A recent note from an OpenDirectoryProject (dmoz.org) moderator about our NanoTechNews site (also from the RAW.NET design ring) suggested that the ZPEnergy link is a liability because it is “a topic which many scientists consider not science, but pseudo-science”. With this mentality, the Internet would have had an infant death.
First of all ZPEnergy is not a scientific site, it is an adventure in technology site, as clearly stated in our mission statement.
Secondly, this site is not targeting scientists (theoreticians 226 see again our mission statement) because, unfortunately, when one has to think "out of the box", few of them are capable of independent thinking nowadays.
As it happened many times in the history of human development, in the ZPE field, the technology based on experiment and inventiveness will outrun the theory. But make no mistake, faced with the evidence, the scientists will find their theory in no time, and behave like they knew that all along! We misunderstood them when they were waving the pseudo-science label!? Remember, heavier than air flying machines were ridiculed in the French Academy even though birds were flying outside their window, exobiology was a pseudo-science just a few years ago, now scientists are very comfortable with life thriving in extreme conditions of pressure, temperature, toxicity, no sun light, etc.; same for nanotechnology, cybernetics, to name just a few.
This site is trying to expand your imagination, to include the truth. This is why it is progressing slowly because we try to stay with the facts and because many are still afraid to come forward or consciously oppose the truth. We are for the liberty of information in cyberspace not censorship, but we strongly plead for educating yourself to be able to screen and make good use of this instant and global wealth of information available to you.
Machiavelli said long time ago: “There is nothing more difficult to plan, more doubtful of success, nor more dangerous to manage than the creation of a new system. For the initiator has the enemy of all who would profit by the preservation of the old system and merely lukewarm defenders in those who would gain by the new one.”
