Jury: No evidence of energy production - "is not full truth" - Steorn.

Friday, January 22, 2010

They say a week in politics is a long time. However, politics has nothing on the fast pace of events in the world of Steorn, so I will attempt to bring you up to date.

First of all there have been some developments with the Steorn "jury".

Ian R MacDonald (Chairman Of The Steorn "Jury") has emerged on the scene again. He has been given a functioning account on the Steorn Forum and has posted a couple of times after being in email contact with Steorn.

From that contact emerged this statement from Steorn:


Just to clarify/correct a comment that I had made previously in the forum where I stated that Steorn was not allowed to release the Jury report. The statement is not entirely correct, we (Steorn) would not have been allowed to release the Jury report with the names of the Jurors. It is the opinion of the Jury that Steorn is specifically denied the right to use Jurors names in the public domain.

Hope this clears this up, I will not be commenting on the details of this any further.


So basically, the jury were telling Steorn that they could publish the jury report, but only if the names of the jurors were kept secret.  Why this would have been an issue is not clear, since the jury's own site voluntarily listed 16 of the 22 members names back at the time of their original statement, in fact some of them even went further and posted bios and career resumes, so why now the request for silence?. 

Further than that, a statement from back on 1st December 2006 says: 

"The jury have all agreed to see the testing process through to its completion and have their names and findings disclosed once the testing is complete. Steorn has agreed not to identify members of the jury until the results are made public, to protect their privacy and avoid unnecessary interruptions to their work."

Why are the jury are now refusing to put their names to THEIR OWN REPORT despite agreeing to this in 2006?

Also puzzling is the chairman's decision to post and interact with another well known foul mouthed Steorn debunkers forum referred to hereafter as the "other forum".

Later the same day Steorn posted the following on the forum:


First I would like to welcome Ian to the Steorn forum and was unaware that he had made a decision to post in the 'other forum'.

As you are aware it is opinion of the Jury that Steorn is unable to name the members of the Jury. As such any document that we may decide to put into the public domain are without provenance and we must question the value of doing this.

However we are aware that several independent news media organization have interviewed members of the Jury and we expect publication of these interviews in the near term.

So, as with all things ultimately the truth will surface.



So why now are some jury members choosing to conduct media interviews and not back at the time of the initial jury statement? What is so special about the jury interacting with the media NOW?

Given the fact that Steorn are about to launch the SKDB in 10 days, is there something we should read into the coincidental timing of these as yet unpublished jury member interviews? One would hope that this would be an attempt by some members to simply set the record straight, and NOT an attempt to take media focus away from the SKDB launch.

Steorn posted again later in the day:

It has been the opinion of our legal firm that we have every right to issue the statements made by the Jury to Steorn and the names of those involved. We had made an internal decision that any action against the company by the Jury would not be productive. This is a decision that we are now reconsidering, we are firmly of the opinion that the statement made by the Jury of "no evidence of energy production" is not the full truth. This fact and the decision of the Chairman of the Jury to selectively answer questions on the "other forum" has forced us to actively considering issuing Jury information that we are advised that we are well within our legal rights to do.

In other news from The Waterways Demo:

Experiment - No Depletion Of The Magnetic Domain Energy (To prove the energy Isn't coming from the magnets themselves)

Steorn are currently running a week long "soak test" on one of the Orbo rigs at the Waterways Centre.  The soak test involves measuring the energy of the magnetic domains in the neodymium magnets at the start, then after a full week of constant running the energy contained in the magnetic domains of the magnets will be re-tested and should not have depleted.  This will prove that the domain energy stored in the magnets is not being used up to perform the work of turning the rotor.

Steorn have now confirmed that for this experiment they are using  optical switching to manage the pulsing of the coils. The reed switches used previously are proving unreliable for a constant week long soak test.



Post a Comment


Contact me at mailto:contact@overunity.co

  © Blogger template The Professional Template II by Ourblogtemplates.com 2009

Back to TOP