# Question to moderators about indie gogo campaign.



## glaucodobrasil (Nov 11, 2015)

Hey folks,

I would like to ask if I can post an Indie GOGO campaign here in Bar & Grill related to a new Operational System that a scientist is trying to fund. I'm not related to him, I'm just a fan who wishes to help it. The question may look weird, but I tried to do that on FreeBSD and Linux.org forums, but they ban me after a lot of personal offenses, and I don't want that to occur here.

Tks!


----------



## patnor1011 (Nov 13, 2015)

Post a link to moderators so they can see if it is related to forum topics and if it is not a pie in the sky type of a thing.


----------



## g_axelsson (Nov 13, 2015)

Personally I would say no, but I was hoping some other moderator would have spoken up by now so I didn't have to take a stance. 8) 

This forum is about gold refining and the bar and grill is more like a social gathering point where we do discuss different things with each others to create more like a community, not as an advertising area.

But since no other moderators have said anything yet I'll make a decision (which might be overruled but will keep you from being banned).

We already know that it's a campaign on indiegogo and it concerns an operating system. You may mention it by name, talk about it's merits and mention the campaign on indiegogo but don't post any direct links to the campaign. If people are interested in it it's easy to use google to find it.

My thoughts is that without a direct link it won't help in search rankings but still smart people could find it easily. This is to protect the forum from becoming an advertising board.

I appreciate that you asked before posting. 8) 

Göran


----------



## Harold_V (Nov 14, 2015)

Very well handled, Göran!

Harold


----------



## patnor1011 (Nov 14, 2015)

And I thought it has something to do with refining. :mrgreen: 
If that is not the case, there is no need to even mention that. I mean operating systems today and tomorrow what? Shoes?


----------



## g_axelsson (Nov 14, 2015)

Harold_V said:


> Very well handled, Göran!
> 
> Harold


That made my day! :mrgreen: 

Happy Linux user since 1992.

Göran


----------



## glaucodobrasil (Nov 15, 2015)

Hey folks! Sorry, I had my Internet out past week.

Tks for your reply, I will not post the campaign, this have nothing to do with gold and will very likely looks like a propaganda or advertisement. Let's keep it here. I'm a little afraid because this have everything to do about Operating Systems, but they banned me from forums that is related to that, like FreeBSD and Linux (after being attacked by five guys in turns, and having my honor attacked with no reason.).

But as this thread is already opened and if you are curious, take a look at the campaign. I will not post links too, just access indie gogo and look for Windroids. The guy is a very honored scientist, and he does a lot of research in mathematics, space sciences and electromagnetic propulsion motors. I'm a fan of him, sometimes we talk by phone or email, and I'm sure nobody here will get misled if starts following his work.

Bye and very tks for your reply!


----------



## g_axelsson (Nov 15, 2015)

I had a look and I think he is a dreamer. A modern OS is so much more than what a few programmers can put together in a few months on a shoestring budget as low as a million bucks.

I've been following Linux since it's birth and to think that you can come together a few guys and in a few months create something safer that is also usable is just hubris. And why did he start talking about wifi versus a cell phone plan? A good OS shouldn't care if the connection is wifi or cellular.

Instead of telling what his new and revolutionary way to protect user data from snooping is he just points out some well known issues with windows and that users seldom updates their software which leaves them open to exploits.

No, he doesn't impress me.

As a background on my credentials, I've studied the workings of operating systems since early 90:es and I've worked a bit with computer security, tracking intrusion attempts and general computer security. I've also done some code breaking, reverse engineering and even found some grave security holes in equipment... how about remotely turning on a microphone in an alarm system to listen in on a room. :mrgreen: 

Disclaimer... I'm just a grumpy old programmer that's starting to have a 50 year crisis. :lol: 

Göran


----------



## glaucodobrasil (Nov 15, 2015)

Actually I'm sure he is a dreamer, but a realistic one. He found the way to determine directly a prime number - this is a 2500 years mistery. He also found out that the Universe works by electricity, and that comets are not dirty snow balls, but rocks of any size excited by plasma electric when they enter a solar system that can turn into planets if they are large enough, and that this electricity is the real cause of all of our weather, not the sun light. He also did a project on how to mount a real electromagnetic propulsion motor that could put our civilization in outer space without rockets or fuel. The interesting thing about all of it is that everything he did - besides the Prime Number thing, that is very recent - was published in Peer Review analysis in Cornell (NASA), the american aerospace administration and the american geophysical union. Why his work did not replace current space, weather theories and propulsion systems? Because he replaced alone almost a century of prestablished theories. Will take a hundred years before the science community starts using his work as they should. He also created a new kind of wind generator that runs slow and don't kill birds, and you can make it out of PVC pipes. I'm about to construct mine.

He is a very prolific scientist, and he does everything in background and suddenly he presents what he was doing ready to use. As he have 25 years experience creating the hardware and the software for mainframes used in telecom, and as nothing has changed since then other than computing power and storage - the infrastructure is the same -, I believe this OS is already fully designed, only waiting for programmers to start working on it. Four months is enough to start sending beta versions if everything is already designed. I'm a computer scientist with +10 years of experience, specialized in software, and I know that a very well designed system can be done quickly if the correct guys are working on it. This OS will not replace Windows or Android, he will only do what a OS does - manage the hardware, memory, and users. The rest will be emulated, and emulation is his specialty in this area.

I'm a fan of him for almost 10 years, and I never saw him making mistakes on his predictions all this time - he does annually predictions of weather, and he predicted hurricanes, storms and even earthquakes sometimes 10 months in advance. He predicts date, time, location and intensity of each of these things, only using the weather theory he created. I know I can't convince nobody about all of it, but give him a chance. A single share on Facebook may help putting his campaign up in the search pages.


----------



## g_axelsson (Nov 15, 2015)

glaucodobrasil, I hope you are joking? You can't be serious that you believe everything on his homepage?



glaucodobrasil said:


> He also found out that the Universe works by electricity, and that comets are not dirty snow balls, but rocks of any size excited by plasma electric when they enter a solar system that can turn into planets if they are large enough, and that this electricity is the real cause of all of our weather, not the sun light.



I suggest some critical thinking here... any new planets popped up lately? Any rock that would gain mass as fast as he claims (one passage behind the Sun) would shine brighter than the Sun from the potential energy released as heat.

I found his website and... I think I need to take a shower, I feel dirty. It was so full of garbage science about space physics... well, I didn't feel like wasting more time there so I only browsed through some of it.

Then I wondered what the prime number thing was, since I've dabbled in that area too and I never heard that you could determine directly a prime number so I googled that claim.
On a mathematics board I found out that his new and revolutionizing method was nothing more than a sieve of Eratosthenes coupled with using primordials. Nothing that a true mathematician would be excited over. It's old theory and nothing new.

I also happened to see a link to a site I know very well. One of the best sites in existence when it comes to deal with bad astronomy is Phil Plait's BadAstronomy and he had a page just for McCanney.


Phil Plait's said:


> He has lots of theories, and he will talk about them endlessly. However, he says these things without the benefit of being right. I have run into a lot of pseudoscientists saying wrong things in my time, but McCanney is neck-and-neck with Richard Hoagland for being the wrongest. His theories are not just bad, they're truly awful, just as wrong as they could be. In fact, he's so far off base that's it's easy to show just where his theories fall apart (basically, at square one); and I'll be happy to show you the details.


http://www.badastronomy.com/bad/misc/mccanney/index.html

We just had a similar thread about free energy and stuff. I'm going to save us a lot of time by just stating that everything I've seen so far from him has been bogus and utterly wrong and the only thing he so far has proved is that he doesn't know what he is talking about.

Based on that I would expect that any money gambled on his indiegogo projects are probably lost.

Göran


----------



## Harold_V (Nov 16, 2015)

Keep a few things in mind, which should help you sort reality from fiction.

There is no free lunch.

If something sounds too good to be true, it probably is. 

Money does not look for people. People, in fact, look for money. How they approach that proposition varies greatly, but if you follow the money you can usually discover why unreasonable claims are made. 

Harold


----------



## glaucodobrasil (Nov 16, 2015)

g_axelsson said:


> glaucodobrasil, I hope you are joking? You can't be serious that you believe everything on his homepage?


Not before spending two months listening to all his radio shows (12y of weekly radio shows). I still have some issues, but this is all related to my occultist background, not science.



g_axelsson said:


> I suggest some critical thinking here... any new planets popped up lately? Any rock that would gain mass as fast as he claims (one passage behind the Sun) would shine brighter than the Sun from the potential energy released as heat.


Yes. Hale Bopp and Comet Holmes. Hale Bopp diminished his orbit from a 5200y to 2600y in one passage in 90s, something only explained by the magnetic tail drag theory created by Prof. McCanney. Comet Holmes shined a lot, and gained so much material that it looked greater than the full moon in the sky. I know some more that were caught by Jupiter lately but I don't remember very well. And he never said that comets gains mass while passing behind the Sun, the process is very different from this, but are being propagated by Phil Plait and his gang as McCanney's work. I don't know why they lie about him, but they do all the time.



g_axelsson said:


> I found his website and... I think I need to take a shower, I feel dirty. It was so full of garbage science about space physics... well, I didn't feel like wasting more time there so I only browsed through some of it.


That's why he need to hire developers to code his OS.



g_axelsson said:


> Then I wondered what the prime number thing was, since I've dabbled in that area too and I never heard that you could determine directly a prime number so I googled that claim.
> On a mathematics board I found out that his new and revolutionizing method was nothing more than a sieve of Eratosthenes coupled with using primordials. Nothing that a true mathematician would be excited over. It's old theory and nothing new.


I know what you are saying, I found out the same before I got his book on how to solve it. The mathematician from that board do not did the same, he was just guessing. Did you know that the last mathematician who claimed that you cannot determine directly a prime number won 1mi dollars for that as a prize? Now he is the one who do the Peer Review on other mathematician works regarding prime numbers in USA. Think about it. I had a small Pearl code that does the calculus and returns 1000's of prime numbers at once. Unfortunately I lost my Hard Drive, but I can do that again later.



g_axelsson said:


> I also happened to see a link to a site I know very well. One of the best sites in existence when it comes to deal with bad astronomy is Phil Plait's BadAstronomy and he had a page just for McCanney.


Let me tell you my history on how I found McCanney: this all started during the 2012 Mayan thing. This started to popped out in every place I navigated, so I decided to start looking who were the stupid people doing that. Phil's blog was one of the first page that I found out with credentials enough to talk about it. I found five names in there, including McCanney. So I navigated each of the pages of these peoples to check if the information gave by Phil was correct. And it was not. Prof. McCanney was claiming exactly the opposite on Phil's claiming about him. Then I started navigating through all the posts on Phil's forum regarding McCanney, and anyone who tried to alert him about it got banned after three posts (including me). You cannot talk about McCanney's work there. Later I found other websites directly related and referenced to Phil's blog, some of them created only to debunk McCanney's work (including a wikipedia one where you cannot edit posts if you are not from their gang). What is the conclusion? Too much people with money, resources and time attacking only one guy is too strange. Then I started studying McCanney's work, as I was too suspicious about all of this effort against him, and what I found out is that all Phil's information about McCanney's work was terrible wrong. But don't tell him, or they will ban you - but not before smashing your head against the wall and humiliating you and your parents and childrens.



g_axelsson said:


> We just had a similar thread about free energy and stuff. I'm going to save us a lot of time by just stating that everything I've seen so far from him has been bogus and utterly wrong and the only thing he so far has proved is that he doesn't know what he is talking about.


How can you say that a scientist work is wrong if you never studied his work? Other than that, he never claimed nothing related to free energy "and stuff".



g_axelsson said:


> Based on that I would expect that any money gambled on his indiegogo projects are probably lost.
> Göran


Now you should reaffirm it after studying his work, or assume that you can be wrong.


----------



## rickbb (Nov 16, 2015)

Well after careful reading of this entire thread I've come to a couple of conclusions.

1. What a load of hokum.

2. PT Barnum was right, there is a sucker born every minute.

:roll:


----------



## glaucodobrasil (Nov 16, 2015)

rickbb said:


> Well after careful reading of this entire thread I've come to a couple of conclusions.
> 
> 1. What a load of hokum.
> 
> ...


I love space science :lol:


----------



## galenrog (Nov 16, 2015)

If this thread does not die very soon, I will suggest that a moderator lock it. It has nothing to do with refining or precious metal recovery. Please let the thread die. Pseudoscience give me a headache and has no place here.


----------



## resabed01 (Nov 16, 2015)

glaucodobrasil said:


> The question may look weird, but I tried to do that on FreeBSD and Linux.org forums, but they ban me after a lot of personal offenses, and I don't want that to occur here.
> 
> Tks!



I have been on a lot of different forums for a lot of years and for somebody to be banned it's generally for some good reason. It's not something the Mods will take lightly either. Banning is usually a last resort after warnings are given for inappropriate behavior and the person just isn't getting the message.
Just sayin'


----------



## glaucodobrasil (Nov 16, 2015)

galenrog said:


> If this thread does not die very soon, I will suggest that a moderator lock it. It has nothing to do with refining or precious metal recovery. Please let the thread die. Pseudoscience give me a headache and has no place here.


This is not pseudoscience, as all the initial papers from this scientist were Peer Reviewed and officially published by institutes and Universities in USA (including NASA, Cornell, American Geophysical Union and Harvard). I could give all the links from these papers here but would occur the same as usual - people can't discuss about honestly without offending. But I agree, this went too far and I myself would lock this thread if I could. Generally people don't like to discuss nothing new that is not published in Science or Nature Magazine. This give me headaches too.


----------



## glaucodobrasil (Nov 16, 2015)

resabed01 said:


> glaucodobrasil said:
> 
> 
> > The question may look weird, but I tried to do that on FreeBSD and Linux.org forums, but they ban me after a lot of personal offenses, and I don't want that to occur here.
> ...


No, man. This is not true always, and depends on what you are talking and with who. There are a lot of small dictators out there in the Internet that can't discuss because they don't have enough background for that. They only repeat, all that is new is silenced and the person blocked. Coincidentally or not, it is always about McCanney's work.


----------



## g_axelsson (Nov 16, 2015)

We have a famous downhill skier in Sweden who answered the question of how he could be so good with a suitable comment...

It's no use to explain to those who doesn't understand it.

glaucodobrasil, If you believe all the ramblings of McCanney then it's no use for me to try to explain how he is wrong because you don't know enough basic science to get it.



glaucodobrasil said:


> Hale Bopp diminished his orbit from a 5200y to 2600y in one passage in 90s, something only explained by the magnetic tail drag theory created by Prof. McCanney.


It also passed close by to Jupiter which explains all about the change in orbit by gravity, a theory first proposed by Newton.


glaucodobrasil said:


> Comet Holmes shined a lot, and gained so much material that it looked greater than the full moon in the sky.


Comets LOSE mass by outgassing, creating a gas and dust tail. For comet Holmes something happened that made it spew out an exceptional large amount of gas and for a while it was actually the largest object after the sun in our solar system. But it was all a large cloud of gas and dust and the mass was still puny.


glaucodobrasil said:


> g_axelsson said:
> 
> 
> > We just had a similar thread about free energy and stuff. I'm going to save us a lot of time by just stating that everything I've seen so far from him has been bogus and utterly wrong and the only thing he so far has proved is that he doesn't know what he is talking about.
> ...


I've studied enough to see that it's just bogus ideas. When it comes to astronomy and space physics I've actually worked with the stuff and have several friends that works as scientists on the Swedish Space Research Institute.


glaucodobrasil said:


> Now you should reaffirm it after studying his work, or assume that you can be wrong.


Well, I can be wrong and the Earth may be flat, but the probability is so low that I'm not going to waste my time reading anything more by him.

Göran


----------



## g_axelsson (Nov 16, 2015)

glaucodobrasil said:


> galenrog said:
> 
> 
> > If this thread does not die very soon, I will suggest that a moderator lock it. It has nothing to do with refining or precious metal recovery. Please let the thread die. Pseudoscience give me a headache and has no place here.
> ...


Citation needed!

Give us the links to the peer review articles.

Göran


----------



## glaucodobrasil (Nov 16, 2015)

g_axelsson said:


> glaucodobrasil said:
> 
> 
> > This is not pseudoscience, as all the initial papers from this scientist were Peer Reviewed and officially published by institutes and Universities in USA (including NASA, Cornell, American Geophysical Union and Harvard). I could give all the links from these papers here but would occur the same as usual - people can't discuss about honestly without offending. But I agree, this went too far and I myself would lock this thread if I could. Generally people don't like to discuss nothing new that is not published in Science or Nature Magazine. This give me headaches too.
> ...


Are you sure? This never ends well.


----------



## Harold_V (Nov 16, 2015)

glaucodobrasil said:


> g_axelsson said:
> 
> 
> > glaucodobrasil said:
> ...


It never ends well because something stinks-----that something is the promotion of nonsense. All manner of claims can be made, but without abundant proof, it's most likely simply not true. Your reluctance to post citations indicates to me that you have an agenda that isn't acceptable on this board. 

It is my opinion that further discussion on this topic is of no value. For that reason, it is my recommendation that there will be no further posting in regards to this subject, with an admonition to readers who don't seem to have a firm grip on reality to stop posting on topics that do not relate to the purpose of this board. 

*Those who don't understand what I'm saying will be notified by being banned*. Consider this as fair warning. 

Seems this board attracts all manner of lunatics, which I banned with reckless abandon in the past. I just may return to my formal self and start doing it again.

Get my drift??

Harold


----------

