Monday, April 16, 2007

Toys, Demos, and Pennies

Sean posted some additional information on the demo in the Questions discussion today:

thomas:Sean, This public demonstration of the "technology", is this going to be a working PMM or just another "toy", operated by a finger tip?

Steorn: It will be a self sustaining system. The difference between the stop-start type and the constant motion type is not manual intervention, its the fact that in the stop-start version the system stops and starts (with no outside influence, finger or otherwise). The constant motion device does not have 'stop-start' as part of its sequence. The constant motion version of the technology has not yet completed development, but do not confuse this (at it seems that some forum members have) with the fact that the stop-start version is self sustaining, i.e. it has no external intervention, manual or otherwise.

thomas: Oh, one more thing, are you going to put up a video of the display unit, after or perhaps even before the public display?

Steorn: Well you will be able to watch the whole thing live over the internet via webcams. You can also chat via live chat software with people there. This is not going to be a one day thing, its going to be there for 10 days. And yes after that we will put videos on our site, but I expect that there will be plenty of them anyway with loads of new hoax theories as well!!

Can you imagine the frenzy that will take place in July? Also, an anonymous commenter or two suggested that we read these forum threads again:

Pennies points unanswered.
Steorn/Experts; Pennies found contradictions,

Both of the threads took place back in August of 2006. It's fun to re-read these conversations and compare them to the ones we're having today. If things get really slow around here, I'll start pulling out the more interesting highlights of days past.


Anonymous said...

One interesting Steorn contradiction is the "static testing" Sean presented earlier. How do you perform static testing on a device that is based on high speed movement and mangnetic lag ?

Sean was talking about hard magnets again. What magnetic delays may he achieve with hard magnets ? It sounds like Sean is talking about magnets at the speed of a bullet again.

Sean has several times tried to predict how Steorn statements will be receive by the public. Sean is predicting that people will give us a lot of hoax theories in july.
My gold fish agree, but my
gold fish is also making a prediction that Sean is not planning on revealing any usefull product or usefull information in the july demonstration. There may be a clever and impressive demonstration unit just like a TV-shop session.

Anonymous said...

Tundrabog said...

Topic: Lawyers

Sean has mentioned the Steorn lawyers numerous times. Lawyers were apparently the reason why the ‘detailed technical specifications at the end of the first quarter’ didn’t happen. They were the reason why SteornTracker was getting a letter about misuse of the Steorn name.

Listening to Sean, you’d think that the Steorn lawyers were standing behind Sean ready to smack his knuckles with a ruler should he release any confidential information. According to Sean, he frequently mischievously ignores them and passes knowledge nuggets to the forum. If the amount of real information released by Steorn is any indication, then I’d say that the lawyers are winning the battle with Sean hands down.

If you’ve actually dealt with lawyers, you’d know that they only provide advice when the client asks, and charge you for the advice. No asking, no advice.

So who are Steorn’s lawyers?

We don’t know.

According to Steorn’s financial statements, Steen O’Reilly Solicitors bought 50 shares of Steorn stock some time between October 1, 2004 and September 30, 2005. It’s not a lot of shares, but it is real investment. In comparison, Sean McCarthy had 37,802 shares at that time.

We also don't know if the law firm made the investment on behalf of a specific client. This makes sense, since law firms aren't in the habit of investing in stock.

Steen O’Reilly Solicitors is a very reputable Irish company that has been in existence for almost 100 years. I don’t know if they are Steorn’s lawyers, but they certainly were shareholders in the latest financial filings.

Here is an amusing scenario where Steen O’Reilly is dealing with a potential new client.

Steen O’Reilly lawyer: I can assure you that our firm can provide you legal advice based on almost 100 years of experience. We use only tried and proven approaches.

Potential Client: Is it true that you’ve invested in a company whose sole business is perpetual motion devices that they refuse to show people?

Steen O’Reilly lawyer: Ummmmm….

Potential Client: If you’ll excuse me, I’ve got another appointment. Good day.


SteornTracker said...

I accidentally rejected a couple of comments from anonymous users:


All right, I can't post on the forum because I signed up too late, but I've been following it and recently read something interesting... Sean said in the "Questions" thread that the Orbo only produces over-unity in certain speed ranges. That means that there couldn't be an Orbo car that works mechanically - unless you were only to drive at 70-80 mph (or whatever the range is). In order to be used in any kind of vehicle, it would have to be used as a generator for an electric motor, and not directly as the source of movement, which may inhibit its ability to power vehicles.
- ComposerPhysicist


Jeez you don't have much of a life do you?

Or for that matter does anyone that posts on this gathering place for the damned have any sort of a life? If all you can do in your free time is come up with nutty delusions of what Steorn is really trying to accomplish I must say I have pity on all of you. What a bunch of sad, pathetic fools you egits are.

Anonymous said...

A prediction,

Sean is in a pickle. His past statements are catching up with him. The question of whether Steorn has OU is becoming secondary to the questions;

a. Does Sean have any credibility? (dates,
numbers, incomplete examples)

b. Why is there so much secrecy? Why the SPDC? (With pointless NDAs)

c. Why, if the jury is all that is important, has there been an obvious effort to convince the Forum doubters? (Or keep the flock anyway)

d. Why ask for questions and then ignore all but the slow pitches?

e. Why was Crank not shown any self-sustaining unit?

f. Where is the Flash movie?

g. Where is the massive FAQ we were promised?

h. Why has Sean challenged skeptics, begun a debate, waffled on questions asked and then disappeared only to start the whole process over while ignoring the previous debate. Does Sean ever complete anything?

i. Why a ‘new’ questions thread when he hasn’t answered the questions in the first four ‘Questions’ type threads he started?

j. Why can Sean not give a straight answer??????????????

With some though, this list could have many more questions, but you get the idea and probably have your own list of questions. Speak up, we can compile a list.

The problem for Sean is that of the forum history. There are dozens of misleading statements by Sean in the forum that all have to be addressed. Sean has tried to claim that there are too many misconceptions to try to correct them. This is odd, as Sean has been the one creating them since August. He will spend hours trying to refute the skeptics who find contradictions (without addressing/correcting the contradiction) in Sean’s previous statements, has plenty of time to question the character of the skeptics, paint himself as the victim, claim he is being stalked (what have the cops said?), evoke sympathy for poor Cathy…….but not time to address what appears to be BS statements he has made, in curiously missing threads.

I see some horrible server room disaster in my crystal ball. All backups lost too. Such a shame that Sean’s previous porkies were lost in the accident.

But not to worry, this way to the new and improved (and heavily moderated) forum. Believers only please.
Bring on the new sheep.

ben said...

Their law firm are:

At least, that's who they use for their NDAs. The laywer I spoke to (as evidenced by his suggested redraft of an NDA for me) knew nothing about physics. The wording he used suggested I was investigating the truth of Steorns device 'increasing it's kinetic energy'.

I would argue that the law firm having the veto on what 'technical details' Steorn can or can't release is highly suspect.

vox_causa said...

Something about PE (pennies) I don't yet understand. She has been instrumental in debunking a previous scam OU company (see PE's history with E8). She came on this board with a similar passion. But after the infamous banning last year she is silent. I would expect to see her writing style under someone's name either on this board or another one, but still nothing.

Where did PE go? One theory would say that she finally agreed to the NDA and was accepted on the Jury. She has agreed to remain silent until the results are published. I find this unlikely, but am open to the idea.

In case I missed something, anyone have the update on PE?

David said...

Neat blog, thanks for sorting through the dross and condensing the interesting stuff.

I can't post to the forum, but here's an idea. If the July demonstration has the goal of convincing the public, then to convince skeptics it has to be something more than what could be accomplished by a David Copperfield show. Do you think Sean has seen the BBC Horizon TV programme from 2002 debunking the 'water memory' effect that was published in Nature? It's an interesting comparison with this case, except here Steorn haven't even published in Nature magazine!

It occurs to me that one way to help to convince people would be to build several 'trick' Orbos which use external energy sources, and show that the fakery of those could be detected by a panel of experts (including magicians!), whereas the actual Orbo, if real, would not be debunked at the same time. The power of contrast...

Anonymous said...

thomas:Sean, This public demonstration of the "technology", is this going to be a working PMM or just another "toy", operated by a finger tip?

Steorn:It will be a self sustaining system. The difference between the stop-start type and the constant motion type is not manual intervention, its the fact that in the stop-start version the system stops and starts (with no outside influence, finger or otherwise). The constant motion device does not have 'stop-start' as part of its sequence. The constant motion version of the technology has not yet completed development, but do not confuse this (at it seems that some forum members have) with the fact that the stop-start version is self sustaining, i.e. it has no external intervention, manual or otherwise.


"It will be a self sustaining system."


"the stop-start version is self sustaining, i.e. it has no external intervention, manual or otherwise."

This is the minimum. If this unit can't be demonstrated and shown to be OU in July..........What excuse could possibly be given?

"Oh, whoops, the lawyers stopped me"

That’s not going to happen ,is it Sean?

Tundrabog said...

I see that the Flatulent Borborygmus has made a cameo appearance here. Howya doing E8, you old boot?

I've been saving the FB comment for a while. Thanks to the person who suggested it (you know who you are).

Thanks for the info on Brown Rudnick, Hairy. Real information is useful.

Anonymous said...

Lots of noise but gets better on P.2

[Closed] Update to existing flash and data compensation example

Interesting Steorn – Dr. Mike chat (and some Pennies), Sean on q&a on p.3

Yet Another Data Compensation Example

Anonymous said...

Worth reading.
Again, lots of noise.
Read p.10 first, then the rest.
Dr. Mike, please help. Is br right?

[Closed] The Movie Part I

Thicket said...

Here's a fun link.

It's a virtual market. You can trade shares. The Orbo is on the market with the following question.

Will "Orbo" be declared a working perpetual motion machine by the end of the year?

I didn't find out about this question until the market had crashed. I bought short at 18% and just sold my short position at 4% (which upped the share price to 4.84%.

I made a tidy profit. Too bad it isn't real money. Quite appropriate though, since Steorn isn't either.

I appeal to all Steorn believers to take part in this market and drive up the share price. I'd like to sell short again and make more virtual money. Hehe.

Esoterica said...

I don't understand why Steorn allows the forum to continue, as it appears to (more and more) make their claim look like a hoax. Head scratching and deep sighs, unless of course...

Been watching and posting there for months now, only to see inspiration become desperation.

Anonymous said...

Nothing much to do with Steorn itself, but this has to be in the hall of fame sometime.

Someone asked "how Crank could find Energyman8 funny?"

Go Energyman

Sean does show up briefly on P.5+6 and there is financial links on P.7

Anonymous said...

I posted the name of a potential 'Juror' today and several posts were deleted, from me and from other's. If I was 50% sure of the guy before I'm 99.9% sure of him now!! Be good to me, Steorn!!

Anonymous said...

Why yes, I would be interested in that 'could bee' juror name.

Anonymous said...

If you're gonna post the name, at least provide information on how you obtained it. Guessing and speculation is just harmful you know.

Anonymous said...

For context, read the link. (other claimants? competative market?)

Hi br,

I do not agree that we could do that with any scale or return - first we do not manufacture, the second point is that other claimants sell their technology over the net (I cannot say if such claims are true or false) but get no real sales.

In order to get into the market, we as a business must take on a mindset that this is just downright impossible, not very, very, very difficult but absolutely impossible.

The only way to 'fast' track this change in mindset is the Jury process.



Hi br,

Yes but then we have to manufacture, distribute, market and so on in what is a very competative market - when asked how long the battery lasts what do we say, and so on and so on.

We are very happy with the Plan B approach - we will be posting some high level details on the applicants for the Jury in a few hours.



Anonymous said...

I now remember this from long ago on the forum.

A new service to allow companies to insure themselves against cost and time overruns on IT projects has been launched by Irish risk management company, Steorn.

This cant be a coincidence can it?

Father Luke Duke said...

Jeez, these guys have tried their arm at all sorts over the years. Not clear whether they actually ever launched the product though - it's not entirely clear what the point of it is.

"Steorn's core business is providing independent client side project management to companies"
I thought they were an "IP company"? Or Web hosting? Or fraud prevention experts? Or whatever great new idea pops into Sean's head, by the look of it.

Steorn certainly seem to have hopped from one start-up project to another over the years - without any success in any of them judging by the state of their finances in 2003.

Good find by the way.

15-India-Street said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Anonymous said...

Mr Thickice states:
So who are Steorn’s lawyers?
We don’t know.
We also don't know if the law firm made the......
I don’t know....
Great piece of investigative reporting there Mr. "frozen subsoil and supporting low-growing vegetation such as lichens, mosses, and stunted shrubs".
You've really moved the debate along there, congratulations.

Anonymous said...


"Until now Steorn have been strictly guarding the privacy of all people involved. But what if they are not part of a big reality show? Will they continue that policy when they get trapped in a corner? "

Steorn do not protect your privacy very well. The SPDC member list was open to everyone for a couple of days when the SPDC opened...