Language: 
To browser these website, it's necessary to store cookies on your computer.
The cookies contain no personal information, they are required for program control.
  the storage of cookies while browsing this website, on Login and Register.

GDPR and DSGVO law

Storing Cookies (See : http://ec.europa.eu/ipg/basics/legal/cookies/index_en.htm ) help us to bring you our services at overunity.com . If you use this website and our services you declare yourself okay with using cookies .More Infos here:
https://overunity.com/5553/privacy-policy/
If you do not agree with storing cookies, please LEAVE this website now. From the 25th of May 2018, every existing user has to accept the GDPR agreement at first login. If a user is unwilling to accept the GDPR, he should email us and request to erase his account. Many thanks for your understanding

User Menu

Google Search

Custom Search

Author Topic: Rosemary Ainslie circuit demonstration on Saturday March 12th 2011  (Read 670135 times)

Offline Rosemary Ainslie

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3968
Re: Rosemary Ainslie circuit demonstration on Saturday March 12th 2011
« Reply #1590 on: June 24, 2011, 11:17:02 PM »
My later simulation results are based on a battery measurement across one of the six batteries, but all six batteries are still in the circuit, powering the circuit.
Golly.  I wonder why you had to do it this way Poynty?  Did this ELIMINATE the oscillation?  Or simply reduce it?  We're left with a couple of questions here.  If it eliminated the oscillation - WHY?  And if it reduced the oscillation - WHY?

This was all painstakingly explained in the detailed analysis, which clearly you do not understand. Go read it please and kindly stop twisting the facts!
I'd read it gladly if you could just take the trouble to post it here.  NOT A LINK.  The actual report.  Otherwise we'll all be inclined to think that you've actually NOT written a report.  Personally I can't open your link.  I'm satisfied that many readers either can't or won't.  SO.  Let's ALL see this report if it's that germane to the argument.

Thanks
Rosemary


Offline MrMag

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 754
Re: Rosemary Ainslie circuit demonstration on Saturday March 12th 2011
« Reply #1591 on: June 24, 2011, 11:27:03 PM »
rosy, rosy, you have an answer for everything don't you. I asked for a rundown test and you call me names.

Poynt has proven your circuit is under unity but now you say his circuit no longer counts. Why is it that you are the only person who has a problem opening his document?

Why are you so against this battery run down test or a closed loop test as Powercat has requested.

You keep getting caught in your own lies and just brush it off and try to put it on us.

I do have another question for you though. What were you trying to do when you discovered this circuit?

Offline Rosemary Ainslie

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3968
Re: Rosemary Ainslie circuit demonstration on Saturday March 12th 2011
« Reply #1592 on: June 24, 2011, 11:51:56 PM »

If that was the case why has no one in over two years reproduced your claim,when you make statements like that,I have to respond as you are being misleading.

Actually Cat it's you who are misleading. Plenty of replications on our previous circuit.  And even from members on this forum.  But you're right that no-one has replicated this circuit - other than on Poynty's sims.  But then you go on to say that we need to do something different?  We most certainly have something different.  This is an ENTIRELY different circuit - with ENTIRELY different results.  if you're going to object then I wonder if you couldn't just check these kind of facts first.  And like RomeroUK's circuit - ours has only been on this public forum for 3 months.

Please do something different...
Indeed.  Again.  I'm happy to report that we have done something different.  ENTIRELY different.  And EVEN BETTER RESULTS. 

Many members have made reasonable requests that you ignore including Stefan amongst others,
but you ignore them and carry on regurgitating your same old arguments.
To the best of my recollection we've answered every single concern related to every measurement - that has ever been put to us. Grounding issues - answered.  Under sampling claims - answered.  Probe positioning concerns - answered.  Standard of measuring equipment - answered.  Impedance concerns - answered.  And since we've done this last WATER TO BOIL test - we've also answered any concerns related to out performance of battery capacity.  Remember?  We dissipate over 25 million Joules from a battery capacity that is AT THE MOST can only account for 10 million Joules.

Regards,
Rosemary

added
« Last Edit: June 25, 2011, 12:14:55 AM by Rosemary Ainslie »

Offline poynt99

  • TPU-Elite
  • Hero Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 3582
Re: Rosemary Ainslie circuit demonstration on Saturday March 12th 2011
« Reply #1593 on: June 24, 2011, 11:52:08 PM »
Everything that's in that document was openly posted already. In fact, the document was compiled from all the posts, so you've already had ample opportunity to read the entire analysis.

I'm done for now, peace out.

.99

Offline Rosemary Ainslie

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3968
Re: Rosemary Ainslie circuit demonstration on Saturday March 12th 2011
« Reply #1594 on: June 24, 2011, 11:58:14 PM »
Everything that's in that document was openly posted already. In fact, the document was compiled from all the posts, so you've already had ample opportunity to read the entire analysis.

I'm done for now, peace out.

.99

Poynty - if I didn't know better I'd guess that your report is that fragile that you dare not also make it easily accessible to our readers.  Of course you're done for now.  You have NO answers to the only questions that matter.  It would take you no time at all to simply post that report here.  I wonder why you don't?

Regards,
Rosemary

Offline powercat

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1091
Re: Rosemary Ainslie circuit demonstration on Saturday March 12th 2011
« Reply #1595 on: June 25, 2011, 01:17:24 AM »
Actually Cat it's you who are misleading. Plenty of replications on our previous circuit.  And even from members on this forum.  But you're right that no-one has replicated this circuit - other than on Poynty's sims.  But then you go on to say that we need to do something different?  We most certainly have something different.  This is an ENTIRELY different circuit - with ENTIRELY different results.  if you're going to object then I wonder if you couldn't just check these kind of facts first.  And like RomeroUK's circuit - ours has only been on this public forum for 3 months.
Indeed.  Again.  I'm happy to report that we have done something different.  ENTIRELY different.  And EVEN BETTER RESULTS. 
To the best of my recollection we've answered every single concern related to every measurement - that has ever been put to us. Grounding issues - answered.  Under sampling claims - answered.  Probe positioning concerns - answered.  Standard of measuring equipment - answered.  Impedance concerns - answered.  And since we've done this last WATER TO BOIL test - we've also answered any concerns related to out performance of battery capacity.  Remember?  We dissipate over 25 million Joules from a battery capacity that is AT THE MOST can only account for 10 million Joules.

Regards,
Rosemary

added

It would appear that yet again you are twisting everything said,and now you are ignoring Mr Mags,
I'm now beginning to understand what happened to fuzzyTomCat,I remember him way back before he got involved with you and turned it bitter and twisted, and then you go and make accusations about 99 that are clearly not true. Most of us can look back through 10 Pages or more and see the evidence that he posted for you, yet you accuse him of not Posting it  :o

Here is my repost with small update in the hope that you might try and answer with out trying to twist everything.

Quote from Rosemary Ainslie on June 24, 2011, 04:47:03 PM
Quote
Well Cat.  I think if you want to follow RomeroUK there's nothing stopping you.  I, personally, no longer have high hopes there. And if you're satisfied that we have nothing - then that's fine.  No-one is holding a gun to your head.  To me it seems that you're rather anxiously looking for a consensus opinion - on the efficacy of our system.  I'm afraid that science is NOT determined by consensus.  All one needs are the the measurements and some reasonable account of the apparatus that produces those measurements.
    Regards
    Rosemary

Quote
All one needs are the the measurements and some reasonable account of the apparatus that produces those measurements.

If that was the case why has no one in over two years reproduced your claim of OU,when you make statements like that,I have to respond as you are being misleading.
That's absolutely no one whatsoever on this forum has reproduced your claim off excess energy with your circuit, absolutely nobody has been successful, not a single member.

Please do something different On this forum,this forum is not your personal blog.
Many members have made reasonable requests that you ignore including Stefan,Mr Mag amongst others,
but you ignore them and carry on regurgitating your same old arguments.

If you're not going to interact with the members here to change the deadlock then there is no point in your thread, you already have a blog where no one can argue with what you're saying.

You are the one making the excess energy claims, no one here after two years can match those claims.
Please please please do something different Here on This forum,and stop ignoring reasonable quests for tests. Or stop claiming OU on This OverUnity Forum

« Last Edit: June 25, 2011, 02:24:42 AM by powercat »

Offline Rosemary Ainslie

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3968
Re: Rosemary Ainslie circuit demonstration on Saturday March 12th 2011
« Reply #1596 on: June 25, 2011, 01:35:26 AM »

If that was the case why has no one in over two years reproduced your claim of OU,when you make statements like that,I have to respond as you are being misleading.
If no-one has replicated as you claim then explain the existence of this paper?

http://www.scribd.com/doc/23455916/Open-Source-Evaluation-of-Power-Transients-Generated-to-Improve-Performance-Coefficient-of-Resistive-Heating-Systems

Which makes this statement ENTIRELY FALLACIOUS.

That's absolutely no one whatsoever on this forum has reproduced your claim off excess energy with your circuit, absolutely nobody has been successful, not a single member.

And as for the rest of your questions and statements they've been answered.  WE HAVE A NEW CIRCUIT.  I HAVE ANSWERED ALL QUESTIONS RELATING TO THAT CIRCUIT.  Here again is my post.

To the best of my recollection we've answered every single concern related to every measurement - that has ever been put to us. Grounding issues - answered.  Under sampling claims - answered.  Probe positioning concerns - answered.  Standard of measuring equipment - answered.  Impedance concerns - answered.  And since we've done this last WATER TO BOIL test - we've also answered any concerns related to out performance of battery capacity.  Remember?  We dissipate over 25 million Joules from a battery capacity that AT THE MOST can only account for 10 million Joules.

R.

NOW LET ME EMPHASISE THIS.  WE HAVE A NEW CIRCUIT.  WE DO NOT HAVE THE SAME CIRCUIT THAT WE USED BEFORE.  IT IS NEW.  SOMETHING DIFFERENT.  IT HAS ONLY BEEN MADE PUBLIC FOR THREE MONTHS - LESS THAN THAT.  IT IS NOT THE SAME AS THE PREVIOUS CIRCUIT. 

Not sure if there are many more ways to say the same thing.  But surely?  You must be able to understand at least one of those sentences?

Again,
R

corrected
« Last Edit: June 25, 2011, 02:22:35 AM by Rosemary Ainslie »

Offline powercat

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1091
Re: Rosemary Ainslie circuit demonstration on Saturday March 12th 2011
« Reply #1597 on: June 25, 2011, 02:13:14 AM »
If no-one has replicated as you claim then explain the existence of this paper?



Yet again you fail to see what is in front of you so I will say it again, no one on this fourum has reproduced your claim of OU I know members here have attempted to replicate your work but none of them whatsoever achieve any energy gain at all,  is this clear now

As for the new circuit which is pretty much based on the old circuit, I was very excited when I first saw this new thread, I even supported you through most of it, but yet again it has ended up like your last thread, no one on here can reproduce your results=OU
and despite repeated requests you just keep arguing the same measurement arguments.

I really could do with an excess energy circuit in my life,so could the rest of the world
but you seem unwilling to do anything different despite numerous requests.

Go on Rosie proof that 99 is wrong in his analysis and makes something that runs and run and put it on the Internet after all,
 (Quote from Rosemary)
"All one needs are the the measurements and some reasonable account of the apparatus that produces those measurements".

Offline Rosemary Ainslie

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3968
Re: Rosemary Ainslie circuit demonstration on Saturday March 12th 2011
« Reply #1598 on: June 25, 2011, 03:27:38 AM »
Yet again you fail to see what is in front of you so I will say it again, no one on this fourum has reproduced your claim of OU I know members here have attempted to replicate your work but none of them whatsoever achieve any energy gain at all,  is this clear now
And yet again you fail to read the evidence.  Here's that link again.  If this does NOT constitute a replication then BY RIGHTS it needs must be withdrawn.  As of NOW it is NOT withdrawn.  This is published by Fuzzy on his own Scribd file.  EXPLAIN THAT if you can.  To the best of my knowledge Fuzzy is a forum member.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/23455916/Open-Source-Evaluation-of-Power-Transients-Generated-to-Improve-Performance-Coefficient-of-Resistive-Heating-Systems

As for the new circuit which is pretty much based on the old circuit, I was very excited when I first saw this new thread, I even supported you through most of it, but yet again it has ended up like your last thread, no one on here can reproduce your results=OU
Now you're doing that dance of the 7 veils that Poynt's so good at.  What you ACTUALLY said is that in 3 years NO-ONE has replicated our circuit.  You're right.  No-one has replicated this NEW circuit.  It's only been PUBLIC for less than 3 months.  Which possibly explains why it was not replicated earlier. You remember you explained that this is why no-one has replicated RomeroUK's circuit?  That statement where you brushed aside certain parallels I drew?  So?  What exactly makes it understandable in Romero's case that does that not apply to ours? And may I add.  It is as much like the previous circuit as drizzle is to a thunderstorm - or as a breeze is to a tornado - or as I've mentioned before - as a gentle ripple is to a tsunami.  So DON'T give me - 'it's much the same as'...  The only point where it corresponds is that it's still a switched circuit.  And it's still powered by batteries.
 
...and despite repeated requests you just keep arguing the same measurement arguments.
And here's another example of your quintessentially reasonable requests.  Effectively I must sit here with my hands folded and my eyes closed and my mouth shut?  Is that it?  While Poynty applies a sledgehammer to the subtleties of this circuit?  Is that to what end?  To make your life more bearable?  I suppose that's fair.  Why not?  What the hell?  Who cares?  And why bother?  Definitely a good argument.  It's as reasonable as taking a stick of dynamite to Michelangelo's David to test it's durability.  And then to argue that it's durability is a measure of it's value as a work of art.  A really good litmus test. 

I really could do with an excess energy circuit in my life, so could the rest of the world but you seem unwilling to do anything different despite numerous requests.
And as for this statement.  It seems that I've not satisfied your precise requirement for excess energy so I must go away?  You don't even have the wherewithal to determine whether or not there's excess energy.  For this you depend on that consensus which, as I've pointed out has NOTHING to do with science.  But I must oblige you and just go away because you're more inclined to go with Poynty's OPINION?  And this because NO-ONE who contributes to this forum has replicated our circuit?  Despite the fact that no-one has ever tried?  Like I say.  It's fair comment.

Go on Rosie prove that 99 is wrong in his analysis and makes something that runs and run and put it on the Internet after all,
Gladly.  Any time you want.  Just make it worth my while.  Either pay for that experiment - or get 4 academics to say that that will be proof positive.  I've already got 1 who'd go on record.  So.  That's a convenient number - a handful.

(Quote from Rosemary)

"All one needs are the the measurements and some reasonable account of the apparatus that produces those measurements".
If you're going to quote me then put it in context.  I seem to recall saying something about your reliance on consensus opinion to determine science.  Let me say it again.  All one needs are the measurements and some reasonable account of the apparatus that produces those measurements.  Which by default means that consensus opinion is a really BAD way to try and determine the validity of science.  One needs MEASUREMENTS.  Not OPINION.

R
A much needed qualification to that statement as there have INDEED been replications.  But the replicators WISELY do NOT POST HERE.  They daren't.  They're very aware of the agendas that they'd be up against.  On OU.COM THEY ABOUND

Offline Rosemary Ainslie

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3968
Re: Rosemary Ainslie circuit demonstration on Saturday March 12th 2011
« Reply #1599 on: June 25, 2011, 09:15:50 AM »
So?  CAT? What do you say now?  And guys - here's the sad and sorry truth.  You all claim that your interests are in exploring OU.  To even entertain the possibility of OU one needs to confront a HUGE chapter in science that claims that it's an impossible reach.  At it's least it needs a certain independence in the mind set.  A kind of courage in the face of majority opinion. You are all so apparently 'brave' and so 'determined'.  Pioneers of new age thinking.  But scratch the surface and all we've actually got are a lot of mediocre minds that promote science by consensus.  And your evidence is based on such a poor foundation of power analysis that you cannot recognise OU if it were to stand up and do a tap dance. 

But there's NO WANT of courage.  All you need to do is to drown out the voice of reason with as little justification as mainstream manage when they hound out the evidence that we've made available.  I am of the opinion that the RomeroUK's evidence was intended as a 'distraction' from our own claim and that Romero was co-operating with that agenda.  The sad truth is that it worked.  But as ever - truth WILL OUT.

Now back to our evidence.  Let me see if I can put this as clearly as is possible.  We have taken water to boil with a measured output of about 25 million Joules.  The battery's maximum capacity is about 10 million Joules.  That's just on ONE test.  Those same batteries have been used extensively and continually for over 10 months.  THEY ARE STILL AT THE SAME LEVEL OF CHARGE AS WHEN WE FIRST RECEIVED THEM.  THEN.  We have applied CLASSICAL MEASUREMENT PROTOCOLS to some 50 or more tests - or to state this more precisely, we've applied some 50 variations to the settings.  THEY INVARIABLY show an INFINITE COP - by which it seems that MORE energy is being returned to the battery than has been dissipated.  That's using classical measurements analysis. 

I can do NO MORE than report on this evidence.  If you choose to ignore the evidence then - OBVIOUSLY - that is your right.  But the downside is this.  We're running out of time.  My own suspicion is that our Mother Nature has had a belly full.  I think she will snuff out this little experiment in humanity - without compunction.  And why not?   We're evidently nasty unprincipled characters who are cluttering her natural balances with an excess in population numbers and a critical indifference to her natural orders.  And when she takes the trouble to show us all how to avoid those excesses then there are enough of those unprincipled self-serving characters to DETRACT from those solutions - that they'll never actually see the light of day.  So.  IF we're looking at some kind of Armageddon - but this time a battle beween us and Nature Herself - then we deserve it.  And of the two - I'd put my money with Nature winning that battle.  She's got the edge.

Rosemary 

Offline MrMag

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 754
Re: Rosemary Ainslie circuit demonstration on Saturday March 12th 2011
« Reply #1600 on: June 25, 2011, 10:44:48 AM »
rose,
If this is an "Entirely different circuit with even better results", the battery test you keep referring must have been done on the old circuit. Can you do the circuit performance test that I (and others) requested on this new and improved circuit. It won't cost any money as you already have all that is needed. You do not need to monitor it continuously, just check it every so often to make sure it is still running. You don't need it to be hooked up to a scope or anything. Just take a battery measurement before you start and after a couple of months you can take another battery reading. It's really very simple to do.

Your argument that this has been done before is wrong. This test has never been done. You may have run different tests over time but not one continuous test and not with this new circuit.

Offline powercat

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1091
Re: Rosemary Ainslie circuit demonstration on Saturday March 12th 2011
« Reply #1601 on: June 25, 2011, 01:53:12 PM »
And yet again you fail to read the evidence.  Here's that link again.  If this does NOT constitute a replication then BY RIGHTS it needs must be withdrawn.  As of NOW it is NOT withdrawn.  This is published by Fuzzy on his own Scribd file.  EXPLAIN THAT if you can.  To the best of my knowledge Fuzzy is a forum member.
http://www.scribd.com/doc/23455916/Open-Source-Evaluation-of-Power-Transients-Generated-

Rosie is never wrong about anything :D. For a start I can't decide which of  Fuzzy's is Previous post to quote they all make the point that you got nothing,and you think he's got OU from your circuit  ::)

I don't want you to leave the forum I want you to interact properly with the members here and do your very best to comply with their requests and prove you really have something, unfortunately all you are probably going to do is repeat the same old thing,  argue with everyone, and say it's a conspiracy.


Quote from: fuzzytomcat on May 19, 2011, 07:11:18 PM
Rosemary any credibility you had left is "GONE" especially after your posting of the pure nonsense "REPORT".

NO ONE HERE AT OVER UNITY cares about your pathetic thesis .... This thread is called Rosemary Ainslie circuit demonstration on Saturday March 12th 2011 for a reason none of which you have ever understood titles of threads at http://www.energeticforum.com/ .... http://www.overunityresearch.com/ ..... http://www.thunderbolts.info/forum/ ..... http://www.thenakedscientists.com/ ( aka witsend , aetherevarising ) where you were banned for continued false and inaccurate statements and attacking members.   

I invite and challenge everyone readers and guests to look at the 8,000 postings of Rosemary's spread out over several years at these forums and see for yourself.

This thread here at OU.com was to show evidence of a finding on a claim of "YOURS" on efficiency of a experimental device "YOU" claim to have a COP> INFINITY.

You have not shown in any "SCIENTIFIC METHOD" how to obtain this efficiency in any way shape or form a experimental device "YOU" claim to have a COP> INFINITY and have "FAILED" miserably only a grade or high school electronic class will be interested in your claim.

You ( Rosemary ) cannot supply one credible package of one experiment that includes a circuit diagram with oscilloscope screen shots done during the test not even one to verify your claim of a finding.

The REPORT failed .... nothing for a independent experimentalist to take and to make a device to your specifications for testing and evaluation in a scientific method to verify the claim on a finding of COP> INFINITY .... COP> INFINITY .... COP> INFINITY .... COP> INFINITY .... COP> INFINITY .... COP> INFINITY .... COP> INFINITY .... COP> INFINITY .... COP> INFINITY .... COP> INFINITY .... COP> INFINITY .... COP> INFINITY .... COP> INFINITY .... COP> INFINITY .... COP> INFINITY .... COP> INFINITY ....

There is nothing in this thread of value you are a terrible inventor and experimentalist and my credentials and expertise stand on there own and well documented unlike yours ..... this is what documentation looks like .... FYI
http://www.energeticforum.com/inductive-resistor/5359-mosfet-heating-circuits.html  ( nine pages !!!! )
http://cid-6b7817c40bb20460.office.live.com/browse.aspx/.Public/Mosfet%20Heater

I won't be so nice to ask you a "TENTH" time here in this thread to do the testing in a scientific method required and do it correctly, not half ass or less as you have shown or are you incapable of the request.

Facts only Facts can you do that ? Are you capable Rosemary ? Do you need someone to hold your hand ?   ???


Fuzzy
 :P

Offline WilbyInebriated

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3141
Re: Rosemary Ainslie circuit demonstration on Saturday March 12th 2011
« Reply #1602 on: June 25, 2011, 03:10:37 PM »
@powercat:

Quote from: aaron murakami
The Ainslie circuits - I spent thousands of hours on countless experiments on all kinds of variations with that and Glen did even more. We were NOT given all the information in the beginning and that was a complete farce.
However the circuit does have merit. I got cop 2.0 as a fairly standard result - but of course the skeptics will blame it on the peukert effect or
something. But the peukert effect in the battery on a low draw does NOT explain the same heat for less measurable energy going in.
Glen got better I believe. But the most interesting to me is that while the timer circuit was dissipating energy (warming up), with my own mods, that I disclosed 100%, the mosfet and resistor side of the circuit cooled up to 2 degrees Celsius below the ambient temperature of the room, which is a different thing altogether and is serious reverse entropy.
Anyway, both Glen and I did replicate over 1.0 with a lot of data to back
it - we didn't come close to cop 17.0 like Ainslie claimed but over 1.0 is over 1.0.
(emphasis added by me)

quote taken from http://www.energeticforum.com/renewable-energy/8247-tom-bearden-oil-3.html#post142994



Quote
"The gifted and skilled Open Source Researcher, Internet name Fuzzytomcat” (Glen Lettenmaier), one of the first to Replicate the Ainslie Circuit successfully in 2009, has built several configurations of the special inductors/resistors for test… And his fine work in building, tuning, measuring, documenting, and analyzing test results… Extremely well recorded and presented using the Tektronix Digital Phosper Oscilloscope stored data, still photos, and “You Tube” videos… Conclusivly prove using accepted industry-standard methods that this circuit has definite anamalous qualities in energy efficiency, and that the Rosemary Ainslie Circuit and effect deserves very close scrutiny from our scientific mainstream community."
(emphasis added by me)

quote taken from "the strange case of the rosemary ainslie circuit by steve windisch". full text can be found here: http://dandelionsalad.wordpress.com/2009/12/24/the-strange-case-of-the-rosemary-ainslie-circuit-by-steve-windisch/

Offline powercat

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1091
Re: Rosemary Ainslie circuit demonstration on Saturday March 12th 2011
« Reply #1603 on: June 25, 2011, 04:02:08 PM »
@powercat:
(emphasis added by me)

quote taken from http://www.energeticforum.com/renewable-energy/8247-tom-bearden-oil-3.html#post142994


(emphasis added by me)

quote taken from "the strange case of the rosemary ainslie circuit by steve windisch". full text can be found here: http://dandelionsalad.wordpress.com/2009/12/24/the-strange-case-of-the-rosemary-ainslie-circuit-by-steve-windisch/

It is what is happening on this forum that interests me.
Your first link,
Having looked through the whole thread on that other forum, what a surprise an argument about how you are measuring things  :D and a request for it to be made a self-sustaining  ;D

As for the other two year old link you posted, Fuzzy as more than covered this subject in this thread and the other thread, maybe I should repost more of his quotes.

Again nobody on this forum has been able to match those claims of OU.

You appear to support Rosie's claims, but you do nothing to help solve the problem that no one here can match those results, and I have already pointed this out to you in my previous posts.

Have you and Rosie ever thought of a political career, your great at avoiding the reality of the situation in front of you, by diverging the argument and ignoring reasonable requests.


Offline Rosemary Ainslie

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3968
Re: Rosemary Ainslie circuit demonstration on Saturday March 12th 2011
« Reply #1604 on: June 25, 2011, 04:20:25 PM »
Wilby - thanks for trying to stem this rot.  But it really isn't needed.  Just let them rabbit on.  It does no harm and hopefully it'll take the attention off this thread until we're ready to publish.  And if we never do publish - then so what?  It just means that we'll inevitably be looking at an escalating energy crisis that will put paid to our social comforts.  And then perhaps the evidence will start speaking more loudly.  Because right now these horrors are hell bent on denying it.  And the joke is that neither of them can even manage elementary power analysis.  So it's not as if we can have a decent discussion. 

Just let it go.  It really isn't worth the effort.  They haven't got the wherewithal to know what they're doing.  And I'm not sure that I can blame them for that.  It just is what it is. 

Regards,
Rosemary