Response to the Attack of Eric Krieg on Betavoltaic

[vlad]

Date: Sun, 19 Oct 2003 20:35:29 -0400
From: "eric" <eric@v...>
Subject: Fw: response to the Attack of Eric Krieg on Betavoltaic now posted

The following person is known for trying to intimidate people who say
anything about his Betavolt company. I really don't want to go through
their request to do a background investigation on me to look at the device -
in fact, with their Scientology-like tactics, I don't think I want to go on
trying to help them get real proof. Perhaps someone else may want to
look at their evidence or go there in person. I post the following with
permission:


----- Original Message -----
From: "Michael McDonnough" <vortex@p...>
To: "eric " <eric@v...>
Sent: Friday, October 17, 2003 6:34 PM
Subject: RE: response to the Attack of Eric Krieg on Betavoltaic now posted


> eric,
> See me point by point below.
>
> ___________________________________________________________
>
> (EK)I try to live my life in a moral way.
>
> (MM)Then you should marry that girl you are living with.
>
> (EK)I have a question about your
> statement saying I am doing harrassing: Could you explain to me
> how I'm harrassing you by trying to lower the bar for my prize
> condition in an attempt to make it easier for you to get free money
> and validation from me?
>
> (MM) Very simply Eric, by offering to change the parameters of the test to
> include us you are making exceptions to include an unqualified candidate.
> This sets us up for mocking and credulity by your so called experts. We
> should not have come under this level of attack in the first place. You just
> got mad because I suggested that Critics are not worth much because they
> invent nothing, create nothing, and produce nothing. You got mad I think at
> this private comment and wrote your negative comments to the web for the
> public out of spite. You are a spiteful and vindictive man in my opinion,
> not a moral person at all.
>
> (EK)Are you open to having my try to find some credible 3rd party person
> meet your security conditions and go on site to have a look at a
> demonstration?
>
> (MM)Sure but not that it matters as far as our investigation on you is
> concerned. It is already underway and will be completed in about a week.
> After that you or your qualified expert will be invited to view the
> technology.
>
>
> (EK)Could you give me contact information for your consoul who
> commented on my site? I'd like to talk to him.
>
> (MM) They say you will hear from them soon enough. It will be formal it
> seems.
>
> (EK)Could you tell me how much input power is needed to get 50 watts
> out, what form the 50 watts is and for how long you have sustained it?
> Also, I am not qualified to review spectroscopy evidence - could you
> tell me what independent person you have gotten to review it or if I
> could talk to them?
>
> (MM) I would be happy to fax you the independent analytical lab report on
> the technology. We are far enough along that I do not fear someone getting
> in the middle of my deal for the technology. That is the only reason I have
> withheld the name of the inventor from the public. I needed the deal closed
> and the payments underway, then I can discuss who discovered the technology
> and what their IP covers. The lab report has the inventor name on it so it
> has been withheld from all but the parties paying for the assignment of the
> technology to BVI.
>
> (MM) The test ran for an hour and the average reading was 11 watts input and
> 71 watts output so I guess it is more like 60 Watts output than 50. The
> report was done by Applied Technical Services Inc. in Marietta GA
> 770-514-3288, the test was paid for by AMDG Scientific Corp. The test
> reference number is M21774 and is dated Oct. 9th 2001, I can and will fax a
> copy to you if need be.
>
> (MM) As far as the spectroscopy is concerned it was done by several labs.
> The first one was done with AMDG's spectroscopic equipment. It was verified
> by Columbia University. I have a copy of that as well if you would like me
> to fax it to you.
>
> (EK)Please note that I do want my audience to have the benefit of
> hearing your response to my points. I am trying to function in the
> capacity of a journalist.
>
> (MM) The fact remains Eric, that you are not a journalist. You are not
> protected by a world class legal team like the Washington Post or the New
> York Times. You are just Eric Krieg, electrical engineer and amateur critic
> from Pennsylvania.
> Feel free to make my comments known to your free energy critics sewing
> circle if you like. I ask you to take your pages down on my company because
> you are damaging us un-failry, at least until you could fairly and justly
> obtain an opinion by direct observation. Instead you take pot-shots from the
> side lines with your so called experts. The one that could not even spell
> beryllium but could give opinions on its fusion to magnesium and hydrogen in
> a plasma vortex.
>
> The same one that said that fusion could not be done without a billion
> dollars in equipment at a government lab. Tell that to the people at
> www.fusor.net and they will tell you that your so called expert is dead
> wrong. Nearly the whole group have table top fusion devices that produce
> plasma based fusion for thousands not billions of dollars. Clearly this
> person Shawn can not judge the workability of our technology so do not
> bother bringing this person along.
>
> Michael McDonnough
>