Ioan,
Admonishing this group because you have "hope" presumes, incorrectly, that we do not. It also presumes that "thoughts" and "knowledge" somehow hamper the search for a future flying machine. Let me also say that it is not only foolish, it exposes your lack of intellectual curiosity. Beware of any argument you make that starts with, "I don't know a thing about what we are talking about...."
Our hopes are often abused by those who know the real answer but hide it from us. I also hope we find better systems, too, but I don't allow that to stop asking some cold, hard questions about the physics involved.
The tiny rotor disks of the Moller air car make it a power-hungry beast, note that on the one model where he actually tells you how much HP he needs, he shows that it need 1/2 horsepower for each pound of gross weight. A light helicopter needs between 1/10. That means (for someone who says "I know nothing about this aircraft") that all you have to do is ask the charlatan, "How much power does it need?" and hear him dance around before he says, "Five times more than a helicopter."
A simpleton, even one with "hope" would then know that Moller's car is impossible, since he must install 1200 Horsepower in a vehicle that weighs 2400 lbs including engines, fuel, structure. The 2 cycle engines he says he uses (or the rotary engine he also mentions) weigh about 1 pound per horsepower, and they consume fuel at a rate between 25% and 100% faster than a regular 4 cycle engine.
The technically challenged reporter could not grasp how simple it would be to get Moller to tell the truth, that half the weight of his miracle car is engine, and the other half is fuel, leaving nothing for structure or people.