Curiously, despite the fact that I have added information on the subject of Johann Bessler on Wikipedia and other 'official' search engines, I can find no mention of the five books I published, which give more information in one place than anywhere else as far as I know. There are no links to any of my web sites though I have added them in the past.
All the references and links point to either historical accounts or negative articles about Bessler. I have added new information three or four times over the last few years but somehow all those references and the information I provided have been removed.
It isn't because I need to see my name up there but rather, anything that catches the attention of someone with the instinct, imagination and luck to make the leap from merely repeating what every one else has done to finding that unique concept which Bessler found, is exactly what we need. Any method that attracts the attention of the right person is valid. Without such information on Wikipedia how can people who might be interested find out more about it? I realise that google offers the ways and means of getting more information but Wikipedia lends authenticity to such searches.
If I was paranoid I might think there was a conspiracy to silence any attempts to promote Bessler's work, but I'm not. I suppose that because the Bessler wheel type of perpetual motion is declared impossible by historical precedent, Wikipedia censors anything which might seem to validate his claims. I guess we could test that out by seeing if any other kind of alternative science which has not been accepted as legitimate by its peers is referenced with links and articles supporting its claims.
It seems to me that the majority of people interested in this subject are of an age similar to my own. Could it be that the younger generations have been brainwashed into believing that an interest in this subject is so laughable that they cannot even take a moment to consider it?
Computers and all their related offshoots require a different discipline quite alien to the way we thought out solutions to physical problems in our youth. Just as I find it hard to get to grips with computers, so they, the younger generation are taught to find the answers with computers. I think that we older ones are used to visualising mechanical processes, whereas the new generation can't because they don't need to.
But who removed the references I added to wiki? Presumably someone with the education to 'know' that my information isn't backed up by the educational institutions and is therefore proscribed.
JC
The terms of use says "Because we are dedicated to making content freely accessible to the public, we generally require that all content you contribute is available under a free license or in the public domain."
ReplyDeleteIt may be they don't allow links to books for sale. I'm not sure about your website links.
Good point, thanks Doug.
DeleteJC
I agree with you John. And I think that Wikipedia should reflect both sides of the story even though the establishement is in agreement with itself. Here is how they say information is chosen: "When an edit is made, other editors may either accept it, change it, or revert it." My conclusion would be: We need more editors that accept Besslers as genuine. Several people could form an agreement that they always would back eachother whenever Wikipedia articles are updated by another user in that group. If I can be of any help, plese let me know. I too have several Wikipedia articles that I must update when I am ready for it.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThanks Øystein, I'll get in contact if I decide to try again.
DeleteStephen, I used to belong to grop who did just what you described many years ago but it still ground to a halt after a while with no progres achieved. Nice idea though.
JC
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI designed the book covers and used the G arrow to demostrate my own belief that the wheels were "gravity-driven". I know one shouldn't use that phrase but I like it!
DeleteJC
I fear that this will always be the case until someone produces a working model
ReplyDeleteThe irony is that Baillywick1 has produced such a device Unfortunately he has gone to ground and is uncontactable so we can't be certain whether the device is genuine or a fraud.
Ken Behrendt and I both believe it is probably genuine, KB because he can't see how it could be faked and I because I believe I understand how how and why it works.
Until someone who has the necessary technical ability to copy the device faithfully and the necessary belief in,and understanding of, my explanation things are rather at an impasse.