Author Topic: Rosemary Ainslie circuit demonstration on Saturday March 12th 2011 (Read 745869 times)

MrMag · « **Reply #1710 on:** June 30, 2011, 04:46:20 AM »

Quote from: Rosemary Ainslie on June 30, 2011, 04:17:06 AM

You've already referenced 1701. Not sure of your point. Are you asking me if the measured voltage across a battery is INDICATIVE OF IT'S CHARGE? I certainly HOPE SO. Or why do we EVER bother to measure battery voltage. I think it can all rest happy on the evidence of the average calibrated volt meter?

Rosemary

Oh my, thanks for the laugh, that's a good one.

Rosemary Ainslie · « **Reply #1711 on:** June 30, 2011, 04:55:03 AM »

Quote from: evolvingape on June 30, 2011, 04:28:23 AM

After 30 secs googling, knowing what I was looking for, I found this:

http://www.facebook.com/topic.php?uid=130930223624230&topic=195

1. If the battery has just been charged or if the vehicle has been driven recently, it is necessary to remove the surface charge from the battery before testing. A surface charge is a charge of higher-than-normal voltage that is just on the surface of the battery plates. The surface charge is quickly removed when the battery is loaded and therefore does not accurately represent the true state of charge of the battery."

You have an un-regulated charging circuit with high frequency, high amplitude current spikes running while you are taking your voltage readings... CORRECT ?

RM

RM. We do NOT have an unregulated charging circuit. But we do have high frequencies and high amplitude current spikes. So high that the voltage across the battery exceeds its rating to more than double. That's on the recharge cycle. Then it drops to below its rated voltage to about 1 volt - AND, at times, even to a negative voltage. Here's the APPROPRIATE question. HOW CAN IT FLUCTUATE THAT WIDELY? BECAUSE - and this is the WHOLE OF THE POINT - the battery as claimed by POYNTY - STILL STAYS THE SAME. And let me see if you can possibly get this - because NO-ONE WHO CONTRIBUTES TO THIS THREAD HAS EVEN GOT CLOSE. The battery voltages - DISCONNECTED - are still the same as they were when we first got them.

This means, effectively, that some current was applied to those batteries that evidently DID NOT COME FROM THOSE BATTERIES. Neither in the recharge cycle nor in the discharge cycle. THAT was the point of those tests. And THAT is the topic of the papers. And all you guys go ON AND ON AND ON ABOUT is the state of charge of those batteries. THEY ARE PRECISELY THE SAME AS THEY WERE WHEN WE GOT THEM. THERE IS NO MEASURABLE DIFFERENCE. DISCONNECTED OR CONNECTED. WITH OUR WITHOUT RESIDUAL CHARGE.

If you even addressed the actual questions that are raised by all that test evidence it would help. I feel that I'm walking through treacle when I address your posts. You are SO far OFF the point.

Rosemary

Rosemary Ainslie · « **Reply #1712 on:** June 30, 2011, 05:13:14 AM »

And then just to continue on WHAT ARE THE APPROPRIATE QUESTIONS ? Here's another. The current flow through those batteries are reversing - as shown by a nearly pure sinusoidal waveform crossing zero. The battery and the shunt voltages are at 180 degrees in anti phase. Every time that the battery discharges the current flow is shown to be moving a clockwise direction - and every time it recharges the current is shown to be moving in an anticlockwise direction. This is STANDARD. BUT. When it moves in a clockwise direction it simply bypasses TWO OPPOSING BODY DIODES AND THE NEGATIVE CHARGE APPLIED AT THE GATE of those transistors. YET. NOTA BENE AGAIN. The two opposing body diodes and the negative charge applied at the gate OPPOSES A CLOCKWISE FLOW OF CURRENT. SO? What is there in the properties of this current flow that enables this flow. BECAUSE - it is UNQUESTIONABLY crossing zero and reversing its previous recharge cycle.

I hope you guys get this. It's such an INTERESTING point. And it's FAR MORE SIGNIFICANT than this obsession with the state of battery charge.

Rosemary

evolvingape · « **Reply #1713 on:** June 30, 2011, 05:26:39 AM »

Rose,

What do you think an UNREGULATED CHARGING CIRCUIT is ? You obviously have no idea. Do you know the difference between a steady state and a pulsed charging circuit and how both operate ? I think not. If you do NOT have an unregulated charging circuit please show where in your circuit diagram the charge regulator is... I cannot find it on the schematic!

Do you know that you have both a LOAD and an OSCILLATING RECHARGING PULSE in operation at the same time due to the parasitic oscillation ? I am beginning to wonder.

Do you know that a charging cycle creates a FALSE SURFACE CHARGE on the surface of the plates which is what your â€œcalibrated multimeterâ€ is reading ?

Do you know that a Voltage reading is a VERY POOR indicator of the state of charge and measure of the amount of ENERGY in a battery ?

Do you know that a battery can sit idle for long lengths of time while being charge depleted and still show 12V or thereabouts ?

You are walking through treacle Rose, and it's Rosemary Ainslie brand.

I am beginning to wonder if you know anything at all!

RM

Rosemary Ainslie · « **Reply #1714 on:** June 30, 2011, 05:29:59 AM »

Quote from: MrMag on June 30, 2011, 04:39:38 AM

How can you claim that you are charging the batteries if you don't perform this test.

First of all, you cannot change the test parameters that you used previously as when the batteries run down, you will have all kinds of reasons for it. Secondly, "We have 2 banks of batteries. They are BOTH running at the same temperature. The one is connected in series with batteries." Huh??? If you really want me to understand, i think you need to do better then this.

lol Really Nag - you are something else. When a load is connected in series it means that they are simply hooked up in the standard way. No switching circuitry. lol. Does that help?

Quote from: MrMag on June 30, 2011, 04:39:38 AM

You are trying to make this more complicated then necessary. Do you really need to boil water or could you use something like glycol or oil? I am not sure of the boiling point or either but I would expect that either one would be acceptable.

It doesn't matter what you use. The fact is that it will need monitoring. The good point about using water is that it has an immediate application relevance. But whether we used anything else - makes no difference. The signal is BRITTLE. It needs monitoring. The waveform analysis is CRUCIAL. It's required for the effect. It needs monitoring. There is no way around this. But it's fine. I'll MONITOR. I'll do that test. BUT CERTAINLY NOT UNLESS IT'S ESSENTIAL FOR THIS PROOF. And - so far - I've NOT got ANY academics who will put their reputations on the line that THIS IS ALL THAT IS NEEDED.

Quote from: MrMag on June 30, 2011, 04:39:38 AM

Your first paragraph says that you are running at low wattage. Now there is so much energy in the circuit???

And as for this. We have run in the region of 50 tests. ALL OF THEM ARE DESIGNED TO DELIVER MORE OR LESS WATTAGE. WE ARE WELL ABLE TO DETERMINE THE WATTAGE OUTPUT REQUIRED. Good Heavens.

Quote from: MrMag on June 30, 2011, 04:39:38 AM

I really don't understand why in the last 10 years that you couldn't of made modifications to the circuit so that it could run without burning up.

I can understand this. You're not an experimentalist. If you were you would NOT be asking this question.

Quote from: MrMag on June 30, 2011, 04:39:38 AM

Sounds to me like your to busy trying to make a name for yourself then to develop a workable circuit.

lol. And you think that by writing in this thread that I'm 'making a name for myself'?

I suppose I am. But it's not the kind of name that one typically strives for. Golly.

In fact I think I'm doing myself an intense disservice IF that was my motive. FAR BETTER to just keep my nose clean and my name pristine - by NEVER posting here at all. Golly.

There is one thing I know. Cat doesn't care - one way or another. He just wants me off this thread and to hell with the harm or help to OU. Evolvingape has his own agenda but he probably has enough acumen to actually understand the issues. You, on the other hand HAVE NO CLUE. It's a shame. Because your posts could otherwise be constructive.

Rosemary

Rosemary Ainslie · « **Reply #1715 on:** June 30, 2011, 05:40:35 AM »

Evolvingape - You're ducking and diving. Answer the QUESTIONS that I took the trouble to outline. You're ignoring the issues because you can't answer them. Let's see how you manage that explanation? Here it is again.

RM. We do NOT have an unregulated charging circuit. But we do have high frequencies and high amplitude current spikes. So high that the voltage across the battery exceeds its rating to more than double. That's on the recharge cycle. Then it drops to below its rated voltage to about 1 volt - AND, at times, even to a negative voltage. Here's the APPROPRIATE question. HOW CAN IT FLUCTUATE THAT WIDELY? BECAUSE - and this is the WHOLE OF THE POINT - the battery as claimed by POYNTY - STILL STAYS THE SAME. And let me see if you can possibly get this - because NO-ONE WHO CONTRIBUTES TO THIS THREAD HAS EVEN GOT CLOSE. The battery voltages - DISCONNECTED - are still the same as they were when we first got them.

This means, effectively, that some current was applied to those batteries that evidently DID NOT COME FROM THOSE BATTERIES. Neither in the recharge cycle nor in the discharge cycle. THAT was the point of those tests. And THAT is the topic of the papers. And all you guys go ON AND ON AND ON ABOUT is the state of charge of those batteries. THEY ARE PRECISELY THE SAME AS THEY WERE WHEN WE GOT THEM. THERE IS NO MEASURABLE DIFFERENCE. DISCONNECTED OR CONNECTED. WITH OUR WITHOUT RESIDUAL CHARGE.

If you even addressed the actual questions that are raised by all that test evidence it would help. I feel that I'm walking through treacle when I address your posts. You are SO far OFF the point.

And then just to continue on WHAT ARE THE APPROPRIATE QUESTIONS ? Here's another. The current flow through those batteries are reversing - as shown by a nearly pure sinusoidal waveform crossing zero. The battery and the shunt voltages are at 180 degrees in anti phase. Every time that the battery discharges the current flow is shown to be moving a clockwise direction - and every time it recharges the current is shown to be moving in an anticlockwise direction. This is STANDARD. BUT. When it moves in a clockwise direction it simply bypasses TWO OPPOSING BODY DIODES AND THE NEGATIVE CHARGE APPLIED AT THE GATE of those transistors. YET. NOTA BENE AGAIN. The two opposing body diodes and the negative charge applied at the gate OPPOSES A CLOCKWISE FLOW OF CURRENT. SO? What is there in the properties of this current flow that enables this flow. BECAUSE - it is UNQUESTIONABLY crossing zero and reversing its previous recharge cycle.

I hope you guys get this. It's such an INTERESTING point. And it's FAR MORE SIGNIFICANT than this obsession with the state of battery charge.

Rosemary.

MrMag · « **Reply #1716 on:** June 30, 2011, 07:44:26 AM »

Quote from: Rosemary Ainslie on June 30, 2011, 05:29:59 AM

lol Really Nag - you are something else. When a load is connected in series it means that they are simply hooked up in the standard way. No switching circuitry. lol. Does that help?

Golly hag, Where do you say that a load is connected in series? All I can do is read your post, not your mind. you said in your post," We have 2 banks of batteries. They are BOTH running at the same temperature. The one is connected in series with batteries."

Quote from: Rosemary Ainslie on June 30, 2011, 05:29:59 AM

It doesn't matter what you use. The fact is that it will need monitoring. The good point about using water is that it has an immediate application relevance.

That's not a good point. You are using a heater to heat up a liquid. That is what is relevant, using oil or glycol just makes more sense.

Quote from: Rosemary Ainslie on June 30, 2011, 05:29:59 AM

But whether we used anything else - makes no difference. The signal is BRITTLE. It needs monitoring. The waveform analysis is CRUCIAL. It's required for the effect. It needs monitoring. There is no way around this. But it's fine. I'll MONITOR. I'll do that test. BUT CERTAINLY NOT UNLESS IT'S ESSENTIAL FOR THIS PROOF. And - so far - I've NOT got ANY academics who will put their reputations on the line that THIS IS ALL THAT IS NEEDED.

You know that you will never get any academic to put their reputation on the line for any test you do. You know this and it is a moot point.

Quote from: Rosemary Ainslie on June 30, 2011, 05:29:59 AM

And as for this. We have run in the region of 50 tests. ALL OF THEM ARE DESIGNED TO DELIVER MORE OR LESS WATTAGE. WE ARE WELL ABLE TO DETERMINE THE WATTAGE OUTPUT REQUIRED. Good Heavens.
I can understand this. You're not an experimentalist. If you were you would NOT be asking this question.

According to Evolvingape, Poynt, and others, this IS the questionable part of your circuit and you don't even understand batteries.
Yes, I am an experimentalist, maybe not much lately, but hopefully I will be able to do it again real soon.

Quote from: Rosemary Ainslie on June 30, 2011, 05:29:59 AM

lol. And you think that by writing in this thread that I'm 'making a name for myself'? I suppose I am. But it's not the kind of name that one typically strives for. Golly. In fact I think I'm doing myself an intense disservice IF that was my motive. FAR BETTER to just keep my nose clean and my name pristine - by NEVER posting here at all. Golly.

But we have seen your type before. There was a guy on here that went by the name of IST. He always thought that he discovered new things, but he too was wrong. He thought he was the know all do all and we were all idiots for not understanding him. You sort of remind me of him.

Quote from: Rosemary Ainslie on June 30, 2011, 05:29:59 AM

There is one thing I know. Cat doesn't care - one way or another. He just wants me off this thread and to hell with the harm or help to OU. Evolvingape has his own agenda but he probably has enough acumen to actually understand the issues. You, on the other hand HAVE NO CLUE. It's a shame. Because your posts could otherwise be constructive.

This is where you are definitely wrong. These professionals are really trying to help you. You are just too stubborn and thick headed to listen to them. Are you really that scared to actually learn from these guys. Poynt is another one. Do you realize how many hours he put into this just to try to explain to you what you are doing wrong. No. Since they don't agree with you, they must all be in a big conspiracy to shut you down. Come on rosy, try to be a little realistic here.

And as far as me having no clue, It's all relative. Maybe compared to these three guys, you may be right. But when it comes to rosy the waitress, I don't think so. I've already forgotten more then you will ever know.

You really need to take a good long look at yourself. Most of your team members not only left you, but are against you. In 10 years, you have done nothing to enhance your circuit to make it usable. When anyone asks you to do a simple test, you start name calling like a 10 year old. When someone tries to show you the errors of your "thesis", they are incompetent and don't know what they are talking about. There is no agenda or conspiracy against you. Everyone initially tried to help you. You got all defensive and started with the name calling. What did you expect their response to be?

I am really looking forward to your test using the capacitor. I have a feeling that it will never be done or we will never see the results. If you have any ethics at all, you will show the results. But even then, I'm sure you will think of some excuse why it doesn't work with a capacitor.

I guess you can tell that my name is MrMag and not Nag. I too get a little defense when idiots that don't know me or what my background is try to degrade me. I can think of a lot of fancy nicks for you too. But let's try to at least keep this part professional since you do brag a bit about being so refined.

Rosemary Ainslie · « **Reply #1717 on:** June 30, 2011, 10:55:49 AM »

Quote from: MrMag on June 30, 2011, 07:44:26 AM

You know that you will never get any academic to put their reputation on the line for any test you do. You know this and it is a moot point.

Well. Then DON'T impose on us to run your tests. There's no advantage to taking the trouble to convince you.

Quote from: MrMag on June 30, 2011, 07:44:26 AM

But we have seen your type before. There was a guy on here that went by the name of IST. He always thought that he discovered new things, but he too was wrong. He thought he was the know all do all and we were all idiots for not understanding him. You sort of remind me of him.

Well since I did not know him I simply can't comment. But what I do know is that NONE OF US HAVE CLAIMED THAT WE'VE DISCOVERED ANYTHING NEW. On the contrary. It would be nice if we had. Then our experiment would be WAY more acceptable. As it is we've DISCOVERED nothing. And I absolutely DO NOT claim to know everything. If ONLY. I'm a self-confessed amateur.

Quote from: MrMag on June 30, 2011, 07:44:26 AM

This is where you are definitely wrong. These professionals are really trying to help you. You are just too stubborn and thick headed to listen to them. Are you really that scared to actually learn from these guys. Poynt is another one. Do you realize how many hours he put into this just to try to explain to you what you are doing wrong. No. Since they don't agree with you, they must all be in a big conspiracy to shut you down. Come on rosy, try to be a little realistic here.

And as for this nonsense. If evolvingape and Cat and Poynt are PROFESSIONALS then they would NOT be hiding behind an assumed internet identity. And exactly HOW can Poynt or Cat or evolvingape teach me? We need answers to some questions which NONE OF THEM is able to answer. Yet they must teach me? They don't even understand the questions. Golly.

Quote from: MrMag on June 30, 2011, 07:44:26 AM

And as far as me having no clue, It's all relative. Maybe compared to these three guys, you may be right. But when it comes to rosy the waitress, I don't think so. I've already forgotten more then you will ever know.

lol. Very possibly MaNag. And MOST CERTAINLY if you're talking waiting at tables. Here I seem to have forgotten absolutely EVERYTHING. I can't even remember doing this. But I'll tell you what. I would be proud to be that capable. I suspect that I'd be sacked for want of competence. Eyes not that good. Co-ordination not that good. Interactive skills - not that good. Interest - decidedly lacking. When I wasn't bumping into tables I'd be spilling the soup. And if I wasn't spilling soup I'd be dropping plates. I'd certainly be slopping the wine as pouring this into glasses would entirely defeat my eyesight. Not the best waitress either. You're quite right.

Quote from: MrMag on June 30, 2011, 07:44:26 AM

You really need to take a good long look at yourself. Most of your team members not only left you, but are against you.

I hope NOT. That would be a tragedy in the making.

Quote from: MrMag on June 30, 2011, 07:44:26 AM

In 10 years, you have done nothing to enhance your circuit to make it usable.

On the contrary. We can now boil water. That eluded us before.

Quote from: MrMag on June 30, 2011, 07:44:26 AM

When anyone asks you to do a simple test, you start name calling like a 10 year old.

lol. What simple test and what names? Be specific.

Quote from: MrMag on June 30, 2011, 07:44:26 AM

When someone tries to show you the errors of your "thesis", they are incompetent and don't know what they are talking about.

To the best of my knowledge no-one has EVER shown me the errors in my thesis. It is never mentioned. Unless I've overlooked something? But I doubt it. I'm reasonably satisfied that I'd have noticed.

Quote from: MrMag on June 30, 2011, 07:44:26 AM

There is no agenda or conspiracy against you.

What a comfort. I had the distinct impression that one replicator and one troll went out of their way to try and kill this technology. I must have been dreaming.

Quote from: MrMag on June 30, 2011, 07:44:26 AM

Everyone initially tried to help you.

You've got this wrong. They did not so much try to 'help me' as help themselves.

Quote from: MrMag on June 30, 2011, 07:44:26 AM

You got all defensive and started with the name calling. What did you expect their response to be?

You need to brush up on that history. I believe the 'name calling' was THEIR particular specialty. Please cite some examples. I'd be interested.

Quote from: MrMag on June 30, 2011, 07:44:26 AM

I am really looking forward to your test using the capacitor. I have a feeling that it will never be done or we will never see the results.

Then I think perhaps I should not post those results here because I'd be very sorry to disappoint your expectations.

Quote from: MrMag on June 30, 2011, 07:44:26 AM

If you have any ethics at all, you will show the results. But even then, I'm sure you will think of some excuse why it doesn't work with a capacitor.

Not sure of your point here. Why? Why should I think up some excuse? I just don't get it.

Quote from: MrMag on June 30, 2011, 07:44:26 AM

I guess you can tell that my name is MrMag and not Nag. I too get a little defense when idiots that don't know me or what my background is try to degrade me.

How unusual. Can't think why you should object to the opinion of idiots? I don't. I only care what clever people think.

Quote from: MrMag on June 30, 2011, 07:44:26 AM

I can think of a lot of fancy nicks for you too. But let's try to at least keep this part professional since you do brag a bit about being so refined.

LOL. WHAT? WHAT REFINEMENT? And WHAT in Heaven's name is there to BRAG about in refinement. Quite frankly I think that - AT BEST - 'refinement' a tedious pretension. I hope to GOD I am NOT refined. I'd be very sorry if that's how I come across. Do you really think I could hang around and answer these disgusting posts if I was REFINED?

Rosemary

powercat · « **Reply #1718 on:** June 30, 2011, 09:14:49 PM »

You attack anyone who disagrees with you, you refuse to do any long-term tests that might prove your circuit works as you claim.

Your understanding of how you should conduct yourself on this forum is ridiculous, and you wonder why the scientific community won't recognise your work as valid.

attack, attack, attack,

Ignoring the issue won't make it go away, since you have attacked me and called me a liar in previous posts I now consider this my duty, so that no one new to this forum will be misled into believing that you have a circuit that produces OU.

You can't tell me of any member on this forum that has produced OU with your circuit, because nobody has,they all failed.

Do something different Here on This forum,and stop ignoring reasonable requests for tests. or stop claiming OU on This OverUnity Forum.
A big conspiracy, it would appear that anyone that says your circut doesn't workor or indicate's measuring error, is then part of that conspiracy.
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.

Go on Rosie proof that 99 is wrong in his analysis and makes something that runs and runs 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".

You will pick on small detail and not address the main point, and you will also repeat what you said before ( this is not your blog) please interact with the reasonable requests made by members here for you to do new tests.

The fact still remains that no one here can reproduce your claims of OU, and you are not willing to do anything to change that deadlock, apart from use this forum as your soapbox and blog.

On this forum you are expected to interact to prove your claim, if you are claiming OU,I think that is reasonable.

Magluvin · « **Reply #1719 on:** July 01, 2011, 01:23:08 AM »

Mag, dude. What is your problem?

Rose owes you not 1 thing. You probably treat your mother this way also. I can imagine that.

You act like she took something from you and you are trying to get it back. Unreal

What have you done on this forum that is in any way productive? Nota thing. You just come here each day, and you put on the gloves and have at it. Its like your daily amusement.

Do you think everyone is cheering you on? It is you who have no credibility. It is you that has nothing. It is your daily plan to come here to beat up on this woman. It seems to be your profile.

Get a life dude.

Hi Rose. ;]

Mags

Magluvin · « **Reply #1720 on:** July 01, 2011, 01:26:25 AM »

And that goes for the monkey and the worm ridden feline.

Mags

Pirate88179 · « **Reply #1721 on:** July 01, 2011, 02:31:04 AM »

Quote from: Magluvin on July 01, 2011, 01:23:08 AM

Mag, dude. What is your problem?

Rose owes you not 1 thing. You probably treat your mother this way also. I can imagine that.

You act like she took something from you and you are trying to get it back. Unreal

What have you done on this forum that is in any way productive? Nota thing. You just come here each day, and you put on the gloves and have at it. Its like your daily amusement.

Do you think everyone is cheering you on? It is you who have no credibility. It is you that has nothing. It is your daily plan to come here to beat up on this woman. It seems to be your profile.

Get a life dude.

Hi Rose. ;]

Mags

MrMag has been very helpful to me on this forum in sharing his knowledge. He was especially helpful in my obtaining an O'scope from ebay a while back. I have been supportive of Rose as well. I calls them likes I sees them.

Bill

Magluvin · « **Reply #1722 on:** July 01, 2011, 02:59:34 AM »

Quote from: Pirate88179 on July 01, 2011, 02:31:04 AM

MrMag has been very helpful to me on this forum in sharing his knowledge. He was especially helpful in my obtaining an O'scope from ebay a while back. I have been supportive of Rose as well. I calls them likes I sees them.

Bill

Hey Bill

Dont you think its enough already?
Its just every day again and again and again.
I find it abusive.

If they dont believe in Roses stuff, then why not move on?

But as Clint Eastwood once said, Nag nag nag.

What is the goal in the daily beat down? Thats all it is.

They dont want her to try and publish papers? is that what its all about? Let her do it. If it succeeds or fails there, is that not enough? Noooo, its the beatings will now begin, every day, non stop.

But maybe you enjoy it also. Just fun and games right?

On the other hand, why dont these guys build it and SHOW, not just tell? Too expensive to be worth it? What, dont have the connections to use a Lecroy? Dont have the time? Looks like they all have the time, thats for certain. Every day for how long now? lots of time.

They all think she is wrong and lieing? Well why even bother? Walk away. But they dont. Its lets get ready to rummble! Every day.

Oh well, maybe you and I should just join in. Join the club. Do you have a club? It might feel better.

Yet you defend them, and say you say you are supportive of Rose. Hmmm. ok right then. Ive said my piece.

Mags

WilbyInebriated · « **Reply #1723 on:** July 01, 2011, 03:06:34 AM »

they're bored mags... 'american gladiator' is no longer aired on the networks.

Magluvin · « **Reply #1724 on:** July 01, 2011, 03:17:30 AM »

Quote from: WilbyInebriated on July 01, 2011, 03:06:34 AM

they're bored mags... 'american gladiator' is no longer aired on the networks.

Ahh, didnt know, never watched it. ;]

Actually, I had a sentence that said, Judgement day will come. But I knew it might draw your attn adversely. ;]

Anyways, They are all using someones sim replication against her. Heck, Stefan had told me once that he was not interested in any sims from me or anyone, only the real thing. And I understand and am ok with that.
But here, sim is law. sobeit.

Mags

News:

User Menu

Author Topic: Rosemary Ainslie circuit demonstration on Saturday March 12th 2011 (Read 745869 times)

MrMag

Re: Rosemary Ainslie circuit demonstration on Saturday March 12th 2011

Rosemary Ainslie

Re: Rosemary Ainslie circuit demonstration on Saturday March 12th 2011

Rosemary Ainslie

Re: Rosemary Ainslie circuit demonstration on Saturday March 12th 2011

evolvingape

Re: Rosemary Ainslie circuit demonstration on Saturday March 12th 2011

Rosemary Ainslie

Re: Rosemary Ainslie circuit demonstration on Saturday March 12th 2011

Rosemary Ainslie

Re: Rosemary Ainslie circuit demonstration on Saturday March 12th 2011

MrMag

Re: Rosemary Ainslie circuit demonstration on Saturday March 12th 2011

Rosemary Ainslie

Re: Rosemary Ainslie circuit demonstration on Saturday March 12th 2011

powercat

Re: Rosemary Ainslie circuit demonstration on Saturday March 12th 2011

Magluvin

Re: Rosemary Ainslie circuit demonstration on Saturday March 12th 2011

Magluvin

Re: Rosemary Ainslie circuit demonstration on Saturday March 12th 2011

Pirate88179

Re: Rosemary Ainslie circuit demonstration on Saturday March 12th 2011

Magluvin

Re: Rosemary Ainslie circuit demonstration on Saturday March 12th 2011

WilbyInebriated

Re: Rosemary Ainslie circuit demonstration on Saturday March 12th 2011

Magluvin

Re: Rosemary Ainslie circuit demonstration on Saturday March 12th 2011