S_C_L-1 said:

"No, he doesnt understand his own invention. If it defys the laws of physics, who does understand it? lol"

I don't really know where to begin with you. So, your stand is that Troy has invented a machine that HE doesn't understand? Um, how does he know what it does, in that case? And how do YOU know what it does?

"Angel light is the only 1 of his inventions without video recordings of it beeing tested."

How fascinating that the only "invention" of his which violates the known laws of physics just happens to be also the only one for which there is no video. Wow, what a coinkidink! You know, a cynical person might think that that is because the friggin' thing DOESN'T work and therefore can't be shown in operation on tape.

"i suggest taking a lil trip to india my friend...(ive seen it with my own eyes... find something a lil more perplexing next time rasberry)"

Again, you are inscrutable. What, exactly, is it you claim to have seen in India?

"With the magnetic field of the earth, and the energy stored in your electrolytes, it is theoretically possible to levitate or at the least, lower your weight significantly (depending on the atmospheric pressure/the strength of the earths magnetic field at that specific location/the charge in your electrolytes etc)"

Either you can prove that these things happen or you can't. Period. Do you have any idea how infinitesimally small the magnetic effect of the Earth is on your body? Do you SEE people levitating around you? Again, if you believe you can levitate, PROVE IT.

Give me a logical reason that a person who invented an amazing machine that violates all the known laws of physics wouldn't videotape it in operation. You make reference to "initial tests." Why didn't he take the simple step of taping it while he was testing it? You expect us to take his word for this (as you obviously do). Why should we?

"Also, you would c videos/info on his other inventions. NOBEL PRIZE winning inventions i might add!"

OK, you have now left the Realm of Believability. Are you honestly claiming that Troy Hurtubise has won a Nobel Prize??? That claim, of course, is easily checked. WHICH Nobel Prize did he win (there is more than one, you know) and what year did he win it?

"So whom do you think i trust more? a NOBEL PRIZE winner with video footage of his tests or a lil media fanatic who has his head so far up his @$$ that he closes off his mind from anything that would bend the "laws" of physics?"

Your claim that Troy Hurtubise has won a Nobel Prize was SO bizarre that I had to check to see what you could possibly be thinking of.

Guess what: I found it! In 1998, Troy was awarded an IGnobel Prize.

Here you go, see for yourself (look under the 1998 listings):

http://improb.com/ig/ig-pastwinners.html

I was right. You are not to be taken seriously.

If you take apart what i say into tiny pieces without making any link, ofc i wont make sens. -_-


Personally, it makes no difference in my life (at all) if you disbelieve or believe. But if you hold no respect for him at all, then im eagerly awaiting to c your face on the discovery channel! (altho i doubt that you understood what i meant by that lol)

It's kinda pathetic tho, that humans (in general) believe that science is infallable... that way of thinking had many a great man killed...

"the earth is round!" *dies*

those "laws" of physics are made by men, not by some invisible force or something. laws of physics are the human way of saying "in general, we found it to work like this..."

just cuz you find a diamond on the street doesnt mean theres a mine under the concrete, doesnt mean there isnt tho...(oooo analogys! complicated lol)

(try to make links between the things i said before trying to flamme me this time)

Sorry, S_C_L-1, but you lost all credibility as far as I'm concerned when you made your absurd assertion that Troy Hurtubise has won a Nobel Prize. I knew that HAD to be wrong because if it was correct, we certainly would have heard about it before by someone in this thread.

That also would have been news all over the place. Then, when I checked to see what you could possibly be referring to, I discovered that you apparently confused a NOBEL Prize with an Ignobel Prize, which is about as similar to a Nobel as a Golden Raspberry (a "Razzie") is to an Oscar.

In my opinion, you SO want to believe that Troy has made an Earth-shaking discovery that you block out any evidence to the contrary. I'll say it one more time: If Troy's device does what he claims it can do, all he has to do to silence his critics is PROVE IT. If and when he does that, he will actually win that Nobel Prize you thought he already had.

All the wishful thinking in the world does not equal a single shred of actual PROOF.

S_L_C-1 said:

"those "laws" of physics are made by men, not by some invisible force or something. laws of physics are the human way of saying "in general, we found it to work like this..."

The laws of physics are discovered through TESTING. We may have theories about how things work but those theories are proven or disproven by TESTING. Those that prove to be accurate are then called "Laws of Physics." Those that don't fall by the wayside.

If Troy Hurtubise has invented something that violates the known laws of physics, he is being negligent by not allowing proper testing of that device. If it does what he claims, he is able to move mankind's knowledge of the world around it by leaps and bounds. Either he is selfishly withholding vital knowledge from his fellow man OR he knows the machine doesn't do the things he has claimed. Take a guess as to which I think is the case.

You can rationalize all you want but you can't get around the fact that no one is obligated to buy his story until he PROVES it to be true.

By the way, when will you apologize to me for the claim that I was being lazy when you have shown that you didn't bother to find out that Troy has never won a NOBEL Prize? A wee bit lax on your part, given that the research needed to disprove your claim took me less than thirty seconds via Google.

your not as informed as you think.
Angel light is, as we speak, being researched in europe.

Cites?
Sources?
Europe is a large place, you know...

o ffs. im not a freaking encyclopedia.

Cute. You say it is being researched in Europe and I'm certain that T-Rays are being researched in Europe.

You then say that you aren't a "freaking encyclopedia", but if you actually had any information you could very easily write it.

"Yeah, I read about it on Oxford's website"

F' this.

I WAS hoping to get a decent conversation on this subject, but all you guys do is put me in a bad mood.

I think what really happened, S_C_L-1, is that you ran into a bunch of people who wouldn't take your vague, unsupported assertions at face value. We ARE having a conversation; you just aren't getting the response you want.

I want you to believe what I'm about to say. If and when Troy Hurtubise proves that his "invention" works as he claims it does, no one will be happier than me. Our world will be a more interesting place and mankind will be better informed about it. Unfortunately, I don't see that happening. The evidence (or lack thereof) suggests that Troy is just telling stories about Angel Light.

You're wasting your time Cranky Media Guy. S_C_L-1 has no information and refuses to see the very logical point that you are making.

I think it's strange that this has been discussed so long and with such heat. As far as I know, BayToday's article is the only primary source about the Angel Light, and hardly a valid base for any strong opinion on the validity of the object. I have seen no other media or documentation about the Angel Light, so either it was a hoax (my personal opinion) or hasn't turned out to be what those involved thought it was. The article itself is hearsay, providing no sources, and as far as I can tell is written using only Hurtubise's own words.

Crazed_Baphomet,

It's been discussed so long and with so much heat for several reasons:

1. The "Angel Light" and associated follow-on articles in baytoday.ca are just plain friggin' hold-your-sides-laughing funny!

2. The fact that they were actually published is even funnier! (But also makes a sad commentary about the state of journalism today.)

3. The fact that people take them seriously is funnier yet! (But also makes a sad commentary about how credulous some people are, and how completely devoid of knowledge about the Scientific Method: what it is, why it's important, how it works and why it works.)

4. There are lots of people in the world who desperately need to learn more about journalistic responsibility, skepticism and the scientific method. Some of these good folks make their needs known by posting statements asserting that Troy's claims are to be taken at face value and/or that inconclusive or nonexistant "evidence" is sufficient to prove Troy's claims and/or their own home-grown "logic" should be used to prove Troy's claims. People like Cranky Media Guy kindly respond to their "calls for help" and take the time to help bring them up to speed.

It's all about having some good laughs and helping people in the process!

That said, this would definately be a shorter thread if so many people didn't insist on trying to revive dead horses: topics that have been beat to death in previous posts that are posted as if the writer has had some new flash of insight ("BUT IT WAS PROVEN ON THE DISCOVERY CHANNEL!!! etc.)

intjudo said:

"People like Cranky Media Guy kindly respond to their "calls for help" and take the time to help bring them up to speed."

Yup, that's me, Benefactor to Mankind. Actually, what the deal is is that, since I've been involved in the Wonderful World O' Hoaxes for a long time now, I just have an highly-evolved BS Detector.

I have no problem at all with hoaxes that are satirical, but stuff like LifeWave is more properly called "fraud" as it takes advantage of people who might well need legitimate medican help (a "lack of energy" may indicate a medical condition).

There's also a part of me that is just amazed when I see adults taken in by what appears to me to be obvious fraud. I wish I was Bill Gates so I could fund teaching awareness of this sort of thing in grade schools all over the country. By the way, I was kidding about the Benefactor of Mankind thing. I'm a big jerk; I just play Benefactor of Mankind on the Web.

Wow, it's been eight months and this is still alive?

WHOO HOO! Another great Hurtubise article!

I came across an old Outside Magazine (May 1997) and threw it on the kitchen table without even noticing the "One Man's Odd Obsession to get Whupped by a Grizzley Bear" headline on the front cover. My wife discovered the article and within minutes, MAN did we have a good laugh.

This is worth a read, as it has a few gems I haven't come across yet. Don't want to spoil them all, but here are a few choice tidbits:

1. Apparently the URSES Mark VII weighs 147 POUNDS!

2. Here's an awesome Hurtubise quote: "This suit, unlike any ever built," he says, jabbing at the air as he speaks, "has not only an exoskeleton, it has an endoskeleton, too." ...Anyone care to take a stab at this one?

3. Three more things Troy promises to revolutionize: Hockey, fire control and riot control! Add 'em to the list!

4. And finally, the characteristic now-you've-got-him-started rant that goes off the deep end:

<snip>
And he fully expects a corporate backer, probably Japanese, to front him the $500,000 he needs for the Mark VII, the ultimate Ursus suit.

"Total top of the line," Hurtubise says. "I gotta go to NASA for the materials. This suit will have 90 percent flexibility. (-- HUH --) I can sit down and have a cup of coffee with it on."

"Japan," he says, "has the foresight to say, 'Give this man a half a million dollars, let him build the Mark VII. All we want from it is the blueprints.' And then they'll put $50 million into it and they'll have a suit that will revolutionize fire control. Or riot control: While they're jumping on top of you, you're eating your sandwich inside. The only way you're going to kill the Mark VII is a rogue elephant with fangs. They'll make a billion off it in ten years."

</snip>

Line by line, man, that is some funny S__T.

I love how he talks about the entire nation of Japan as if he can aggregate all Japanese individuals into some kind of abstracted entity he can wheel-and-deal with directly. He's got this whole sales pitch and he's got himself all revved up to deliver it to "Japan."

At least I don't have to blast Outside Magazine for flaky reporting. The author seems to have tongue firmly in cheek and a wry sense of skepticism.

Anyway the article is online as well as in print, and there are lots of laughs in it I haven't spoiled yet so here you go:

http://outside.away.com/outside/magazine/0597/0597grizzlies.html

"This 'garage inventor' most likely would not have the inherent smarts to deal with these issues, unless he had a fair amount of formal training, a large test equipment budget, and a lot of money to blow on state of the art hardware. It could be that he does have all of these."

Just like those idiots the Wright brothers and that moron Eli Whitney, right? And George Washington Carver? I don't think HE even had a garage! But Henry Ford did, eventually.

Well,
I gotta tell you, the article in question didn't seem so tongue in cheek to me. It sounds like the guy is completely sideways, but ya gotta hand it to him; that damn bear suit can take some PUNISHMENT!
And he was inside it the whole time.

The crack about
"I love how he talks about the entire nation of Japan as if he can aggregate all Japanese individuals into some kind of abstracted entity he can wheel-and-deal with directly. He's got this whole sales pitch and he's got himself all revved up to deliver it to "Japan."

Is just plain low. The Arabs sell oil. The Italians are great cooks. The Germans are efficient.
They're called "generalizations". Many of us use them. What planet are you from that you don't get that?
But let me point something out to you crack heads:
Where did he get all the money to build the "Angel Light"? Especially after he was, according to the article, bankrupted by building the bear suit?
My guess is from selling those other inventions of his. Maybe even to Japan!

re:

"Where did he get all the money to build the "Angel Light"? Especially after he was, according to the article, bankrupted by building the bear suit?
My guess is from selling those other inventions of his. Maybe even to Japan!"

troy's family has made a compfortable living in the scrap metal (recycling) trade. by the way, troy himself worked for many years in the family scrap yard. by dismantling various applicances, cars etc. he no doubt aquired a working knowlege of how things are put together. those skills, when combined with a fertile imagination and a carnival barkers sense of self-promotion have got him the publicity he craves, but i doubt he has made a cent of profit on any invention.

John,

Granted the Ursus can take a beating - but so can a metal box. Point being, in order to be useful the suit must provide not only protection but mobility. Per copious discussions on this thread it clearly fails to provide mobility and is thus a useless invention.

The futility of the suit is best demonstrated by Troy's own tests of the suit: when's the last time you had a need to stand immobile while your friends hit you with shovels, or swung logs at you from trees, or drove into you with their pickup? In equivalent real-life scenarios you'd want *mobility* so you could get out of the way, or rescue someone, or...*do* something besides stand around.

As for generalizations...granted they're a necessary abstraction that we all are obliged to utilize from time to time. However, abstraction is one thing...having internal *conversations* with you abstractions is another, and I find it amusing. It's like talking with an imaginary friend and relaying the conversation to a news reporter.

Perhaps I'm being "low," but if so it's because I think Troy's delusions are funny and I like poking fun at him and the "reporters" who present his ramblings as "news", not because I'm criticizing Troy for generalizing.

As for your "guess" that he's been paid for his inventions...you seem to be implying that the purchase of one or more of Troy's inventions is proof that they work as advertised. Not true. Given the extraordinary nature of Troy's claims, formal scientific proof is required, or *at least* demonstations of success in real-world situations. Troy has provided no such proof.

Furthermore, you seem to be asserting that we're all a bunch of sloppy thinkers ("crack heads") on this thread, and that your observations are so keen relative to ours that you can trump our entire conversation with a single post.

If you'd bother to read the thread before making such assumptions, you'd have known that there's not a single credible record of *anyone* purchasing an invention of Troy's for *any* real-world application. You'd also know that we've completely dismantled the notion that Troy's "garage inventor" status is relevant to proving the validity or in-validity of his claims.

And if you didn't catch the "tongue in cheek" flavor of the Outside Magazine article I'd suggest reading it again, or perhaps having someone with high-school reading/comprehension skills read it to you.

But thanks for your post, it was good for a few giggles.

Actually the term crack heads refered back to my comment above (The crack about..).
That's called a double entendre. I learned about those in high school english. That and generalizations.
Hmm, maybe you should try a high school english class yourself.

As regards the abstractions,
The one we are referencing is his use of the term "Japan" from the article:
"Japan," he says, "has the foresight to say, 'Give this man a half a million dollars, let him build the Mark VII. All we want from it is the blueprints."
I don't see an internal conversation there. Point it out to me, why don't you?
Maybe that's one of those seemingly asserted things you were going on about, huh? (Like the way I seem to have asserted that someone buying an invention is proof that the invention works?)
In answer to that, go back and look at the literal, (as opposed to seemingly asserted) meaning of my statement. It has nothing to do with the feasability of the invention, but merely states that this guy appears to have a positive cash flow NOW, whereas he was $37,000 in debt before. (In fact the bear suit was being auctioned off by bankruptcy trustees.)

I merely took the information given in the article and hypothesized that, somehow, he had gotten far enough out of debt to go and dump another sizeable chunk of cash into his new "Angel Light" project.

I don't have someone "with high-school reading/comprehension skills" right at hand, but if I did, he or she would probably notice the flaw in your whole "mobility" argument, as referenced to the article. Go back and read it, I'll wait.....
You see? He wasn't talking about "Japan" buying the Mark VI. He was refering to investment capital for the Mark VII.

"This suit will have 90 percent flexibility. I can sit down and have a cup of coffee with it on."

We know he built the Mark VI to be able to withstand a beating, and now (according to the article) he has the mobility issue resolved (at least on paper).
That's from the article. And then zip forward to NOW. And he's gone and put a big chunk of money into the "Angel Light". Where did he get it?
I can't believe the "scrap business" is that lucrative, to allow him the finances AND the time to put into his inventions. Again, he was in debt to the tune of $37000 before, where was that "comfortable living" then? (Hi Geebs!)
Really, seriously, WHERE DID HE GET THE MONEY???

You're welcome.

P.S. Grown ups who giggle are often insane. You should have that checked out.

John:
From wikipedia.org:

"A double entendre is a figure of speech similar to the pun, in which a spoken phrase can be understood in either of two ways. The first, literal meaning is an innocent one, while the second meaning is often risqu

OOO,
I got burned!
No really, why don't you even pay attention to your own posts? The Wikipedia reference states "the second meaning is often risqu

I have no solid opinion on the validity of this matter (even though it does sound fairly far fetched). I was interested to check out the realtronics website on internic whois.

Domain Name: REALTRONICS.COM
Registrar: GKG.NET, INC.
Whois Server: whois.gkg.net
Referral URL: http://www.gkg.net
Name Server: NS.BHFC.NET
Name Server: NS2.BHFC.NET
Status: REGISTRAR-LOCK
Updated Date: 16-oct-2004
Creation Date: 29-sep-1999
Expiration Date: 29-sep-2013

How long has this "hoax" been going on? Since '99?

I've seen the discovery channel show on this Angel Light. It looked real. I also heard the fellow talk on coasttocoastam. I don't think it's a hoax unlike a lot of other topics on "coast." You call it a hoax when you don't know anyting about it. People thought the lazer beem was science fiction when it was first built. Who's laughing now on that one? People laughed at Galileo and said he was a nut when he said a bb would fall at the same speed as a cannon ball. That's why Galileo is well read nowadays and his doubters have drowned in obscurity. I'd would rather be a nut myself. this fellow will be laughing all the way to the bank while you laugh at him.

portamenteff, your logic is flawed. Basically you said that because people laughed at claims made by other people in the past, the fact that people laugh at Troy's claims may mean that his "invention" is legitimate.

That, of course, is nonsense. The reaction of other people has no bearing on whether or not Troy's "invention" is real or not. Either it works or it doesn't. No one has suggested that people's reaction to it is proof that it doesn't work. I'll repeat: either it works or it doesn't. So far, Troy has provided NO proof that it does, so there is simply no evidence that it is legitimate. Period.

portamenteff,

Did you see the Discovery Channel/Angel Light show on TV or on the Web? Can you post a Web link?

this guy lives just outside of where i live. he is a nut. look at his hairdo. and the baytoday is just a little web publication. they were probably just looking for something to write. he is not an MIT alumni, and who said he was? this guy is a weirdo. end of story.

i could not take him seriously when he came in to the store where i used to work. and he's a bit of a dick too.

Hey Fellas,

I/ve know about this guy for years. This Angel light thing sounds crazy, but so has everything else he's done, and he has done them. Haven't you seen when he chucks himself down the cliff? It is f-ing crazy, How about when he paints a hockey helmet with his paste and does an interview while some blasts his head with a 2000 degree celsius blowtorch. That's been on discovery channel and they shot the footage - it wasn't supplie by Hurtubise. They also did a show on his armoured bag that talkes the equivilant of a RPG strike in dynamite strapped to the outside, and leaves a car door intact behind it. I hear there is third party footage, but havent seen it where he demos his paint that stops the most powerful bullets around 30-06, or 303s or something. As to it not being bought, the government is sitting on armour it has in warehouses in the states (AP, Reuters) instead of sending it to Iraq, so it isn't surprising that they don't wan't this stuff. In fact it seems they only by from themselves - haliburton, Tamiflu. You guys sound like a bunch of bitter sissies who have never created anything, and try to make yourselves feel better by trashing weirdos, like Hurtubise. It's dinks like you who would have us back in the stone-age just to save your fragile illusions about your importance and place in the world. Contribute or Shut the F-Up

I'll say it again. If it worked, which the fire paste does, he would have called Discovery Channel and had them come back to do a story on his latest invention.

He hasn't because it doesn't. End of story. Case closed.

Comments: Page 10 of 14 pages ‹ First  < 8 9 10 11 12 >  Last ›