| 
Posted Nov 4, 2009 by Potholer
I just saw this article
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/04/w...d/middleeast/04sensors.html?_r=1&hp
about expensive and seemingly entirely useless (according to the US military) explosives detectors being sold to Iraq.
Seems it's just a case of cheap-to-build crap being sold at ridiculous prices, either to people who know nothing, or (more likely) to people who are in on the scam.
Surely, if there was any value at all in the things, advanced/honest military forces would already be using them, and the firm would be famous?
|
 
|  | |
| |
Posted Nov 4, 2009 by Ictoan S.H.A.D.O.W. Secretary - AWE - WAWi
oooh, that rings a bell. JREF have investigated similar devices and they don't get any indication of effectiveness. The US Military is correct (blimey, did I just say that?) but the way the Iraqi buyers are defending it tends to indicate they've either been comprehensively scammed or are in on it. I suspect the former from the comment "Whether it’s magic or scientific..." from the article.
Just goes to show the ethics of purveyors of woo - this is going to cost in lives never mind money.
|
| | |
| |
Posted Nov 4, 2009 by Whisky
The weird thing is, if the iraqi military believe it works, and more importantly, if the people making the bombs believe it works, then it _does_ work... It'll stop anyone carrying a bomb attempting to get through military checkpoints.
|
| | |
| |
Posted Nov 4, 2009 by Potholer
But if it had value as a bluff, it still wouldn't need someone to make a huge amount of money out of selling bogus equipment, merely someone making fakes and spreading rumours.
Once a few people had taken the risk of carrying explosives and got through checkpoints unstopped, word would seem likely to spread very quickly that the devices were useless.
Let's remember that there are people doing suicide attacks, who would likely not be afraid to at least *try* carrying explosives.
Also, the guy seemingly making a lot of money selling the ADE 651 devices also suggests that they are good for mine clearance, among other things.
I don't suppose anyone here thinks that mines disappear or become non-explosive due to people's beliefs about them.
Fake mine detection kit ==> dead mine clearance personnel
Personally, I'd be very surprised if the people at the top are actually fooled for a second - with the large sums involved it seems much more likely that they're in on the scam and lining their pockets.
If the Iraqi general sincerely believed they worked, he'd presumably have been really keen to prove it to the doubting US forces he's allied with.
Somehow, I rather doubt he's tried to do that.
|
| | |
| |
Posted Nov 4, 2009 by  Taff Agent of Kaos.We are Borg....Resistance is Futile....Bufoons are Go
the point of a deterent is to make the terrorist think about an easier target
suicide bombers are the worst and most popular type these days due to the wide range of electronic counter meassures available to prevent the remote detenation of an IED
even if you detect explosives theres nothing to stop matey-boy going all 'allah akbar' on you, all you have done is allowed the bomb to be set off premeturely and not at the intended target
there are still casualtys to deal with
|
| | |
| |
Posted Nov 7, 2009 by 3Dots
And 'created' by people in Leicester too boot.
It's rubbish along with anything to do with magnets improving fuel efficiency or anything else.
The only thing magnets can do is improve the magnetic properties of certain metals.
|
| | |
| |
Posted Nov 15, 2009 by Xanatic, I´m loveable dammit!
I can´t believe the money they´ve spent on this. I really hope somebody brings fraud charges against these guys.
|
| | |
| |
Posted Nov 15, 2009 by 3Dots
Here's something else that companies are starting to use...normally taken up by people with no knowledge of magnets or improvements in fuel efficency.
http://www.maxsysltd.com/
The company says by putting electromagnets onto the gas supply to a boler it can improve fuel efficency by 5%. Initally it said the magnets lined the molecules up then they changed their monds and are saying it does something to the iron in the gas and also clean the system too. Anyway, the Carbon Trust firstly gave them some money to help with the technology then rejected it because there is no peer reviewed proof that the technology works...they also probably read their own literature which says that if you just start to examine a boilers set-up and improve that you will get a 5% improvement.
So, the MD of the company wrote the following:
http://www.energy-online.net/storie...ry_speaks_out_against_carbon_trust/
here's a few things against the technology but based on liquid fuel...gas is even more energetical and changing than liquids:
http://www.fuelsaving.info/magnets.htm
http://www.ncbuy.com/credit/articles/01_10816.html
Now, I am not saying that this technology does not work..just that there is no peer reviewed reports explaining how it does work and that there are other reasons to show the improvements in the fuel efficiency...and the Carbon trust have rejected it.
You can read about some research that has been done on the technoloy on their website.
http://www.maxsysltd.com/page.cfm?page_id=109§ion_id=4
This talks about fluid dynamics etc.
I will leaeve it up to people to decide whetehr they think it works or not.
Now, if they show some really hard evidence and peer reviewed research proving it then...a) they should call up James Randi and get that million dollars and b) "I will take a compass and carve 'Fancy That' on the side of my c*ck" to quote Mr Minchin.
Obviously, the success of Maxsys means they are doing something right. So, good luck to 'em...just don't knock at the door of my company til you've got the research paper and the Nobel Prize for physics....then I'll take your technology with no questions at all but with a large bandage around my nether regions.
|
| | |
| |
| |
Key |  |  |
A: An older reply to the parent Posting
B: The parent Posting, to which this is a reply
C: A newer reply to the parent posting
D: The first reply to this Posting
| | |
Click on this icon to make a complaint about a specific Posting | |
|
Home
Reply
