Hi Kiril,

I think you need to step back and realize that these questions posed by
wthwthwthwth are not unreasonable at all.

Radical claims require radically thorough proof before skeptics will
consider them bona fide.

I do think you waste your time with skeptics.

It takes a special breed of Don Quixote like person, with just a touch of
reality, to bring revolutionary technologies into existence.

While yet in the pioneer stage, you cannot expect a lot of company. Few can
endure the hardships of forging new territory.

So while I agree that wthwthwthwth's questions are fair, I also think your
response is inappropriate.

Admit it, you are a maverick. You should be proud of that, rather than
bashful.

By trying to placate the skeptics who want you to look like most other
credentialed Ph.D.'s they've met, you only give them fodder to question your
legitimacy.

Own your maverickness.

The reason you are not published in the mainstream journals in your field is
because you are a maverick, not because you are wrong.

Anyone knows enough history to know that many good things have come from
outside the realms of those who would have been expected to birth such
things.

Be proud that you are not part of the mainstream.

In my opinion, it only makes me more convinced that if you have something,
it is huge.

And I do believe you have something.

Sterling

________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________

Message: 9
Date: Mon, 07 Jul 2003 19:04:19 -0000
From: "wthwthwthwth" <wthwthwth@...>
Subject: Re: Chukanov's bona fides?

On Wednesday, July 2, 2003, at 11:17 PM, Angelina Chukanov wrote:

>Hello, Mister wthwthwthwth,
>I'm curious to know more about you.

I'm an electrical engineer. My interest in the areas of
pseudoscience and pathological science began after I
was hired to test a device promoted by Tom Bearden. The
device failed miserably, and since then I've been fascinated
by the delusional and/or fraudulent behavior that typically
characterizes these sorts of inventions.


>You criticized me too much(very unfairly) from distance.

What is unfair about my criticism? I have made two points
in my previous messages:

(1) Despite your claims of a Ph.D. and faculty appointments
at three different universities (one of them a full professorship
at a Bulgarian university), and despite describing yourself as
a "world authority on ball lightning", there is not a single
peer-reviewed paper written by you that is listed in the
INSPEC, ProQuest, or Compendex databases. Anyone
can go to a library and verify that this is true.

(2) You are committing a fundamental scientific error in
thinking that a comparison of the light generated by two
entirely different physical processes (incandescent heating
vs. high-voltage plasma excitation) can be used to estimate
the power output of your plasma generator. Dr. Rhodes made
the same point to you in his comments on Sterling Allan's web
page. In his words: "You cannot compare power consumption
of a light bulb from a filament with a glow discharge from
(a) capacitor, or microwave."


>I'm not a charlatan, I spent so many years on this
>research which is finally successful. I would like you to come in my
> house and my lab for demonstrations and discussions.

I don't think you're a charlatan or a deliberate fraud. I do
believe that you are deluding yourself, like so many free energy
researchers before you. You have put so much of your life
into your creations that you won't face the fact that you can't
make them work after 17 years. I have no intention of traveling to
Utah to see you in person, because I would never invest a
dime in your invention based on your responses to my
questions so far. It would be a waste of my time and yours.


>I spent so much my money on
>this project, I sacrificed my career(my PhD is not "fake" as you
>told me), I sacrificed my health, my reputation(because all
>"free energy" researchers are considered by the official
>science as a crazy people), I sacrificed my
>family's comfort(no weekends, no vacations,...) and now, when I'm f
>ready to start business I lost my two jobs. At 59 years nobody wants
>to hire me even though on very low level job. Nobody cares
>about my diplomas, education and experience.

I never said your Ph.D. was fake. What I said was that any
responsible investor would make a point of thoroughly
investigating your background and confirming your
educational and professional history before giving you
$1M for your research, particularly since there is no record
of your work in any mainstream peer-reviewed conference
or journal anywhere in the world.

You claim to have written many papers and books. It would
take a legitimate researcher (and in particular an ex-professor)
very little effort to put together a vita and bibliography of his
prior publications. So why don't you do it, instead
of protesting how unfair people are being for asking about it?

And as for your work history, I have to agree with Professor
Element who wondered why someone with your claimed
credentials can't get any sort of employment related to science
or engineering. I do know that most U.S. companies that hire
engineers and scientists make a point of verifying the
information on applicants' resumes. What is it about your
background that makes you unemployable in the areas
you claim to be an expert in?


> I think many "free energy" researchers are like me.

That is unfortunately true. Many free energy researchers spend
their lives in a vain attempt to make their dreams come true.
The problem is that the laws of physics don't care about
people's dreams and desires.


>And because of that, it is extremely unfairly to humiliate those
>people - just for fun. I don't care too much about your "destructive"
>criticism from distance, I care more about all those free energy
>researchers who are unfairly criticized by people like you.

I'm not trying to humiliate anyone, and I don't think I'm being
unfair. You are the one who claims to be a world authority on
ball lightning and quantum physics. You are the one who is
looking for investment money.

All I'm doing is legitimately pointing out inconsistencies in
your background and claims. Instead of addressing them
rationally, and providing specific evidence to prove your
claims in this forum, you're either lashing out in anger or
complaining how unfair life has been to you. As I've already
said, anyone who is going to give you the money you need to
build your commercial generator is going to be much more
harsh and critical than I have been.


>This forum must serve as a
>space for exchange of ideas, advices, support,help.I'm sure you are
>a good person and we can become friends. I'm saying that not
>because I'm afraid of your criticism, but because all we must be
>friends.
>Kiril Chukanov

I have no desire to be your friend, but I have no desire to be
your enemy, either. The scientific method isn't about being
friends or enemies, it's about separating truth from fiction, and
fact from fantasy.

Criticism of unusual claims is part of the scientific process. Anyone
who makes a claim that violates the accepted laws of physics
had better be prepared for lots of comments and criticism from
others. Until you are willing to defend your claims with solid
analysis, mathematics, and measurements, you are only making
yourself look even worse.

WTH


________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________

Message: 17
Date: Tue, 08 Jul 2003 01:21:27 -0000
From: "wthwthwthwth" <wthwthwth@...>
Subject: Chukanov's reply

On Monday, July 7, 2003, at 04:19 PM, Angelina Chukanov wrote:

>You are really very stubborn person. It is stupid for me to continue
>this meaningless polemics. This is the last time I answer your
>stupid provocation.
>Regards.

If by "stubborn" you mean "unwilling to accept an extraordinary
claim without proof" then yes I am. You've certainly provided no
proof whatsoever for your claims about your prior research and
publications, nor any satisfactory explanation for your use of an
incandescent light source as a yardstick for estimating the power
output of a plasma light source.

I do not believe you will have much luck finding investors for
your company.

WTH