Rosemary Ainslie circuit demonstration on Saturday March 12th 2011

[poynt99]

A net gain by applying pulses to dead battery make inverters work, that previously could not provide the working voltage to the connected various loads.
This (well known ) individual has proven it:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aqDS8QQ_9Z0&feature=related

Please prove that he has proven it.

.99

[Rosemary Ainslie]

All the readers here are fully aware that you are not about to indulge anyone or any notion that may threaten your claims.

First of all, 5 hours a day is not 24/7, which is what is required.

Second, "without any measurable loss of voltage to the batteries" does not cut it in terms of knowing what the batteries' state of charge is over time.

Present something with "substance" please. These airy arguments of yours are becoming quite tedious and boring. 

.99

It seems Poynty Point that you are - indeed - prepared to hit below the belt.  Gauschor may not have read my post related to this but you most certainly have.  Do you really expect me to let you get away with this comment AGAIN?

Here's the thing.  We can get VERY HIGH wattage dissipated at the load.  It works like a 'booster converter' - delivering even more energy that is allowable in terms of resistance placed in series with a standard supply without an applied switching cycle.  But - under those circumstances - there is just so much energy that the 'offset' setting slips ever higher and - the circuit then becomes hazardous.  Therefore one needs to monitor that circuit on a full time basis.  I do not have the time to do this monitoring - even if I could manage to stay awake for 24 hours of every day over an extended period of time.  Nor can any other member of the team whose days are spent in trying to earn a living.  So.  Who do you propose will do the required monitoring? 

But you know this.  Why are you repeating the same old complaint?  Is it in the hopes that I won't remind you of this?  Perhaps?  Surely you know me better.

Rosemary

[poynt99]

Where there is a will, there is a way, and most certainly there is a way in this case. The will is what is sorely lacking.

You and your "experts" just need to put your thinking caps on for a moment and develop a simple scheme to prove this out by letting the circuit run continuously until it becomes exceedingly obvious and beyond a doubt (which you have not yet achieved) one way or the other if the batteries' capacity is declining.

.99

[Rosemary Ainslie]

Please prove that he has proven it.

.99

And here, guys, in a nutshell - is the final defense of the defenseless.  Accurate reports - detailed screen downloads - repeated public demonstrations - youtube demonstrations - predicted results - proven theses - NOTHING will work.  How much more PROOF is required.  This right to denial is now getting to a level of absurdity that actually makes a mockery or a parody of science. 

I have long been aware of the many evidences of overunity - even by those who don't even claim it.  The Joule Thief is a case in point.  It is stated that the energy comes from ground.  Dear God - it doesn't matter WHERE the energy comes from provided that it's non pollutant.  And what really gets me down is how Mags is browbeaten into submission with a really elegant arrangement.  And even if they don't all work.  SO WHAT?  Isn't it a far, far better thing that we have done than we have ever done?  - which is possibly hopelessly misquoted.  Why must we feel ashamed of working towards such excellent goals?  If we don't then - as sure as day follows night - we're dead in the water.    We can kiss the human race - 'good bye'.  Because that's where we're heading.  And mainstream are not going to dip into this dialogue until they've been given a strong and concerted argument - not this fractured nonsense that comes from these threads.  And Poynty et al - they KNOW this.  And they make sure that it stays fractured.

And I sincerely believe that we have actually finally given the measurement proof that's required.  And guess what?  They're denying the measurements.  They STILL want proof.  I actually think that this clamorous denial has now had it's day.  Let's move on.  I think we need to be way more pro-active in our thinking.  And all we're managing here is to go round and round in a circular argument that defeats our best efforts and fits in very comfortably with their agendas.  Let's move on.  I dream of the day when these threads are just wholly and completely dedicated to discovery and not to this hideous need to defend our interests our claims or even our evidence.  Proof is proof.  And right now there's a surfeit of it.

Most sincerely
Rosemary

[poynt99]

So there it is folks, in classic form:

We are being asked to forget about the actual issues at hand, bury our heads in the sand along with Rose, and "move on". Move on and ignore the meat of the matter?

It's time to remove the rose-colored glasses and opt for a lens that allows for the true determination as to the validity of the claims.

Do the continuous test. Failing to do so will never get you beyond the "beyond a reasonable doubt" stage, and this nonsense will go on forever. 

.99