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

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 Members: 83511
  • *Latest: Ntambi

  • *Total Posts: 514023
  • *Total Topics: 15297
  • *Online Today: 44
  • *Most Online: 103
(December 19, 2006, 11:27:19 PM)
  • *Users: 2
  • *Guests: 12
  • *Total: 14

Author Topic: Rosemary Ainslie Quantum Magazine Circuit COP > 17 Claims  (Read 247032 times)

Offline conradelektro

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1679
Re: Rosemary Ainslie Quantum Magazine Circuit COP > 17 Claims
« Reply #105 on: September 13, 2013, 03:58:03 PM »
Hi Conrad,
I was just wondering what your circuit had to do with Rosemary's? 
 
Oscar

I see a common idea, namely the OU speculations around the back EMF (induced current) in a coil or inductance.

Oscillation (or at least switchin the current on and the off) fed through a coil induces a "back EMF" and many OU-gurus believe that the energy in the back EMF comes not from the power supply but from somewhere else (ether, zero point energy, from where-ever).

We have the same elements in the ill defined circuits put forward by the verbose lady from the tip of Africa:

- oscillation (NE555 and switching transistor)
- an inductance (the heating element)
- and alleged mysterious energy from somewhere but the batteries

I read these "back EMF mysteries" and wanted to measure the energy in the "back EMF" by feeding it back to the battery or capacitor driving such a circuit. I used a Joule Thief type circuit and a pulse motor circuit.

I could not find any energy in the "back EMF" which did not come from the power supply (battery, cap), But as I said, I might have done it wrongly.

Greetings, Conrad

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy


Offline TinselKoala

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13971
Re: Rosemary Ainslie Quantum Magazine Circuit COP > 17 Claims
« Reply #106 on: September 15, 2013, 07:03:01 AM »
Quote
Our 'ickle' pickle's argument against paper 1 was ALWAYS based on the CLAIM that we could not have applied a 3% ON duty cycle.  In fact he CLAIMED that we had not even applied a 10% ON - but a 90%.  This was the SOLE basis of his argument LOUDLY AND REPETITIVELY augmenting his general calumny and - as ever - ENTIRELY BASELESS.

No, Ainslie. My argument is FULLY BASED IN FACT and can be demonstrated at any time. Your insults and whining are just delusional rants from someone who has been utterly and soundly debunked... time and time again.
You are a dirty filthy LIAR ROSEMARY AINSLIE. The schematic published in the Quantum article CANNOT make the duty cycle and frequency combination you claimed to use. My argument was ALWAYS based on the SCHEMATIC you published and stood behind. This is definite and proven: the schematic published under your name cannot do what you claim, and if you used it your duty cycle was NOT the 3.6 percent ON that you claimed, and if you did NOT use it.... then the schematic is a LIE. No other alternatives are possible: either you used the schematic in the article or you did not. Either way, YOU LIE.


Quote
Through a miracle of Divine intervention - we FOUND our early experimental apparatus - and thanks to the genius of Steve Weir - we were able to prove that INDEED our apparatus could manage the 3% duty cycle - as claimed.

Again YOU LIE. The circuit in the box, which both YOU and DONOVAN  MARTIN repeatedly claimed was LOST, DOES NOT CONTAIN THE SAME CIRCUIT THAT WAS IN IT FOR THE QUANTUM ARTICLE. The circuit in the box NOW contains a chip that wasn't even manufactured until May of 2007, and it only has ONE potentiometer connected, and it uses A DIFFERENT MOSFET, not the IRFPG50, and it DOES NOT OPERATE AT 2.4 kHz. Yes, it can make a shorter duty cycle, but it CANNOT OPERATE IN THE RANGE CITED IN THE QUANTUM ARTICLE. I am really getting sick and tired of your constant refusals to acknowledge reality, AINSLIE. The circuit in your box NOW is NOT the circuit that was used for the Quantum article, it does NOT operate in the stated frequency range and it is A LIE FOR YOU TO CLAIM OTHERWISE.

Quote
Rather than acknowledge this both he and Mark Euthanasius - then prepared reports of varying levels of complexity and 'misdirection' to continue with their DENIALS.  What's new?  From where I sit - NOTHING's new.  They're now basing their denials on the fact that I made an early 'retraction' related to that duty cycle.  TK - poor sod that he is - actually recovered the text of that early retraction.  What he FAILED to mention that my very first acknowledgement of there being a possible misrepresentation of that duty cycle - was based on a misunderstanding.  An experimentalist BUILT that switch according to the schematic published - and he had NO difficulty in getting the required duty cycle.  His English NOT that clear.  I assumed that he had not achieved the required result.  I apologised to all and sundry.  He explained he DID get it.  I RETRACTED the RETRACTION.  And because our Little TK CANNOT report honestly - he conveniently omitted that FINAL retraction.  As mentioned.  Nothing's new.  Amusingly - I see that Mark Euthanasius is also depending on that early retraction.  No-one can accuse either of them of impartiality.

Kindest regards
Rosie

You are a bumbling fool and so was Joit. ANYONE CAN BUILD THE CIRCUIT, you poor slapper, and see for themselves that you are utterly and stupidly wrong.  Get your "Team" of Electrical Engineers to build the circuit AS PUBLISHED in the Quantum article and test it. Show your work, like I have done several times. This would take your "Team" perhaps half an hour to do, with about five dollars worth of components. DO IT, SHOW THE WORK AND REPORT. But of course you will not.

You accuse ME of not reporting honestly? You lie with every post you make, Rosemary Ainslie. You cannot cite a single case when I have reported something about you inaccurately. Yet I can cite instance after instance when YOU have baldly and outrageously LIED, over and over.

"I DID NOT POST THAT VIDEO"
"FIVE MOSFETS IN PARALLEL"
"THE APPARATUS WAS LOST"
Paper 1 Figure 3
etc etc etc.

Offline TinselKoala

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13971
Re: Rosemary Ainslie Quantum Magazine Circuit COP > 17 Claims
« Reply #107 on: September 15, 2013, 07:31:10 AM »
Does the Demo Kit 1 box resemble the schematic published in the Quantum article? No, not in the least. It is evidently the device shown in the photograph in the Quantum article, minus the meters..... but how can it contain a chip not manufactured until 2007? Why does it only have a single potentiometer connected? Why does the schematic drawn by SWeir not resemble the published schematic AT ALL? Why does it operate at a much higher frequency range than the published schematic?

Will the September promised demonstration use the PUBLISHED QUANTUM CIRCUIT, the one that supposedly has been "accredited"? Or will it use some other circuit? Will it use this Box? This different mosfet? NOBODY KNOWS.


Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Rosemary Ainslie Quantum Magazine Circuit COP > 17 Claims
« Reply #107 on: September 15, 2013, 07:31:10 AM »
Sponsored links:




Offline TinselKoala

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13971
Re: Rosemary Ainslie Quantum Magazine Circuit COP > 17 Claims
« Reply #108 on: September 15, 2013, 07:51:49 AM »
More pix of Demo Kit 1, the "lost" then miraculously "found" massively overunity device constructed for Rosemary Ainslie by Bernard Bulak, who later committed suicide.

Offline TinselKoala

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13971
Re: Rosemary Ainslie Quantum Magazine Circuit COP > 17 Claims
« Reply #109 on: September 15, 2013, 10:02:07 AM »
 
Quote
To the best of my knowledge absolutely NO part of that apparatus has had any parts replaced - to the best of my knowledge - since 2006 or thereby.

To the best of your knowledge? Well, we already know that isn't true at all.

Liar. The NE555N chip bears a data code indicating it was manufactured in the 18th week of 2007.

Liar. There is NO IRFPG50 in the box. Never has anyone mentioned (except me in 2009) the use of an IRFP450 OR a p-channel mosfet.

Liar. You claimed this apparatus was LOST. But it was never lost at all.

Liar. You claimed that this apparatus was used for the Quantum tests. But it has a completely different circuit in it than was PUBLISHED in the Quantum magazine and CANNOT make the duty cycle and frequency claimed in the Quantum article.


Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Rosemary Ainslie Quantum Magazine Circuit COP > 17 Claims
« Reply #109 on: September 15, 2013, 10:02:07 AM »
Sponsored links:




Offline TinselKoala

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13971
Re: Rosemary Ainslie Quantum Magazine Circuit COP > 17 Claims
« Reply #110 on: September 15, 2013, 10:15:17 AM »
The genius troll GMeast writes,

Quote
Rosie,

You made a statement a long while back relating to Tinsel Koala's identity and to his cowardice in NOT revealing his true identity. If there is to be any credibility claimed by this turd, then why can't he come forward with his true identity? Otherwise, he remains nothing more than a FICTIONAL CHARACTER to the readers of these threads. It's likened to holding Sherlock Holmes in regard as a REAL SLEUTH. This holds true for the picowatts, poynty-asses, fagluvin, and others that are too cowardly to stand up and show their true identities instead of hiding behind FAKE ones ... unless they are all admitting to being FAKES.
The unnamed academics and others who have supposedly "vetted" Ainslie's claims are anonymous, and NO ONE CAN CHECK THEIR WORK OR VERIFY THE CLAIMS MADE.

I am anonymous to certain people ... but ALL MY WORK IS PUBLIC AND CAN BE CHECKED BY ANYONE WHO LIKES, and not a single thing I've said or demonstrated has been refuted. Especially not by TurdMouth GMEAST.

And there are plenty of people who know exactly who I am, where I live and so on. People I trust, mostly, but also people who have run games on me and tricked me and threatened me. Am I not supposed to be Bryan Little any more?

If you want to call me a FAKE, GMeast.... try refuting something, rather than shitting out your mouth like you do. I don't need "credibility" because all my work is open, replicable and doesn't even require fancy equipment, it just IS.

Quote
To all readers that are detractors of these technologies: ARE YOU SO GULLIBLE THAT YOU WOULD TAKE THE WORDS OF FICTIONAL CHARACTERS AS THE FINAL WORD(s) ON O.U.? If so ... then you deserve to REMAIN IN DARKNESS FOREVER ... fueled by BIAS,  BLINDNESS and HATE! You are all a bunch of SHEEP!

Greg

Refute me, Greg. YOU CANNOT. And NOBODY has to take my WORD for anything... because I always provide PROOF, outside references, checkable citations, fully worked math, and demonstrations that are REPLICABLE BY ANYONE. Nobody has to take my WORD for the fact that the NE555N chip in Ainslie's device was made in May of 2007... THE DATE CODE IS ON THE CHIP and you can call STMicro yourselves to confirm it.
Just for one example.
You don't have to take my WORD for the fact that the Quantum 555 timer circuit cannot do what she claims it does... you can simply build it for yourself and check it, or you can watch my very clear demonstrations, or you can look at Mark E.'s scopeshots.

Your argument is, as usual, completely bogus GREG. And as far as making your complete identity known on the internet, go for it, nobody is stopping you. Why not publish your address and phone numbers, so people can call and visit you?

Offline TinselKoala

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13971
Re: Rosemary Ainslie Quantum Magazine Circuit COP > 17 Claims
« Reply #111 on: September 15, 2013, 05:29:14 PM »
Hey Greggie baby

Suppose for a moment someone on the internet was constantly using foul language, breaking down, saying things to you like "Fuck you dead" and so on. At the same time, insisting that you identify yourself fully.

Suppose I said "FUCK YOU DEAD" to YOU and insulted you with "turd talk" and homophobic slurs. Would you want me to know where you live?

Somehow I doubt it.



Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Rosemary Ainslie Quantum Magazine Circuit COP > 17 Claims
« Reply #111 on: September 15, 2013, 05:29:14 PM »
Sponsored links:




Offline Groundloop

  • TPU-Elite
  • Hero Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 1738
Re: Rosemary Ainslie Quantum Magazine Circuit COP > 17 Claims
« Reply #112 on: September 15, 2013, 08:52:26 PM »
Open letter to Rosemary Ainslie.

Ref. http://www.energy-shiftingparadigms.com/index.php/topic,2313.msg5059/topicseen.html?PHPSESSID=c1c0992981a38982d550373564ed3ca0#msg5059
Post #435
Snip
"Thankfully - they're back on track - and referencing ME - rather than that RIDICULOUS circuit that Groundloop and our Little Pickle are trying to promote in the hopes of distracting you all."
End snip.

Background:

TK asked for a way to discharge a charged capacitor into a battery. I did respond with three ways to do that.
The first was by using a SCR triggered from a neon bulb. The second was by using glow starters for fluorescent light. The third method was by using a high voltage JT circuit connected to the capacitor and then discharge the
capacitor to the battery by a third coil connected to a diode bridge.

Discussion:

All of my three circuit proposal has nothing to do with your circuits or theories.  All three of my circuit
proposals will work in a setting where you want to discharge a capacitor, that has a voltage higher than
a neon bulb trigger voltage, into a load. I have never, to my best knowledge, published any circuits on the
internet that do not work or as a means of distracting people.

Conclusion:

In you post you use the word "RIDICULOUS" about my circuits. I do not think you are capable of determine
if a circuit is "RIDICULOUS" or not. Your knowledge about electronics is basic at best, and non-existent at
worst.

I expect an apology from you!

Groundloop.

Offline TinselKoala

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13971
Re: Rosemary Ainslie Quantum Magazine Circuit COP > 17 Claims
« Reply #113 on: September 16, 2013, 02:13:25 PM »
Ainslie is still making her RIDICULOUS claims, even though EVERY TIME she herself or her team have actually TESTED one of their claims... it has been proven to be false. She even now goes back and distorts and misinterprets the findings of her most recent set of "demonstrations" of incompetence: ALL her measurements are bogus, and this nonsense about the battery being disconnected from the circuit _at any time_ is another of her transparent displays of utter ignorance. She and her RIDICULOUS pottymouth sycophant, or maybe psycho-phant, GMeast can't seem to make connected thoughts come together in their minds.

How does a chip with a date code of May 2007 get into a box that was "lost" in 2006 and not "found" until a couple of weeks ago? The box doesn't even contain an IRFPG50 and doesn't operate at anything even close to the frequency range cited in the Quantum article. I'll tell you how that happens: Ainslie's RIDICULOUS pile of lies has become too big for her to keep track of, and the inconsistencies in her story are becoming glaringly obvious to everyone _with a brain_ that examines the evidence.

Let her rant and insult, make claim after RIDICULOUS claim, many of which have ALREADY been proven to be false. Until she manages to DEMONSTRATE THE REALITY OF HER CLAIMS -- which she will never do -- they are just so much verbal excrement.

Groundloop, waiting for an apology from Ainslie for her insults and lies about you is like waiting for a Solstice in July. You'll never get a sincere apology from the Queen of Trolls, you will just get more lies and distortions and false claims without ANY SUPPORTING EVIDENCE whatsoever.

She can't even explain why there is only one pot connected in her Demo Kit 1 box when the Quantum article shows three. She can't explain why there is NO IRFPG50 transistor in there, but instead a very different IRFP450. She can't explain the frequency range of the Box circuit, when it is so much higher frequency than the Quantum article claims. She can't DARE to attempt to explain the presence of the 555 timer chip made in May of 2007. She can't explain _anything_ about "her" circuit, she's an ignorant bloviating fool, and her insults and ridiculous claims mean nothing to anyone, except as easy targets to shoot down.

Her cheerleader GMeast can't even think for himself, with all that excrement and homophobia floating around inside his skull.



Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Rosemary Ainslie Quantum Magazine Circuit COP > 17 Claims
« Reply #113 on: September 16, 2013, 02:13:25 PM »
3D Solar Panels

Offline TinselKoala

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13971
Re: Rosemary Ainslie Quantum Magazine Circuit COP > 17 Claims
« Reply #114 on: September 16, 2013, 02:28:16 PM »
Ainslie claims to "know enough" to produce these "oscillations" in the Quantum single mosfet circuit .... but we have NEVER SEEN HER operate her equipment at all. She always has someone else do it!

I tell you right here and now: She does not "know enough" to do anything more than turning the equipment on, if that much. Over the years, she has damaged her Fluke scope, her LeCroy scope, her Function Generator and her battery cables by her incompetent flailings, as well as blowing a bunch of mosfets. She can't do math and refuses to check her work at all, having made many really utterly STUPID errors that betray her ignorance and naivete when it comes to calculations.

If she claims to "know enough" to do anything... let her demonstrate it!

Let her set up a demonstration, operate the equipment and show that her claims can be supported. Of course she cannot do this, the woman is incompetent at everything except manipulating people.

Note her reference to Glen again. She lies when she says he has tried to hide or cover up _anything_. Glen's entire corpus of work is freely available in the excellent collections he has put up for anyone to see. He includes complete raw data, scopeshots, operating parameters, everything. Long videos of running, even. For Ainslie to claim that Glen has hidden or covered up ANYTHING of his work is an absolute lie and an insult to a careful and honest researcher.
Furthermore... we once again see Ainslie's inability to reason. She endorses Glen's "replication" of "oscillations".... when IN FACT, we (.99 in sims and I in hardware) here have made the IDENTICAL WAVEFORMS that Glen has made and that Ainslie endorsed -- and they are not oscillatory waveforms at all in the same sense as the true parasitic feedback oscillations of the "Q-array" miswired mosfet joke. Yet look at what she says about our work. The ignorant bloviating fool even proudly admits to not watching my videos. No wonder she remains so utterly ignorant... she doesn't even know what she is criticizing!

Offline TinselKoala

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13971
Re: Rosemary Ainslie Quantum Magazine Circuit COP > 17 Claims
« Reply #115 on: September 20, 2013, 01:17:02 AM »
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cLqM7FRMeZ4

Transcript: (DM = Donovan Martin, RA = Rosemary Ainslie

DM: I effectively mm mm met Rosemary in about 2000, round about then, and at that time the instrument that was available was the (unintelligible), a, it's not here today, it's one with a real wound element is effectively roughly as I recall 8 winds, in fact, just to digress it's the one in Quantum magazine, the referenced there (?).
And um effectively what it was it was a wound coil around this ceramic core with a platinum-based thermocouple ahm, mounted in the center. The objective behind the test was simply not to scrutinize measurements. That's a matter of  opinion always. That's always easy to argue measurements on the scope, from one scope to another, one can argue for days and years to come. Ahm, knowing that, ahm, I think what Rose has been trying to achieve, up to, to now was ah to show some of the waveforms which at times obviously could be very difficult. Because of the simplicity of the circuit, makes it very difficult to obviously _achieve_ certain fine settings. And ahm, going back, back in history what was done back then  was simply a Joule test, and of course Joules doesn't lie. Ahm, there was a control circuit, I'm sure everyone actually, watching (unintel) moment is probably aware of what was done... there was a Control, and then there was the actual Apparatus that was tested against the Control. And in every single instance it outperformed the control by Days. And this obviously was monitored (?) recorded by our local CSIR, and of course BP, and I think it's actually made mention, (unintelligible) I happened to witness the original test at the time as well.
Now the Apparatus has left for California many years ago, and never returned, unfortunately. Now you can take my word on that. (?) ABB Labs, and ahm (unintelligible) up to today, no word, other than the three scientists who originally ah, witnessed the test, and vetted the results were fired two-three months therafter.
So. In the interim there was a second device, which was built, because one was wont to do that. Ahm, the device again was tested, um, at this point, interest was lost. In, in this particular device. Um, to the point where BP actually offered a bursary through our local university

RA: (Hisses) SASOL

DM: Er, SASOL rather. Ahm, offered us bursaries, (to take it?) further. No one unfortunately came to the fore, to take up the challenge. And it's been ahm, it's been a passion of Rosemary's since then. Remember, for her it's not about the electrical circuits, it's about her Field Model, in terms of what she's trying to achieve ...
(end transcript)

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Rosemary Ainslie Quantum Magazine Circuit COP > 17 Claims
« Reply #115 on: September 20, 2013, 01:17:02 AM »
3D Solar Panels

Offline Pirate88179

  • elite_member
  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 8368
Re: Rosemary Ainslie Quantum Magazine Circuit COP > 17 Claims
« Reply #116 on: September 20, 2013, 02:17:08 AM »
Well, that pretty much clears everything up...NOT!  I think this proves that none of them know what they are talking about.  As most of us should have learned as little children, if you tell so many lies, it is very difficult to keep up with them...much easier to tell the truth.

Now she is insulting Groundloop?  He has been nothing but helpful in any posting I have ever read of his, and I have read many of them.  His suggestions had nothing to do with her circuit(s) yet she tries to use this to distract from the fact that her many variations of her circuits do not work.  Sure, blame Groundloop.

Little Miss Mosfet should stick to her curds and whey and stop insulting a lot of good, smart, hardworking folks on this and other forums.

Bill

Offline Tseak

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 42
Re: Rosemary Ainslie Quantum Magazine Circuit COP > 17 Claims
« Reply #117 on: September 20, 2013, 09:24:37 AM »
Methinks the lady doth protest too much. Her memory is also conveniently short - or - perhaps her claim that she doesn't read responses is true.  Her latest post:

Quote
Where among a slew of nonsense he also states...

Note her reference to Glen again. She lies when she says he has tried to hide or cover up _anything_. Glen's entire corpus of work is freely available in the excellent collections he has put up for anyone to see. He includes complete raw data, scopeshots, operating parameters, everything. Long videos of running, even. For Ainslie to claim that Glen has hidden or covered up ANYTHING of his work is an absolute lie and an insult to a careful and honest researcher.

Perhaps, dear reader, you could take the trouble to check this Scribd link for yourself.  http://www.scribd.com/doc/23455916/Open-Source-Evaluation-of-Power-Transients-Generated-to-Improve-Performance-Coefficient-of-Resistive-Heating-Systems

This was the paper published by open source collaborators where I was nominated 'first author'.  Scroll down to the data that was published in support of the argument.  Then tell me what data you actually see.  From where I sit I see repeated reference to the statement ... 'Sorry.This person moved or deleted this image'. The same thing from Test 1 through to 13?  I think it is?

If that is our Little Pickle's best sample of Glen Lettenmaier's  'complete raw data, scopeshots, operating parameters, everything' ... then it falls rather short of LITTLE pickle's further statement that 'For Ainslie to claim that Glen has hidden or covered up ANYTHING of his work is an absolute lie and an insult to a careful and honest researcher' begs a certain want of EVIDENCE.  I can PROVE that he's removed his data.  LITTLE TK can only ALLEGE that he has not. 

And conveniently forgotten, from her own forum:

Quote
Rose,

I already had posted this in your "debunking" thread, but I guess it should be here as well since it is about Glen's results:

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

- The Panacea compilation:
http://www.mediafire.com/view/lx2nnz9dnpg34tt/Rosemary_Ainslie_COP17_Heater_Technology.pdf

- Glen's livestream site with links:
http://www.livestream.com/opensourceresearchanddevelopment

- Glen's skydrive site with all the test data etc.:
https://skydrive.live.com/?cid=6b7817c40bb20460&id=6B7817C40BB20460!120

So as you can see Rose, all the results from all of Glen's tests are readily available to anyone. It took some sleuthing on my part to find Glen's cache (which he ended up giving me anyway), which I found on my own from a post of yours on EF actually.

Click on the last link above and you can directly download Glen's results from test #13 (or any other)...

As poynt99 says all Glens result are available to anyone.

Offline TinselKoala

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13971
Re: Rosemary Ainslie Quantum Magazine Circuit COP > 17 Claims
« Reply #118 on: September 20, 2013, 07:15:33 PM »
Tseak , as the troll queen Ainslie says,
Quote
Let me see if I can explain this in words of one syllable - or as few as is possible.  Maybe that way you'll understand me better.

All of Glen's results are, as you pointed out, available at his Skydrive site and others. Every bit of his data, including spreadsheets, is there.

Unfortunately for the idiot troll queen Ainslie... they are in .zip folders, and SHE DOESN'T KNOW HOW TO HANDLE THEM.

 ;D ;D ;D ;D :D ;D :D ;D :D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

This is equivalent to receiving a letter in the mail and not being able to figure out how to open the envelope. Par for the course! Ainslie blames the sender for using an envelope she doesn't know how to open. The Troll Queen insists on remaining ignorant, blaming others for her ignorance, and then lying about it. She claims Glen's data is unavailable.... and it is unavailable TO HER because she refuses to correct her own willfull ignorance. But everybody else with a computer on the planet can Google "zip files" and know, in ten minutes, how to deal with them. Not Ainslie! She prefers to persist in her delusional lying fantasy that Glen is trying to hide something! When it is perfectly clear to everyone that he is not.

Glen (FuzzyTomCat) removed his data from the fraudulent Scribd manuscript because he knows that Ainslie's claims are false!

Now... aren't you understanding Ains-lie a LITTLE better now? Once again, she has made post after post of lying allegations, challenging me to provide evidence WHICH I HAVE ALREADY PROVIDED several times. Will she admit she has been ONCE AGAIN PROVEN UTTERLY AND COMPLETELY WRONG in her ridiculous claims and allegations? Of course not, she's way too LITTLE a person for that, she will simply continue on insulting and lying with every post she makes.


Hey AINSLIE.... are you having a LITTLE trouble understanding what the word PUBLIC means?


Offline TinselKoala

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13971
Re: Rosemary Ainslie Quantum Magazine Circuit COP > 17 Claims
« Reply #119 on: September 20, 2013, 09:18:44 PM »
Here are some more images that might allow one to understand Rosemary Ains-lie a LITTLE better:

 

OneLink