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.
Amazon Warehouse Deals ! Now even more Deep Discounts ! Check out these great prices on slightly used or just opened once only items.I always buy my gadgets via these great Warehouse deals ! Highly recommended ! Many thanks for supporting OverUnity.com this way.

User Menu

Tesla Paper

Free Energy Book

Get paid

Donations

Please Donate for the Forum.
Many thanks.
Regards, Stefan.(Admin)

A-Ads

Powerbox

Smartbox

3D Solar

3D Solar Panels

DC2DC converter

Micro JouleThief

FireMatch

FireMatch

CCKnife

CCKnife

CCTool

CCTool

Magpi Magazine

Magpi Magazine Free Rasberry Pi Magazine

Battery Recondition

Battery Recondition

Arduino

Ultracaps

YT Subscribe

Gravity Machines

Tesla-Ebook

Magnet Secrets

Lindemann Video

Navigation

Products

Products

WaterMotor kit

Statistics


  • *Total Posts: 520060
  • *Total Topics: 15497
  • *Online Today: 44
  • *Most Online: 103
(December 19, 2006, 11:27:19 PM)
  • *Users: 2
  • *Guests: 10
  • *Total: 12

Author Topic: Testing the TK Tar Baby  (Read 1443435 times)

Offline gmeast

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 481
Re: Testing the TK Tar Baby
« Reply #5100 on: November 12, 2012, 06:23:43 AM »
Howdy all,

Well gmeast for having all the excitement and approval ratings has seen a mandate to further his unscientific method of testing and evaluation over at Energetic Forum, posting in a Sub Forum called "INDUCTIVE RESISTORS" started by that Administration for my modified scientific replication of a COP>17 device after finding out the original circuit didn't work as specified by Rosemary Ainslie the author of a article in October 2002 Quantum Magazine "Transient Energy Enhances Energy Co-Efficients"

I hope he will remove his trash and deposit it into his own thread so that there is "NO" association to any work that has already been done in the thread he's presently posted in.

This will give greg (aka gmeast) a opportunity to place "ALL" his schematics, photographs, video films, testing and evaluation data in one place for review by members at Energetic Forum, being he refuses to do it here and has only shown limited details at Rosemary Ainslie's personal forum/blog. This also can and will be compared to what has already been published on greg's "variant" device claiming a COP>1 to a COP>2.

Best,
Fuzzy
 ;)


Just checking to see if you made an announcement over here, and you did. Hate is so predictable.  I had guessed you were a member of this cult.  Fuzzy ... real scientific on your part ... on par with TK's hatred-driven analytics and commentaries.  We'll see if you jokers still call my efforts "trash" when it's all said and done. TTFN!




Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Testing the TK Tar Baby
« Reply #5100 on: November 12, 2012, 06:23:43 AM »

Offline Magluvin

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5832
Re: Testing the TK Tar Baby
« Reply #5101 on: November 12, 2012, 06:37:08 AM »

Just checking to see if you made an announcement over here, and you did. Hate is so predictable.  I had guessed you were a member of this cult.  Fuzzy ... real scientific on your part ... on par with TK's hatred-driven analytics and commentaries.  We'll see if you jokers still call my efforts "trash" when it's all said and done. TTFN!

Well that depends if you fake it or not. ;)

Mags

Offline poynt99

  • TPU-Elite
  • Hero Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 3585
Re: Testing the TK Tar Baby
« Reply #5102 on: November 12, 2012, 02:18:12 PM »
Howdy all,

Well gmeast for having all the excitement and approval ratings has seen a mandate to further his unscientific method of testing and evaluation over at Energetic Forum, posting in a Sub Forum called "INDUCTIVE RESISTORS" started by that Administration for my modified scientific replication of a COP>17 device after finding out the original circuit didn't work as specified by Rosemary Ainslie the author of a article in October 2002 Quantum Magazine "Transient Energy Enhances Energy Co-Efficients"

Yeah, that is typical of him. He did the same in my thread over at Rose's sandbox.

His nonsense won't last long over there either, because he actually has "nothing worth discussing".

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Testing the TK Tar Baby
« Reply #5102 on: November 12, 2012, 02:18:12 PM »
Sponsored links:




Offline TinselKoala

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13968
Re: Testing the TK Tar Baby
« Reply #5103 on: November 12, 2012, 08:38:01 PM »
I don't think they are very friendly towards Ainslie or her circuits or claims, over there. I wonder if GMEAST has done sufficient homework to understand the history of Rosemary Ainslie and her one-time sycophants Err-on Burakumin and Ashtwit Melanogaster.

Offline TinselKoala

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13968
Re: Testing the TK Tar Baby
« Reply #5104 on: November 12, 2012, 08:47:24 PM »
@AlienSigns..... You are really outdoing yourself. I'll bet you get kicks out of stealing pencils from urine-smelling blind old ladies.

 :P

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Testing the TK Tar Baby
« Reply #5104 on: November 12, 2012, 08:47:24 PM »
Sponsored links:




Offline TinselKoala

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13968
Re: Testing the TK Tar Baby
« Reply #5105 on: November 14, 2012, 06:16:52 PM »
Meanwhile, Ainslie.... aka Maria Krebs .... continues to promulgate her lies and distortions.

She fails to realize, or care, that Mister Wayne's claims are not and were never intended to be "open source" at all, as he EXPLICITLY STATES HIMSELF when challenged as to why he does not share all his information and data here.

Nor does she care that all my efforts in that thread were directed EXPLICITLY toward making Mister Wayne share his information.... and to point out, ultimately, that he had NO INFORMATION TO SHARE that supported his claims.

What a fool Ainslie is. Mister Wayne could have silenced me and all his other detractors simply by ACTUALLY RESPECTING THE "OPEN SOURCE" ideal, sharing his data, and demonstrating the veracity of his claims. But.... just like Rosemary Ainslie and her claims... he cannot, and so he blames the skeptics for pointing this out. So HE decides to enter "stealth"... or rather "censorship" mode... just as we have seen Ainslie do and also others of this ilk.... and has removed all pretense of "open source". And for this, the person who only asked him to support his claims with hard data, is blamed. I laugh out loud at the pitiful flailings of Ainslie and Mister Wayne and all of that ilk, who make claims, cannot support them, and then go off whining, like the little piggies that went to market and went weeeeeeeee all the way home.

But at least Mister Wayne doesn't engage in the kind of outright lying that Ainslie does. He's a bit more circumspect in his lies, not making outrageous claims that can be disproven with a few minutes of internet research or reference to his own data.

Offline TinselKoala

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13968
Re: Testing the TK Tar Baby
« Reply #5106 on: November 14, 2012, 06:22:14 PM »
How can someone who has this much difficulty with reasoning, even find her way to the grocery store to buy food?

Oh.. that's right, I forgot, she has someone else do those things for her, she's confined to her compound for her own safety.



Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Testing the TK Tar Baby
« Reply #5106 on: November 14, 2012, 06:22:14 PM »
Sponsored links:




Offline TinselKoala

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13968
Re: Testing the TK Tar Baby
« Reply #5107 on: November 14, 2012, 11:45:25 PM »
Here's some more "pornography" from the DeepBunker.

Testing the ignition voltage of a NE-2, in case anyone doubts that they need 90 volts to fire:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EVCXvX-uugA


Addressing the issue of AC coupling vs DC coupling, and LTseung's measurement follies:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2TKEQwG-2gY

Offline fuzzytomcat

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 676
    • Open Source Research and Development
Re: Testing the TK Tar Baby
« Reply #5108 on: November 15, 2012, 02:43:45 AM »
Well Rosemary appears to have gone full circle again with the bartender at her local pub hangout, she should stay away from pole dancing.  :o

Why is it that all the damn "FREE ENERGY" devices ALWAYS have or use batteries and NONE of them work as claimed and advertized? The mystic reasoning goes from the components and there unique usage configuration to the mysterious materials inside the battery.  ???

GO FISH !!  :P

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Testing the TK Tar Baby
« Reply #5108 on: November 15, 2012, 02:43:45 AM »
3D Solar Panels

Offline Magluvin

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5832
Re: Testing the TK Tar Baby
« Reply #5109 on: November 15, 2012, 03:13:51 AM »
http://www.energy-shiftingparadigms.com/index.php/topic,3.msg3716.html#msg3716


"We believe we have a method whereby we can regenerate electric current WITHOUT the use of a battery supply - required because, notwithstanding the greater efficiency shown in those comparative battery draw down tests - the batteries DEPLETE when, according to the measurements -  it SHOULD NOT.  This is possibly due to the speed of the electrolytic process that is frustrated by the frequency of the oscillation.  We can't comment.  We're none of us chemists."

Well, Rosie, thats why someone suggested that a cap should be used as a source. Did the cap drain?

So let me get this straight. You claim you have a method  that can regenerate electric current WITHOUT the use of a battery supply, but it doesnt work without a battery?

So you invent a reason why the battery looses charge? A reason you are admittedly not sure of because no chemists are available?

 I believe!!   ::) Well thats funny right there ;)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=76Hi6uf0fiM

Magsy




Offline TinselKoala

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13968
Re: Testing the TK Tar Baby
« Reply #5110 on: November 15, 2012, 03:29:35 AM »
Quote
the batteries DEPLETE when, according to the measurements -  it SHOULD NOT.

What Ainslie...or Maria Krebs or whoever she claims to be now.... actually must realise is this:
Quote
The batteries DEPLETE when, according to the claims made in the manuscripts, they SHOULD NOT. Thus, the claims made in the manuscripts are WRONG.

Further, since batteries CAN clearly be charged by application of high-frequency currents AS LONG AS THEY ARE IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION AND MAGNITUDE, yet these batteries deplete nevertheless..... we must conclude that the measurements used in the manuscripts ARE IN ERROR.

In fact, as anyone can easily show, and as I proved years ago with the _actual_ COP 17 claimed circuit, one can easily charge up an _external_ battery using exactly the same magic whatever, that Ainslie claims is preventing her _internal_ running battery from discharging. But this is simply transferring charge from one battery to another, incurring significant losses on the way. Neither that system nor the present one can do anything to prevent its own battery from discharging....except perhaps by blowing a mosfet. And this has nothing to do with frequencies and electrolytes and the rest of Ainslie-Krebs's nonsense.

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Testing the TK Tar Baby
« Reply #5110 on: November 15, 2012, 03:29:35 AM »
3D Solar Panels

Offline TinselKoala

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13968
Re: Testing the TK Tar Baby
« Reply #5111 on: November 15, 2012, 07:59:57 AM »
The idiot paranoid delusional ranting of Maria Krebs... or whatever she calls herself this week.... continues apace.

Quote
But his time is nearing it's end.  I'm certain of that.  He's dominating the thread posts at OU.com - and trying to imply that he is the ONLY authority available to comment.
This is a lie. I have never implied any such thing, and Krebs... or Ainslie as she likes to be known lately .... cannot provide ANY EVIDENCE for her claim. She lies, once again.
Quote
Eventually people will get bored with his rather rampant claims to know all and everything related to matters scientific.
Once again, she lies. Nowhere can she show me claiming " to know all and everything related to matters scientific" or anything like that. Ainslie is a liar and cannot provide support for her libellous accusations against me.
Quote
He's an amateur - and a tinkerer - and a boaster - and a brutally self interested sociopath. 
Now the idiot delusional senile ignoramus dares to call me a sociopath. I can prove that she is an idiot, an ignoramus, senile, delusional and much more. She cannot provide any evidence or proof that I am a sociopath. I doubt seriously if she even knows what one is, and I KNOW that she has no psychological qualifications, other than her experience as a patient, to make any kind of diagnosis of anyone, anywhere.
Quote
The trouble is that - by his own admission - he is the recipient of expert advice in order to guide his comments related to those matters about which he actually knows little -  if anything.
What an interesting statement. I wonder where that came from. Would a person not be well advised to take expert advice in such a case? Well, we know Ainslie/Krebs doesn't, there are ample examples of her ignoring expert advice because she, in her ignorance, believes she knows better.
Quote
The joke is that he freely admits this.  He works as a team and he fronts that team. 

And again she expresses her delusion of persecution with yet another lie. She cannot provide any evidence for her accusation that there is some kind of organised "team" persecuting her, nor that I am now or ever have been any part of any "team" of any kind. Ainslie/Krebs.. is really worried about "teams", so she sees them around every corner. However, she lies yet again, as she cannot provide any evidence for the veracity of her delusional and libellous accusations.
Quote
This confrontation is NOT limited to TK.  There's always that team in the background - that are well orchestrated and well paid.  I suspect that Sean and 'The Boss' are the actual authorities in that campaign.  And I'm reasonably certain that their funding is from Oil cartels.
Well, I can tell you this much.... my paycheck seems to be a little late. Four years late, in fact.
Hilarious, isn't it, that she thinks that I am "well paid" and funded by Oil Cartels.... Yep, I keep my laboratory full of fancy new digital equipment well out of sight, pretending to be an impoverished amateur... a tinkerer... a boaster .... when in reality I am the high-powered, well paid frontman for a team paid for by the Oil Cartels and headed by MrSean and The Baas. Her paranoid delusions of persecution and grandeur are right out of a textbook. Yep..... Krebs has really outdone herself .... again.

Offline TinselKoala

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13968
Re: Testing the TK Tar Baby
« Reply #5112 on: November 15, 2012, 08:24:28 AM »
Quote
Now.  TK's entire thread related to this subject - relies on the fiction that our papers claim anything at all related to battery performance.  This is gross misrepresentation and I challenge him to show where, in our paper - this claim is made.

Oh, really, Krebs-Ainslie? Apparently I'm more familiar with your daft manuscripts than you are. I've highlighted just a few places where you talk about battery performance, and I've even highlighted where you lie about your measurements. As I've shown USING YOUR OWN DATA, your batteries did indeed show a definite and consistent loss of voltage over the course of several days of experimentation, entirely consistent with normal rates of discharge and ENTIRELY INCONSISTENT WITH YOUR LIES.

And of course your entire set of claims for the various monetary prizes you tried to claim were ENTIRELY BASED on the fiction that your batteries exceeded their rated performance.... which you never tested at all, but promised to do so.... over and over again. In fact the judging criteria which you agreed to...or were about to... included specific tests of battery performance. Now you claim that you haven't been claiming anything related to battery performance? You are indeed deluded. Or perhaps you just don't remember, due to your creeping senility.


Quote
Some mention must be made of those aspects of the tests that have not been thoroughly explored. The first relates to the batteries rated capacity. The batteries used in these experiments have been used on a regular basis for over 10 months. They have been dissipating an average wattage conservatively assessed at 20 watts for five hours of each working day, during that period, continually subjected as they were, to both light and heavy use. Notwithstanding this extensive use, they have never shown any evidence of any loss of voltage at all. Nor have they been recharged except for two batteries that caught fire. However there has not been a close analysis of the electrolytic condition of the batteries, before, during or even after their use. This requires a fuller study by our chemistry experts. Results therefore were confined to classical measurement protocols with the distinction that the energy dissipated at the resistor element was established empirically and as it related to the heat dissipated on that resistor.

Quote
There was no attempt made in these tests to precisely quantify the energy delivered by the battery as this relates to the measured rise of temperature over the resistor element. This was based on the fact that in all tests and, notwithstanding variations to the frequency and offset adjustments, the results show a zero discharge of energy from the battery supply. Therefore, any measured rise in temperature over ambient on the resistor element is seen as being anomalous.

More astounding lies about the battery performance.

Quote
The question that remains outside the scope of this study, relates to the location of this source of this
energy if it is not, in fact, coming from the battery supply source. This question goes to the heart of a
thesis that was developed around a non-classical magnetic field model that predicted these results. The
relevant aspect of that model is that it requires this oscillation as a result of the exchange of energy that
is supplied by the circuit material. The proposal is that the voltage and the resulting reversing flow of
the induced current from the oscillation itself, is led by an opposite charge to the battery primary supply
and that the material property of charge is from the circuit material itself. These results are measured in
tests that relate to the first part of this two-part paper. What is here intended is to model the current
comprising magnetic dipoles and to show that the circuit paths would then allow that current reversal
without a discharge of energy from the primary battery supply source.

Are you going to say, now, that that last passage is NOT TALKING ABOUT YOUR CIRCUIT? Not trying to explain where your energy that you think is not coming from your batteries, is coming from? Are you going to try to claim that these passages do not refer to battery performance, or that you are NOT claiming that your batteries exceed their rated performance when running your circuit?
You probably will.... after all, we know already that words mean whatever YOU want them to mean, not what the dictionary says they mean. You are an Astounding piece of work.


Offline mrsean2k

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 173
Re: Testing the TK Tar Baby
« Reply #5113 on: November 15, 2012, 09:41:12 PM »
From one side of RAs cavernous lying gash:

"It seems that every comment I make on this forum is answered by Bryan Little or TK et al.  It's MOST encouraging"

From the other side of her stupid gaping maw, a short while before:

"When I see omission of comments on my posts at OU.com I KNOW I've hit a home run."

Well, which is it Rose, you idiot?

Offline mrsean2k

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 173
Re: Testing the TK Tar Baby
« Reply #5114 on: November 15, 2012, 09:49:20 PM »
And I see its full steam ahead on your forum - the goto place for CheeseNyts conspiracy theories, or the semi literate sycophancy of AlienWhines.

I command my oil fuelled flying killer monkeys to destroy free energy everywhere.

 

OneLink