is a generic term. which brings us to his second tell. he researches absolutely nothing. he assumes he knows it all. Take an honest look between all of the different citations links and video I align my ideas with, and then look at what he was able to produce when asked on several occasions.. the man never produced anything no matter how many times I asked him to cite something. engineers provide primary source material if not secondary when primary is not available.

Dude proble works on a cruise ship or a freighter.. they call allof their workers engineers.

Meanwhile you try to make an argument from authority because you are a refrigerator technician. And because no one else is doing the same you assume that it is because they cannot. This is an example of your arrogance.

again title aside look at the quality of response IE look at who produces citations links and videos and who can't produce a working definition of a word so as not to humiliate himself for a basic comprehension failure.

The truth is that there are many people on this forum far more qualified than you to talk about thermodynamics yet they do not make an argument from authority because they recognise that doing so is a fallacious argument.

THEN THEY SHOULD OR COULD HAVE SHUT ME DOWN Simply by telling me my machine uses fuel. but NONE not one of you qualified people who could have thermodynamically pounded me into the ground did so.. again this was not a one or two hour discussion.. I let this go one and on for 5 days to show you people how inept you where in researching and discussing scientific fact and existing technology.

5 days where any one of the experts you mention could have said "heydrich are you stupid or something? your plant used the earth's heat as fuel! did you not even look up the word PMM? it says it in the defination, the machine can not use fuel!!!" but... none of you even broached the subject.

(yes deesee used the word nuclear fuel because he thought I thought the ground 7.5 miles down was radioactive/read his post and follow up but that has nothing to do with why my machine is not PMM)

I would have let the discussion go on for a month if not for the fact you guys began to use arguments you where trying on day one. (circling back around hoping the old stuff would stick.) Then even after I let you in on it (the smart one immediately shut up) but the rest took another 7 days to finally get/accept what was done.

yet you say there are people here more qualified???


Fine let's go with that.. just riddle me this who are they and why didn't they speak up? why did they let the rest of you get gut hooked into a discussion where all of you look like... what you claim I am?

Not only that have you missed the point all together? it's not about school it is about backing what you say up with legit scientific fact, so even if there was a guy more qualified he still can not argue documented facts. That is what i did that is what I do. ALL THE TIME.

Also, because unlike you they do know their subject, they don't have to try convincing others to believe them.

until someone like me shows someone like deesee to be lying or completely ignorant completely destroying his credibility EVEN IF HE WAS A full on real life engineer. Why? because unlike what you group thinkers have been taught it is not about your pedigree it is about the truth and what you can prove. like I proved desse was 1000% wrong when he said closed loops systems have nothing to do with nuclear power. Do yu truly still not understand? Science and technology trumps what even a 'respected man' thinks or feels. Don't you guys use this on christians all of the time? How the hell can you let a christian then beat you with this same strategy???

I'm thinking that it's more than just a Dunning Kruger syndrome with you. You seem pathologically incapable of admitting either that you are wrong or do not know something. Even when it is pointed out to you in ways that cannot be refuted, you instead claim it was a deliberate move on your part to test us. You are fooling no one.

beloved.. show me where I was wrong.
show me where what I said did not match the science I posted.
Show me where my definition of closed loop was 'not used by the nuclear power industry show me where I was not right in how my initial machine was wrong..
(which btw just showed you to be a name calling ad hoc, liar.)
because IAM THE ONE who identified my machine as a non PMM, when you all proved that none of you knew enough basic science to shut me down/identify the fatal flaw in this design after 5 days That beloved is an admission of being wrong right there.

So now show me where any of you properly refuted anything I have said.. You WILL NOT AND CAN NOT. Why? because I like all engineers build arguments/things based on know and verifiable quantities and or facts. so if there is a failure it can be identified and fixed. I make up nothing on the fly I am disciplined and research everything. know it or not like it or not I'm usually 2 or 3 days ahead of most of you when speaking to you. why?

Because the smarter members have already gone down this road, and most of you write it off as incomprehensible drich dribble. but you gotta remember I am often times dealing with a dozen or more of you at a time and can 9times out of 10 address you where you are at in the conversation your failures your good points and mistakes without having to reference anything, while most of you struggle trying to keep up with me.. So how do I know I am right when I speak to you? because I researched it 3 days before when the question was first asked and was right then.

It is OK to admit that you do not know something or were wrong. We all have to do this at some point, why are you incapable of doing so yourself?

---

Could’ve been sharing the word of god, but that takes a backseat to the word of drich.

To be fair, we know that Drich exists.

Still waiting on that one.. ALL of you where wrong here not one of you has admitted it.

The best i've gotten from any of you is when you figure out what I've done... is you shut up and move on. but no admissions.

And again post 179 in the so what happened thread was me showing you when and how i was wrong. i even made an out line in this thread showing all of you how and why my reasoning failed.. remember why I said engineers research everything to align themselves with truths and known quanities so when it fails we can determine why. that out/time line was an failure analysis. Something you hero desse has yet to demonstrate or has done.

In the out line I went step by step and showed you all of the times I failed how and why I failed. I also showed you how all f yu failed and provided a synopsis of how and why also..

Something desee again has not done.

he/se is emotionally motivated and everything comes from the gut with that one. he/she communicates like a scolding parent on their say so. again no engineer works that way..