A short reply to Lyne's(Beware of anti-Tesla hecklers):

The text is William's latest reply to my series of attacks at his credibility as a researcher. He fails to
understand the point of my attacks and says that I am anti-Tesla and then gives a rather childish rant
on how his research is better than everyone elses and how stupid I am. Lyne forgets than I am with
him on three things: UFO's are man-made, aliens/interdimensional beings have never visted this
earth and that Tesla technology is related to the UFO. My plight with him is that he has taken it too
far and has mixed outright lies, technically incorrect facts and mis-read information to formulate a
phoney theory of UFO propulsion.

Lyne in the text:

“Did it ever occur to
such nincompoops as to how Tesla produced the electrostatics he did so many
experiments with?”

Actually Lyne, as Tesla often states he used “rapidly varying electrostatic discharges”, so that
means AC. That is where the “Tesla Coil” came in. If you do not understand this then I can't help
you. You are not an Electrical engineer. You are a degreed artist as you have proved time and time
again with your complete lack of understanding of electrical matters.

William Lyne and Electrical Engineering: The pair that was never to be:
William Lynes lack of Electrical knowledge actually is quite pathetic and anyone can see how weak
his argument has become.

Lyne states in the “Beware of anti-Tesla hecklers”:

And what was this “simple device for supplying static electricity”? As
shown by Nikola Tesla’s patent #1,119,732, Apparatus for Transmitting Electrical
Energy (granted Dec. 1, 1914), the “device” was a Tesla coil, an oscillating
electromagnetic dipole tuned to 1/4 wavelength!
As Tesla stated in the text of the 1914 patent, page two, lines 35 to 38,
describing the tuning and action of the Tesla coil (emphasis mine), “...as under
normal working conditions ONE QUARTER OF THE PERIOD or more for its transformation
from STATIC to KINETIC form...” (the “kinetic form” was the rapidly-varying
electrostatic form).

The quote he give from this patent is in a completely different context to what Lynes wants it to
mean. Let's say for a minute that that it was in the correct context then shouldn't it read KINETIC to
STATIC?? As in Lynes phoney theory the high voltage/high frequency is meant to turn into DC or
static???? This is actually laughable, I can see where Lyne gets his quotes now. He just searches a
document for words that are relative and then copy+paste, even if they have no bearing to his
“point”.
While the actual meaning is probably a bit too complicated for the laymen it doesn't matter as
furthur on in the text it reads (page two, lines 101 to 108, emphasis mine.) “Having described my
invention, I claim: 1. As a means for producing great electrical activities a resonant circuit having
its outer conducting boundaries, which are charged to a high potential, arranged in surfaces of
large radii of curvature so as to prevent leakage of the oscillating charge, substantially set forth.”

Not only as he tried to use a quote which he obviously doesn't understand, but a little furthur down
the text his idea is killed completely when we are told the charge is oscillating, not static!

A fundamental error with Lyne's claim that Tesla's Tower produced a static/DC charge, is that
electricity has to be AC to be transmitted through the globe as Tesla set out to do. If we were to use
Lyne-logic then a static generator should transmitt electrical power???!!????

He then goes on to still support the quote which Dimitrije proved (See his wesite below or my
“Reply to : Flunking the Debunker) was rewritten by him to suit what he has to say and is therefore
invalid.

To see why the “¼ Tesla coil will produce DC” is nonsense read Dimitrije's piece on it at:
http://williamrlyneliar.blogspot.com

More pointless texts from Mr Lyne:

William R Lyne has written another piece entitled, “William Lyne Says Clark R. Daniel
(bobdee1001) is a Big Fat Lying Liar". In this piece he claims that I am a liar, but never points to
any documented facts as to where I have lied. This article just seems to be full of insults and
childish ravings. It is obvious that i've hurt the guy's feelings from my writings. While I never
intend to hurt anyone's feelings, I feel that the line must be crossed when huge lies and technical
blunders are being advertised. I have tried to add no personal attacks where possible, unlike Lyne
,who seems to shower anyone who doesn't agree with him in obsenities, including calling people
“kiddie-fiddlers”.

Last words:
My reply's to Lyne have become somewhat half-hearted, as for every lie I expose or counteract with
fact he will add another lie or bring up another one of his technical blunders. It has just become
plain boring. Unlike an intellectual debate which I quite enjoy, Lyne has made this about as anti-
intellectual as you can get and find it really hard to believe that he is as smart as he claims he is.
(reading at college level when he was 4?????(or was it 7) years old.)
Anyone who is seriously interested in Tesla, UFO's etc, should read all the Tesla lectures they can
find, http://www.tesla.hu is a good start. If you start reading works by the likes of William Lyne,
Gerry Vasiliatos, Thomas Bearden, etc, you will find yourself going astray and believing rather silly
things, ie Cold Electricity and that Watt/hour meters will give you free energy. These guys are either
there to mislead or are in it for self-gain.

A good book for anyone interested in how the universe actually works is an old book called “A
History of the Theories of the Aether and Electricity from the age of Decartes to the close of the 19th
century.” By E. T. Whittaker. Make sure you get the 1910 edition not the 1950 one. It's available on
Amazon or for free at http://www.internetarchive.org. Actually the internet archive is a great
resource for heaps of old works.

BD

bobusdeeus@gmail.com

http://sickofmisinformation.mysite.com