Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Biomass Hydro Dynamics


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was   speedy delete: this was patent nonsense, and moreover an obvious hoax, and therefore vandalism as well. Thanks to Tim Vickers for pointing out the blatant hoax and patent nonsense: All biomass contains pyrolytic crystals whose crystalline lattice expands greatly under heat: add a few links and you can see why that's a classic demonstraton of the power of impressive sounding but meaningless malarkey. - Smerdis of Tlön (talk) 18:34, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

Biomass Hydro Dynamics

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Article about a new plan to solve all the world's energy needs by delivering two trillion gallons of "hydrogen super-fuels" by a process involving "Magneto Hydro Dynamics", "High Temperature Pyrolytic Graphite" and "helium fission by-products". Referenced only to the originators' website and a pending patent application. Possible hoax (the author denies this), certainly original research - the article says "First referenced in Wikipedia (unknown in Google at the time), June 15th, 8:00 PM PST", and fails our key policy of verifiability as it lacks any confirmation from independent reliable sources. Wikipedia is not here to provide first announcement of new ideas, however fantastic. Delete. JohnCD (talk) 08:51, 16 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete: The US patent app suggests they just have a better way to turn biomass, dead plants, into fuels. Fine but there are plenty of these and many extraordinary claims made. A scientific article or even a USA Today article on a water burning car would help make the claims in the wiki article notable.

Nerdseeksblonde (talk) 11:37, 16 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions.  -- TexasAndroid (talk) 12:12, 16 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Environment-related deletion discussions.  -- TexasAndroid (talk) 12:12, 16 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete There is no WP:RS to validate the information. At best, it can be considered original research. Who are Mike Rogers and Phillip Nakata? All we have is their website verde reformation. The article says "will become NET History" but Wikipedia is not a crystal ball. Lechatjaune (talk) 13:03, 16 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete - the author is very clear that this is nothing beyond an unvalidated white paper. So take your pick: WP:OR, WP:COI, WP:BALL or WP:HOAX--it doesn't belong here. Owen&times; &#9742;  13:16, 16 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete per all above; also seems to be spam promoting somebody's newly described, but not newly invented, version of a perpetual motion machine or gasoline pill. - Smerdis of Tlön (talk) 15:13, 16 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete, unverifiable since no journal would publish this. My favorite part as a biochemist is the statement that All biomass contains pyrolytic crystals whose crystalline lattice expands greatly under heat, pseudoscientific gibberish, and not even notable gibberish. Tim Vickers (talk) 16:15, 16 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete. A clear case of original research. Salih  ( talk ) 17:09, 16 June 2009 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.