30 votes

Tesla Free Energy suppressed by govt and corporations in energy business

I watched the first 41 minutes of this film so far:


I knew Eugene Mallove personally as he used to have a store in Framingham where he sold telescopes etc.

It is no wonder that aside from those of us who know of Ron Paul I still encounter people who have never heard of him at all thanks to the MSM blackout.

I do fear for his life given the threat to the profits of those who are reaping in the interest on the production of Federal Reserve Notes by the Fed which Ron Paul wants to abolish after a thorough audit.

Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

I met someone who was doing this in the 70s

ended up dead not many years later; he was young--

body found in an isolated area--

that sort of thing--

it was a coincidence my finding out about it. I met the person and was fascinated, saw what he was doing--

then twenty years later I found out we had a mutual friend, who sadly told me that he had been killed several years earlier--

this person was gutsy and brilliant--

it's hard to be awake; it's easier to dream--

So... 1) Your friend messed

1) Your friend messed around with hydrogen powered vehicles in the 70s.

2) More than tens years later your friend was found dead, apparently murdered.

Do you have *ANY* evidence that these two facts are in any way connected?


I have no evidence.

1--this person was not a 'friend'; this was an acquaintance, someone I heard about who was doing extensive hydrogen work--we did talk for a while, and I was shown what sorts of things he was working on--

. . .

2--didn't think about it for years; I was impressed with his work, but there were other things going on in my life (actually, *our* lives; both spouse and I met this person.

3--ten or twenty years later a friend, this time a long-time friend, and I were talking about 'free' energy, and I mentioned this person that spouse and I had met, talked about what we had seen, how impressed we had been, etc.

4--my friend looked sharply at me and said, "yes, his body was found; the authorities think there was foul play, but nothing could be proven"--

5--I said, "when?", and the friend shook his/her head and said, "oh, a few years ago; I don't know anything more than that."

It was one of those moments when *you* just wonder. No, I had no proof; my friend knew nothing more, but it seemed suspicious to me--

That's all. I don't live anywhere near where that happened now; it was almost 40 years ago that we first met the person who was doing hydrogen work--

Suspicious things happen all the time that make a person 'wonder'--

when there is NO way that the person who 'wonders' is in a position to find out more--

I don't even remember the name of the man who was doing hydrogen work--

and . . .

a few years ago my friend died suddenly, not under suspicious circumstances, died too young, but--

any connection is gone--

but I mention it on here; would you not?

Because, after all these years, I still wonder--

And now I wonder why you are asking--

it's hard to be awake; it's easier to dream--

So in short, this is pure

So in short, this is pure speculation based on no positive evidence whatsoever. I feel bad for your acquaintance, but see no reason whatsoever that his untimely demise was connected to his work on hydrogen power.

if it makes you feel better to think/believe that--

well, then, of course, you are free to do so.

I think I explained that I was in no position to get evidence for anything--

my friend didn't know that I was acquainted with the man when I learned of his death--

Whereas nothing can be proven, nothing can be disproven as well.


this is the end of the discussion.

it's hard to be awake; it's easier to dream--

Can you prove his death is

Can you prove his death is not connected? Do you have proof it was not connected to his work? Are you making an assumption?

I believe there are purple

I believe there are purple striped zebras living in caverns 100 miles below the surface of the earth. Do you doubt me? Sure I can't prove my claim, but you can't prove the opposite. So, by your reasoning, the hypothesis that there are purple striped zebras living in deep caverns is just as likely as the converse.

Reasoning: a disturbing

Reasoning: a disturbing number of the scientist in these energy fields working on these particular types of technologies continue to to demise in unnatural ways.

More reasoning: These Scientist's inventions and discoveries threaten the largest industry on the globe. "Energy".

Watch the movie "Thrive" it brings up some of these instances.

A guy making hydrogen powered

A guy making hydrogen powered vehicles was in no way a threat to the oil industry. Unlike you, the oil guys know that you have to make hydrogen in the first place, and that takes energy. The overall cost is generally higher than just using gasoline. If the oil company executives thought your acquaintance had made some breakthrough that actually made hydrogen viable they wouldn't have had him murdered, they'd have bought him out, and he'd have retired a rich man. Then the oil companies would be happily selling you hydrogen.

Sorry kids, there's no Santa Claus, no Easter Bunny, and no free energy. Nuclear power works but after Chernobyl and Fukushima it's really hard to make a case for it. Nuclear power would not be viable in the U.S.A. if the government didn't limit the liability of the reactor owners. (More socialized costs and privatized profits.) We still have no viable alternative to fossil fuels. That sucks, but nobody promised you a reality that doesn't suck.

Lucky for us everyone doesn't

Lucky for us everyone doesn't think inside the box or we may still be using firewood for energy. The cost of everything that followed was much more expensive until it was used in mass. My goodness can you imagine the cost and labor of the first autos compared to a horse and wagon. I can hear people making (your same) arguments the cost of roads, gas stations, and how much more expensive it all is than the horse. How practical was the first light bulbs and running water? For some time only the very well off could afford such luxury. Again lucky for us they did because it allowed for it to develop into what it is today. If some of these new methods are given the light of day they will take off as well. I just can't imagine we are stuck on fossil fuel forever. A break through well outside the box, someone most of the world will call crazy, will once and for all put an end to big oil.

The energy industry is not interested in moving to anything that cut's profits period. Do you believe for one second if someone handed Rockefeller a way to give everyone on earth free energy and he had the choice to hide it away or hand it out that he would hand it out? How many thousands of solders die in oil wars? It just isn't that big of a stretch to imagine a few scientist dieing for the same cause. BTW this is a great movie..

No Santa? You just ruined Christmas..

Yup, you are no doubt at the

Yup, you are no doubt at the age where you still believe in Santa Claus. Sorry to have ruined your Christmas.

Batteries and solar panels are already produced on a large scale. Millions of solar panels are manufactured annually. So your grand hope that drastic reductions in costs can be achieved by scaling up seems unfounded -- solar panels are already mass produced. Do you see cars getting cheaper from year to year now? Then why should solar panels? Of course we can expect improvements in in cost/kw as the technology improves. But those improvements have been slow in coming, and will eventually butt up against theoretical limits. And even if I could get solar panels for free, the battery cost alone would make a fully off the grid solar energy system impractical. I know because I've priced them out, when trying to see what it would take to get my house off the grid. Batteries have been mass produced for about as long as automobiles have (every car has one). It is wildly unrealistic to expect drastic reductions in battery costs. On the grid solar (where solar power augments conventional on the grid power) is more economical (no batteries) but there you're still getting most of your power from conventional sources.

In fact, sometimes increasing the scale of production increases costs, if there are scarce inputs to the production. So don't assume that increasing demand for solar panels will drive down their cost.

The movie was propaganda designed to appeal to people with little real knowledge of physics or chemistry (99% of Americans). I wasn't impressed.

Comparing a car battery to a

If you could get free panels why would you need batteries?

Comparing a car battery to a storage battery is like comparing a kite to a plane.

Weight of a set of batteries alone cost a fortune to ship. This could drastically be reduce with increased demand. If they sold them at home depot they could be included in the delivery systems home depot has developed driving prices down that much more. We actually used golf cart batteries purchased as local as local got in the mountains. This is also talking about the most expensive form of solar. Most people would not need to be off grid to realize huge savings.

a grid-tied (that is, connected to a utility) system, the size of the system is only limited by space constraints and your electric utility policies. This is the most efficient type of system and the energy from the solar panels is converted directly to standard AC power and synchronized with the utility. Any surplus energy is effectively sold to the utility instantly, so storing energy is not necessary. Optionally, a grid-tied system can include some energy storage to provide backup power during power failures. Now why would big energy have a problem with everyone having a grid-tied system? Hmmm that could hurt the bottom line!

You make it sound like our scientist have not evolved nearly far enough to figure out our energy solutions. Still stuck on hundred year old ideas. All that clean free energy all around us and not one scientist smart enough to harness it in a useful way. Could be the dumbed down schools... Maybe that is why the average MPG hasn't changed in 30 years.

Car batteries and storage

Car batteries and storage batteries are essentially the same thing. I know because when I looked into a solar power system and the batteries recommended for it, they were the same type of lead acid technology that is in car batteries. I would be surprised if golf cart batteries were any different.

Batteries are heavy because they contain lead and are filled with sulfuric acid. The lead is always going to be expensive to ship. You can ship batteries without the acid, but then you have the fun of filling them up after they arrive. Pouring acid into little holes is not my idea of a good time.

You are correct that on the grid systems are more cost effective and make the most sense for most people. But keep in mind that an on the grid solar home is still primarily a coal, nuclear, natural gas, or hydro powered home, the solar power is generally providing less than half the energy used in any given week. If indeed there are huge savings to be had with on the grid solar power, then why aren't more people installing it? Don't tell me it's because of the oil companies. No hit man from Exxon is going to go after me if I talk to the local solar power guy. In New Hampshire solar power isn't very popular because we have long winters and plenty of rainy days. In other parts of the country solar power may make more sense.

MPG hasn't changed in 30 years because the modest improvements in engine efficiency achieved were outweighed by Americans' move from cars to giant SUVs. I am from a large family and my parents hauled us around in a station wagon. Nowadays parents with two kids think they need a monster truck.

There is no clean free energy around us. All forms of clean energy cost money. Wind power costs money. Solar power costs money. Hydro power costs money. Geothermal power costs money. Of these four, only hydro and geothermal power are suitable for 24 hours a day base load power. Both hydro and geothermal power require suitable geology that isn't available in many places. Iceland has plenty of accessible geothermal power, New Hampshire doesn't.

Dumbed down schools are the reason we have people on this thread who believe in water powered cars.

Earth is full of free

Earth is full of free energy... always has been.... Long before man came along and hooked a dollar to it... Again we just don't have the brains to harness it without hooking dollars to it... I suspect that crazy scientist will come along and change this. As the movie said the earth is 450,000,000 years old. If one other planet just like earth exists and it is 451,000,000 years old they have a million years on us... Do you think they would be burning fossil fuel? I really doubt we will be burning fossil fuel in a million years. I would also deduct from what you are saying we better get moving away from oil in a huge hurry. When we run out we will fall back into the dark ages because nothing can replace it.

By your strange reasoning

By your strange reasoning petroleum is free. After all, nature charged us nothing to put it underground. But to find the oil, pump it up, ship it to a refiner, refine it into useable products, and ship gasoline to gas stations and heating oil to houses all costs money. Your use of "free" is meaningless since all your "free" sources of energy cost a lot of money to harness.

My point exactly... energy is

My point exactly... energy is everywhere... in everything... There is energy radiating all around us. We need that crazy scientist to figure out how to harness it... I suspect when we finally have it right it won't take a single watt to harness it. I predict petroleum will be unnoticeable in the 451,000,000 time line. Even plastics and such will be replaced with something far better. We certainly have the potential to do better than this.

Petroleum will not be used in

Petroleum will not be used in one million years for the simple reason that well before that time we'll have used it all up. The bad news is that there is still no good replacement in sight. The two most politically correct forms of energy, sunlight and wind, are very dispersed and intermittent. So they are among the most expensive forms of energy to harness. Even crazy scientists can't do miracles, so, no, solar and wind power will never be free. We can hope that they will soon be cheaper than they are now.

Tokamak fusion doesn't look like it will ever be a practical way to produce power. I have slim hopes for polywell fusion but it's still very much a dark horse. If it doesn't work out I don't know what we'll do, other than continue on the destructive course of building more nukes and trashing huge areas of the earth with oil sands mining.

Agreed that nothing is in the

Agreed that nothing is in the mainstream to even come close to replacing petroleum. When one accounts for all the products manufactured along with the obvious uses of petroleum running dry would be devastating.

Hopefully our priorities will change and the money spent on the military and building a police state will be used to fund that crazy scientist. Always room for someone to flip a law or two upside down with a new discovery. Hopefully the number one priority won't be that the new energy source has to be metered.

ha, ha!

I've been appreciating what you have had to say, and we heat our home with wood--

*shaking my head*

irony abounds.

it's hard to be awake; it's easier to dream--

Wood is is a wonderful thing.

Wood is is a wonderful thing. Off grid is a wonderful thing. It is always nice not to have to depend on others for the basics. I have Forced air gas for everyday use, a gas stove for backup (non vented) I also use this in tandem with the forced air, and a wood stove in the garage with all the duct work installed in the house (for crises backup)... In the event it wouldn't take much to convert.

Great movie... Must see

Great movie... Must see

Tesla drew up the schematic

Tesla drew up the schematic for the modern day transistor with a stick in the dirt while playing as a kid. So....

"My country is the world, and my religion is to do good."
Thomas Paine

ecorob's picture


i do!

after all, how many einsteins and teslas were there in the 20th century?

2, thats right...2!

and thats a LOT of folks to choose from

its 'cos I owe ya, my young friend...
Rockin' the FREE world in Tennessee since 1957!
9/11 Truth.


You are unfamiliar with Tesla's work. As far-fetched as it sounds even today, he was doing stuff 100 years ago that is still cutting edge!

Silence isn't always golden....sometimes it's yellow.

"The liberties of a people never were, nor ever will be, secure, when the transactions of their rulers may be concealed from them." - Patrick Henry

Many ideas and inventions are feasable

and vanish into the void, for some reason. Take for example the water fueled car that Japan was ready to begin mass marketing, when it suddenly, quietly, disappeared.

Good God. There are actually

Good God. There are actually people here who believe in the water powered car stories? I knew the state of science education in America was bad. I didn't know how bad.

Take a few minutes to look at the video

about the Japanese invention. This invention was scheduled for mass production, when it suddenly disappeared from view, with some lame excuse. Bought out by big oil or threatened out of existence.


Yes, I saw the video. Wow,

Yes, I saw the video. Wow, it was on the internet -- it MUST be true!

Decades ago I saw an almost identical news story. An American "inventor" claimed to have a car that runs on water. Newscasters are chosen for their looks and delivery, not for their scientific acumen. So the local news station lapped it up. I knew then that it was nonsense and of course nothing came of it.

In the video the inventor claims that he extracts hydrogen from the water. He doesn't say what he does with the hydrogen, but presumably he burns it in an internal combustion engine or else uses it in a fuel cell to make electricity. Either way the reaction is 2H2 + O2 -> 2H2O + energy. That is, the result of burning hydrogen is water. But when you extract hydrogen from water you must carry out the reverse operation: 2H2O + energy -> 2H2 + O2. TO SPLIT WATER INTO HYDROGEN AND OXYGEN YOU NEED AS MUCH ENERGY AS YOU GET BY BURNING THE HYDROGEN TO GET WATER BACK -- THE TWO PROCESSES ARE THE REVERSE OF EACH OTHER.

There, I capitalized that last sentence so you might begin to understand what is wrong with the "car that runs on water" scenario. The energy obtained from burning the hydrogen is never any more than the energy needed to extract the hydrogen in the first place. There is nothing left over to power the car with. Furthermore, there are inevitable losses, so in fact you will need more energy to extract the hydrogen than you get by burning it.

But you saw the car buzzing down the street! Um, this is called fraud. There are any number of ways that car could have been powered -- by gasoline, natural gas, batteries, or even a store of hydrogen that had been created previously (while the car was plugged into a wall).

The inventor is looking for some suckers who will invest in his business. Then he'll vanish with the money. After that happens folks like you will create a myth about how he was threatened by oil companies so had to disappear.

How a water fueled car works.

You can do the research. But it does work.

So tell, me, how does it

So tell, me, how does it work?