Archer Quinn picked up his toys and went home

I made a post a couple of weeks ago about Archer Quinn's announcement that he would release an open-source simple to build and easy to replicate over-unity free energy device on June the 20th.

Since that time he has actively engaged with the 'free-energy' community over at www.overunity.com with a series of increasingly bizarre posts. His last was profanity laced and truly a remarkable picture of a man losing his grip on reality.

As always, whether it is UFOs, Scientology, Mormonism, or String Theory, my interest is not, and never really has been, some objective truth about the 'reality' of these things but, rather, on why people believe what they choose to believe. (And, let me assure you they *do* choose, whether they admit it or not.)

I find the psychology of belief absolutely fascinating. Why does anyone believe what they do? Why do they feel compelled, or not compelled, to convince others of their beliefs? Why do they defend their beliefs with the same ferocity a bull gorilla defends his territory? (In the case of most religious organizations people believe what they believe due to good old fashioned brute force imprinting and brainwashing throughout their formative years. More interesting is why people succumb to conspiracy beliefs or fringe topics like UFOs.

Let me give you this example. After extensive research for many years I have come to the personal conclusion that UFOs are 'real'. Now, I cannot tell you what kind of 'real' they are but I share the opinion of Jacques Vallee that there is a real-phenomenon that has existed and interacted with human culture throughout all of recorded history. Now, given all of that, I have also concluded that UFOs don't really matter much at all and my ability to 'care' about them one way or the other is fairly low.

When UFOs actually affect my daily life, then I will take more notice. When I can buy a free-energy device at Walmart, I will suddenly begin to care about them as well. Meanwhile, why do so many people allow these beliefs to consume their lives to such an extent that it can often times be self-destructive?

Reading the entire thread over at www.overunity.com about Archer Quinn's announcement and subsequent engagement of the community is an amazing real-time experience of delusional thinking and beliefs based on wishes, hopes, fears, and conspiracy thought.

Personally I don't believe in over-unity or free-energy devices. It's not even that I don't believe in them because they 'violate the laws of physics' (after all, if they work they will be in accordance with the laws of physics; and these laws (really just models after-all) will simply be revised.) No, I generally don't believe in over-unity devices because none of the damned things actually works.

For centuries people have been trying to build a perpetual machine based on some combination of gravity, bouancy, and magnetic fields. Even Leonard DaVinci designed a non-working gravity wheel. In all of that time, with all of that effort, no one has ever succeeded.

Still, that doesn't prevent the over-unity faithful from returning to the well, searching for that holy grail device that will liberate them from the tyranny of big oil while shouting a big 'F-U' in the face of all doubters.

Of course, I'm sure my Scientology friends will feel the same way when Xenu shows up, my Mormon friends when some golden plates are finally found, my UFO friends when a spaceship lands on the White house lawn, and my string-theory friends when the super-conducting super-collider produces a black-hole that eats the earth in an eye-blink.

Here is a link to an Endgadget story on the topic.

Here is a link to the full thread over at overunity.com which is can be highly entertaining if you have the patience to wade through it.

Here is the link to Archer Quinn's website which keeps changing on a daily basis. It may not have any content soon enough.

Here are some site links that are no longer accessible from the home page but, as of this posting, are still live.
Page 1.

Page 2

Page 3

Page 4

Finally, for my own amusement, I made the following post to the overunity forums after Archer Quinn self-destructed in a brilliant online flame out.

The post is titled 'Archer Quinn takes his ball and leaves the playing field'

---------------------------------------------------------

Well, it appears that the brief saga of Archer Quinn is now over. After a series of ever more incoherent posts on this forum, and his website, he has decided to call it quits.

It was certainly an interesting exercise in sociology and I think the 'roll on' thread, is likely to live on in infamy for some time to come.

In some respects it is surprising that this story got as much play is it did. I believe it is because of the way Archer Quinn played/interacted with his audience that provided most of the entertainment value, that and the seductive promise of open source FE for all on a specific time and date.

As a bit of a debrief of the whole affair I had the following observations.

(1) Archer Quinn never provided anything but 'claims'. No videos, no photographs, no blue-prints, sketches, and not a single coherent explanation of an alleged complete and working device. The only thing he did offer was 'free energy for all' in a completely open source fashion. This promise holds at its core the essence of the divine allure of the FE Holy Grail quest and for this reason alone it attracted OU readers like moths to a flame or, in this case, flies to a bug-zapper.

(2) Archer Quinn presented himself as a very strong personality. Having never met a spell-checker he couldn't ignore, his posts were highly emotional, full of bitterness and attacks on Isaac Newton; as if Sir Isaac had at some point in the past done something to deeply personally insult Mr. Quinn. In fact the open anger, bitterness, bile, and spurious attacks on Newton were bizarre to witness as they unfolded. His use of profanity, and inability to communicate in anything approximating a coherent fashion, added some spicy Cajun sauce to this over-unity gumbo. In point of fact the poor grammar, atrocious spelling, foul language, incoherency, and generally bizarre nature of Mr. Quinn's communications seem to have created the tipping point in this unbalanced wheel of hype, promises, and inanity..

(3) Patient builders such as Clazner were quite happy to try to replicate whatever device Mr. Quinn had to offer but even Clazner's patience wore out in the face of an onslaught of verbal diarrhea spewing from Quinn's rambling and incoherent 'explanations' of a device that, to be frank, didn't seem particularly different than any one of hundreds of other gravity wheelesque designs which have failed throughout history.

Is this story really over? Probably not. To date every time Archer has posted an announcement that he wouldn't do this or that anymore, he has come back to join the fray.

I hope that Mr. Quinn learns something from this exercise.

(1) Stop wasting your time and energy attacking Newton, or anyone else. It is pointless and a distraction from whatever it is you have to offer in terms of a working device.

(2) Stay on message and limit your commentary to the device itself. Yeah, yeah, we all hate that oil prices are high and, yeah, yeah, we all want to shove it up skeptics ass if/when any OU device were ever to come to light. Nevertheless, the focus is, in fact, on producing such a device.

(3) This one may be the most difficult of all, but show a little bit of humility. Acknowledge that it is reasonable for those trying to understand what you are saying to be skeptical or to question the claims that you make.

(4) Just because you personally think/believe your device works, don't assume anyone else is going to accept, as fact, what amounts to nothing more than your unsupported claims. The only proof is in replication. The only real proof is in mass-produced replication (i.e. anyone can purchase an OU replicated device for $29.95 and submit it as their science fair project). To accomplish this goal takes time, patience, and a lot more than you have offered to date. It takes pictures, videos, sketches, diagrams, blue-prints, and coherent explanations.

As usual, the 'Holy Grail' of FE is back up for grabs. Let me know when I can buy a device, I have $29.95 burning a hole in my pocket as we speak.

-------------------------------------------------
As absurd at the whole Archer Quinn thing was to begin with a whole lot of people on the forums became quite emotional when he stormed off. They were especially angry at those who were critical of Quinn as having scared him away. I received a most delightful response to my post and I enjoy cross-posting my reply here.
--------------------------------------------------------

Konduct wrote the following:

>>Well...I just have to say...I hope you guys are pleased with yourselves by finding all the faults within Mr. Quinn.

Yes, I am pleased, thanks for noticing.

>>You've successfully pointed out all of his apparent weaknesses. Spelling, language, general communication skills.

I am impressed at your skills of observation in recognizing and acknowledging my skills of observation.

>>So if you guys are so good at finding weaknesses, why haven't you spent your energy on finding weaknesses in the methods of producing energy?

Finding weaknesses in fraudulent claims of OU proponents is, in fact, spending energy in an effort to find methods of producing energy. It takes a lot of hard work, critical thinking skills, time and patience to read and follow these threads and ultimately reach conclusions about the efficacy surrounding the proposals presented by various FE proponents.

As you may, or may not, be aware free-energy, or over-unity if you will, is not generally considered to be 'possible'. Over the course of centuries of effort there has not yet been one single easily reproducible and demonstrable technology,machine, device, or invention in all of that time. Universally all attempts at replication of every patent, drawing, sketch, explanation, or video has resulted in a complete and utter failure. In fact the only thing that keeps the dream of an over-unity device alive is the mythology surrounding it. In fact, the only tangible 'thing' you can point to in FE is the mythology that has evolved around the various proponents of these devices which ingloriously fail to work.

Yes, it takes a lot of energy to wade through the piles of crap and nonsense which is peddled in these forums. And, God bless the patient souls like Clanzer who actually takes the time and trouble to *build* these devices. In my own case, in addition to monitoring the evolving myth surrounding these claims, I have made clear that I will be the first to purchase a working device once it becomes available at Walmart for $29.95.

If that's not commitment I don't know what is. Sometimes I think the largest part of the market for neodymium magnets in the world is comprised of 'free-energy' researchers.

>>Don't we look for different avenues of positive energy production and research?

Yes, we do.

>>Focus on the strengths and avoid the weaknesses right?

Yes, we do. Did you happen to notice that Archer Quinn has some 'weaknesses'?

>>So, how does your morally superior stance on communication skills help the energy problem?

It helps weed the wheat from the chaff. It applies logic, reason, and critical thinking skills when evaluating claims of the improbable; if not the impossible. Logic dictates that if hobbiests and inventors have been tinkering with gravity wheels and magnet motors for centuries and, in all of that time, not a single person has ever been able to produce an easily replicable device, then it is rather dubious to accept the claims of someone like Archer Quinn at face value. Look at Clanzer on these forums as an example. He doesn't curse. He doesn't rant and rave. All he does it build intersting gizmos and post the videos, blue-prints, sketches, drawings, and explanations online for everyone to see and share. The first time Clanzer reproduces an OU effect you know that many people here will take it seriously because he has earned that right through his dedicated efforts.

Let us all say it together, "I know Clazner, Clazner is a friend of mine, and let me assure you that Archer Quinn (not even his real name) is no Clazner."

>>How did it help Mr. Quinn?

I am hoping that it helped him towards a moment of introspection and reflection. I am hoping that it helped him realize some of the mistakes he has made in communicating his ideas, and given him some direction on how he might improve int he future. I am here only to help because, from where I am standing, Archer Quinn definitely could benefit from some professional help.

>>Did you focus on his strengths?

Yes. Please read previous posts on this forum where I praised him for his open-source attitude and willingness to engage the community directly. Of course, this was before he developed a penchant for cursing everyone out and calling Sir Isaac Newton, or anyone who has learned from him, a fool.

Let's take a case in point.

Here is a link to Archer Quinn's website where he explains basic physics. It is entitled http://www.surphzup.com/gpage.html">'Physics 102'.

Now, compare and contrast, here is a link to http://quod.lib.umich.edu/cgi/t/text/pageviewer-idx?c=umhistmath;cc=umhistmath;rgn=full%20text;idno=AAT3201.0001.001;didno=AAT3201.0001.001;view=pdf;seq=00000023">Principia Mathematica by Sir Isaac Newton.

Now, I want to be fair and all, but I have to be honest that when I read these two side by side, I have to wonder which one of the two is really the idiotic fool that Sir Archer Quinn claims? (I decided I could give Archer Quinn an imaginary Knighthood since that isn't his real name anyway.)

>> Or did you just want to make yourselves right since he's so easy to make wrong with his bad grammar and all?

I am sorry to say this but I do believe that it is fair to asses the relative intelligence of an individual by how they write. When someone appears to be a barely functioning semi-illiterate foul mouthed buffoon in their online discourse then I think it is fair to judge the rest of the claims they make against that impression. So, you are saying that if someone is unable to express themselves in a way that demonstrates even a high-school education that I should take them seriously when they attack Isaac Newton as a fool and an idiot? When did I enter bizarro land and how do I get out?

>>He is a little incoherent.

You are too kind.

>> Did anybody make an honest effort to help eliminate the communication gaps?

Yes, several forum member had private email conversations with Archer and even made an effort to correct his horrific spelling and grammar when they cross posted his commentary online. Far greater an effort than I would ever make, so kudos to those brave members of our tiny community.

>>Or did you just widen them farther?

I too privately emailed Sir Archer Quinn with personal advice in an effort to shorten the communication gap. Unfortunately it appears that the sincere efforts of our forum members were unable to make a dent in the opinion of Mr. Quinn.

>> Did anyone help, or did we all just act like douchebags to "purge the idiot from our presence"?

Many people helped. He purged himself in a furious flame-out of unprovoked profanity and misplaced anger.


>>I'm just asking rhetorically of course.

Uh-oh. So all of this was rhetorical questioning? Pardon me for answering anyway.

Brother John