Posted by grim (206.162.192.40) on February 06, 2003 at 18:08:23:
In Reply to: Karls payroll posted by David on February 06, 2003 at 17:18:42:
As I posted before, unbiased research demands a look at both the pro's and con's of any subject matter. All this does for me is possibly elimnate Wolff as an unbiased witness. That leaves several other big names in science at that time who witnessed this thing and inspected for fraud, including Gravensande, who reported directly to Isaac Newton.
I never did buy Wolff's explanation of "flexible" or "drooping" arms with weights, that design can be found on any skeptic's website, plus the web pages of unworkable devices shows that design and gives a very exacting explanation why it doesn't run.
I'm going to do some more background research on the witnesses, check their association with Karl, if any exists, and whomever is not associated after screening will be the witnesses that I will listen to.
Also, as I stated before, I believe it would be just as tough to make the mech to fake this as it would be to recreate the "genuine article". I've seen the weights I have here move this wheel; position of weights really does cause motion, and eventually a simple auxilliary mech will come to mind to accomplish this. Bessler's clues are misleading,
so one must go back to observable basics and work forward from there. It's fun to get a step to work and compare it to his cryptics, but like Nostradamus' prophecies, you can read your own work into his writings if you try hard enough.
Regards,
grim