Ugh - sorry Avi.

It was an unintentional error, I'm sure. Having several articles copies on Neatorama, I know how you feel. I've fixed the links.

Thank you for letting me know and sorry again.

@Bere - see: "The Nokianvirta river is named after a dark, furry animal that was locally known as the nokia – a type of marten."

From Nokia's website: http://www.nokia.com/A4303003

Marten is a type of weasel.

If they had used a Ford Focus built on a Friday, the music would sound off key....

Leatherman? Bah, this is the only tool MacGyver ever needs.

Wow, thanks for the response, guys! Let me address a few points:

@php captcha: those are fan-made logos, right? I believe the one listed above is the original version made by Sergey.

@Aaron Bassett (and Jacob Morse by email): thank you for the clarification. I've updated the post.

@Ilari Sani: Thank you - I didn't know that, but I think 13 or 8 stripes are almost the same thing when it comes to Big Blue's logo. I wouldn't even notice if you didn't bring it up.

@Kris: can't do all companies, the article is long enough as it is. I almost included AT&T, but we've covered that before on Neatorama.

@anon and luma: LG is not an acronym, because it doesn't stand for anything. But you guys are right about it also not being a backronym. Fixed.

@Plus: did you find the hidden arrow in the FedEx logo? :)

@Anzo: The lak hui bit is from LG itself.

Yes, Alex, you ought to be ashamed of yourself. You have pulled out the poorest argument for giving intant scientific merit to untested ideas and have tried to give it some sort of authority because you’re stunned into stupidity by a spinning motor.

Isn't that confrontational? I'm stunned by many things, true, but I'm rarely stunned into stupidity.

I'll say it again: decay of magnetic material is not in the timescale of the experiment. If indeed the wheel accelerates, where is the source of energy being inputed into the system? Let's cut to the chase - we're talking about perpetual motion machine, regardless of what you want to call it.

I stand by what I said at the end of the article, which simply reads: before you dismiss this idea as completely bunk, please consider other accepted scientific principles that - before they became accepted - began as crazy ideas.

Re: only serves to make it appear that you are attempting to quash any discussion of the veracity of the inventor’s claim.

No, actually that's the opposite effect of what I wanted - I'm trying to prevent attempts to quash discussion of the phenomenon described by outright dismissal like the one by Dus.

Re: permanent magnet decay. The reason they're called "permanent" is because they're pretty darned well near permanent - they don't decay anywhere close in the timescale that would explain the acceleration.

Re: Prusiner. My point was that he endured years of ridicule when other scientists dismissed the idea that an infectious protein causes prion proteins out of hand.

Re: acceleration. Yes that's what they see, but what causes the wheel to accelerate? Where is that energy coming from? It's not from the decay of the permanent magnet (too short of a timescale for magnets to decay). What they were all thinking privately is "free energy" but that term is taboo in science.

Look, I'm not claiming that this is the real deal - there's been too many wacky perpetual motion inventions for eager acceptance. But let the guys prove/disprove it the scientific way: by experiments, not by outright dismissal.

Dus and Kate: Yes, nutters use the argument of misunderstood genius to back their nutty claim. Just because they laughed at them and Einstein at first didn't mean that both are right.

But it is also not right to dismiss ideas out of hand (unless, of course, you're talking about educating stupid - there is a difference between nutter and completely nutter) because current scientific thinking is otherwise.

Your thinking that it HAS to be wrong because it doesn't fit our CURRENT scientific view is exactly what science is not. Science is NEVER about outright dismissal of an idea.

I agree with you that extraordinary claim requires extraordinary proof. But isn't THAT what the guy is doing by asking an MIT professor to look over his invention? To find the scientific reasoning behind the acceleration that he saw?

I have complete faith that if the phenomenon is real, then someone smart will find the scientific explanation for it.

Oh, and garage inventors Bill Hewlett and Dave Packard, as well as a lowly patent clerk named Einstein would disagree with your classification of "real" scientists.

All throughout the clip I was wondering what they'd show Ron Paul as ...

Ah, that was great! Phil Hansen is awesome.

The aging Pet Shop Boys resorted to robbing banks.

Bwahahaha! That was very well done. I loved it how the baby um, let go of some gas to knock out the dog.

Thanks Cathy in Maine and anon - I've fixed the geographical error.

And if I may, let me point out that these eight graders stand a very good chance of making it big in this Norwegian show.

So noted and changed! Thanks Dan!

For his comment of Wait until the ACLU gets a wind of this, I hereby award VonSkippy with: