Rosemary Ainslie circuit demonstration on Saturday March 12th 2011

[Groundloop]

Hi GL.

I've seen your diagram, but I've not seen Rose's "OK" of it afterward. I know it was based on a drawing she emailed you, but I think it is wise to wait for her approval first.

Moreover, if that is indeed the new circuit, I'll need to see a photo of the new setup (top and bottom) before I build that version.

I am more inclined at the moment to build the version demonstrated in the video because we know the circuit, and there is a lot of data posted about it. At present time, Rose's claims of overunity made in reference to that demonstration still stand. She has not retracted those claims reference the demo, and therefore it stands as a valid circuit to build and test.

.99

.99

Rosemary has "OK" of it to me by email.

GL.

[Rosemary Ainslie]

.99

Rosemary has "OK" of it to me by email.

GL.

Sorry Groundloop.  I was in the process of posting this 'good to go' notice,  and got sidetracked.  For the record guys - I am absolutely happy with Groundloop's representations.  And frankly Groundloop - I'd very much welcome any technical support and advices that you can offer.  I entirely trust your interests here and your representations.  Perhaps you could guide anyone with enquiries that I can't deal with.  I'm only good at measuring those energy values guys.  That's just about it.  Unless you'd like me to bore you all to tears on a dissertation of zipons.  Be happy to oblige.  lol.

I've had the smallest of small glimmers of hope here guys.  It seems we may find some really appropriate interest in all this VERY SOON.  I do hope so.  It certainly looks as if things can, pray God, be moved forward.

Anyway - I'll tell you all more when I, myself, know more.  A 10 day wait.  But that's already 10 days better than I've had yet.

Kindest and best,
Rosie

[Rosemary Ainslie]

I have a very real problem in being denied access to Poynty's forum.  It seems that this is public to the world. But not to me.  I am entirely satisfied that this is immoral - if not illegal.  I would earnesly propose that while there is all this level of duplicity in Poynt's dealings with me that he really also disqualifies himself from comment here.  It's one thing to hold up everything with his endless and spurious comments and objections - still to be listed by the way - but am getting there.  It's an entirely different thing to pose as a 'replicator' when this much antagonism is flaunted and quite this publicly.

Rosemary

[poynt99]

.99

Rosemary has "OK" of it to me by email.

GL.

That's a good first step GL.

However, as I mentioned, I will not be building that version until I see an updated photo (top and bottom) of the apparatus. It would also be quite beneficial to see scope shots (close-ups) and probe positions both on the apparatus and on an approved diagram.

In the mean time, I'll be building and testing the circuit from the demonstration video, as this is the only one actually verified at this time.

Also, pending a retraction of her claims with reference to the demonstration video and all the results associated with it, it still stands as the de facto proof of COP>1 according to Rose.

.99

[vonwolf]

  Well sorry Rose I deregistered from there yesterday when the Poynted one PM'd me over there to threaten me about a post I made over here, now it seems I too am banned, Not to worry  everyone knows how it goes at our. They just seem to like to hear each other drone on and on about denying any claim of OU regardless of thier merits. I know I won't miss that forum.
  As allways good luck Rose Pete

oops wrong "hear"