Rosemary Ainslie circuit demonstration on Saturday March 12th 2011

[utilitarian]

My dear Poynty Point. 

Right now I don't even have the time to read this.  But from a quick scan - I see you're still on about criteria for proof.  Here's the thing.  I'll do whatever it is that is required PROVIDED ONLY THAT THIS IS FIRST ENDORSED BY AT LEAST 5 EXPERTS AS BEING SUFFICIENT PROOF OF THE CLAIM.  AND THEN THAT CLAIM MUST THEN BE SUFFICIENT TO BE ENDORSED BY THE ENTIRE SCIENTIFIC COMMUNITY.  Otherwise, with respect - you're wasting my time.  I have NO interest in satisfying your own arbitrary criteria.  They're irrelevant and designed to confuse the facts with extraneous parameters that have NOTHING to do with the measurements.

Rosemary

Here is one thing you may or may not be aware of.  The Randi Foundation has a standing offer of $1 Million to anyone able to demonstrate a paranormal claim.  The definition of paranormal has been expanded to include a perpetual motion device, which is currently considered impossible under traditional science.

Here is a link:  http://www.randi.org/site/index.php/1m-challenge.html

So if you can make a self-runner, you can score an easy $1 Million.  JREF does now require a media presence, so you would need to show a news story about yourself, but once you make your self-runner, it should be no trouble to get at least some local outlet to do a story.

[poynt99]

My dear Poynty Point. 

I'll do whatever it is that is required PROVIDED ONLY THAT THIS IS FIRST ENDORSED BY AT LEAST 5 EXPERTS AS BEING SUFFICIENT PROOF OF THE CLAIM.  AND THEN THAT CLAIM MUST THEN BE SUFFICIENT TO BE ENDORSED BY THE ENTIRE SCIENTIFIC COMMUNITY.
Rosemary

You may or may not own and drive a petrol car, but I am going to assume you have some basic knowledge about them. With reference to the above:

Would you require the endorsement of 5 auto mechanics to assure you that a perfectly functional car with it's engine running will indeed stop running when the car uses up all of it's petrol? 

Or closer to the point: would you require the endorsement of 5 auto mechanics to assure you that as the engine runs and the fuel gauge indicates a decrease in fuel quantity over time, that the gauge is indeed working properly, and the engine is using up petrol? 

.99

[Rosemary Ainslie]

You may or may not own and drive a petrol car, but I am going to assume you have some basic knowledge about them. With reference to the above:

Would you require the endorsement of 5 auto mechanics to assure you that a perfectly functional car with it's engine running will indeed stop running when the car uses up all of it's petrol? 

Or closer to the point: would you require the endorsement of 5 auto mechanics to assure you that as the engine runs and the fuel gauge indicates a decrease in fuel quantity over time, that the gauge is indeed working properly, and the engine is using up petrol? 

.99

No Poynty.  Your grasp of the point is rather tenuous - as ever.  I'm commenting on the fact that there is no consumption of petrol.  On the contrary.  Every time I run that car the tank fills up again.   Not only that but the petrol gauge confirms this.  I've already spoken to the guys who made that gauge and they've assured me that there's a warranty on it's accuracy.   And I've also told and shown some really interested people about this on this thread and all over the place.  But I've also, unwittingly, shown a mere handful of really nasty - ill qualified - small minded mechanics.  This latter group - about a dozen or so disciples of yours in the art of disinformation and misinformation - earn their living from the sale of all that petrol.  If there is no need for ample and excessive consumption of this then there will be no livelihood available to them.  So they have rallied in earnest.  They are now dedicated to destroying this claim.  They're on record.  They state that I must be mad to be reading this excess on the gauge.  And when they say this they say it REALLY, loudly.  They scream the facts across two public threads and an equally public blogspot - all run concurrently.  This really noisy minority group of partially qualified and excessively partial group of mechanics make up for their minority representation - that minority quotient - through an anxious and mindless repetition of those shouts and screams to advise the world and its wife that my reading of the gauge is the result of delusions - incompetence - and general idiocy. 

Since the petrol gauge shows 'full' and since this has now been seen by a sizeable percentage of internet browsers - related as it is to those who read here and to those who followed earlier evidence of this - then I have no actual quarrel with this little group - representing - as they do - a mere handful of ill qualified mechanics.  In truth,  I would first need to be as mad as they claim to even spend time speaking to them. 

There is no question that the guage reads 'FULL'.  And there is no question that the car has been beetling about the place with a seemingly endless appetite for movement - and this has been duly seen and approved by a whole slew of mechanics - who are ALL ON RECORD.  That petrol gauge has been checked and re-checked.  The 'logic' that it applies to that reading - to the calculation of that 'sum' has been checked and rechecked.  There is no explanation for this.  Either it is a miracle - or it is erroneous - or there is some principle that has been overlooked that allows for this reading.

So.  I am modestly proposing that the best way to get this explained is to bypass those ill-qualified mechanics who are dedicated to wrecking this technology for their own nefarious purposes - and go to those real experts who are capable of evaluating this as is required.  And so open handed am I in this exercise that I have recommended that those same people - that minority handfull of ill qualfied - nasty self-serving men - the term 'men' here used in its loosest sense - find their own 'experts'.  The only criterion then - is that they are acknowledged experts and that they evaluate the evidence and not speculate on what they predict may be that evidence.  Then.  I will show them that evidence and hopefully all parties will then be satisfied.

Otherwise - I assure you - I am not about to get into my car and drive around in circles for another 5 months or more - to satisfy you or anyone else that I am that I am indeed that lunatic that I'll comply to any aribtrary requirement or request that you or yours stipulate.

Kindest regards
Rosemary

[Rosemary Ainslie]

Here is one thing you may or may not be aware of.  The Randi Foundation has a standing offer of $1 Million to anyone able to demonstrate a paranormal claim.  The definition of paranormal has been expanded to include a perpetual motion device, which is currently considered impossible under traditional science.

Here is a link:  http://www.randi.org/site/index.php/1m-challenge.html

So if you can make a self-runner, you can score an easy $1 Million.  JREF does now require a media presence, so you would need to show a news story about yourself, but once you make your self-runner, it should be no trouble to get at least some local outlet to do a story.

Utiliarian - I am not about to try and impress anyone about anything at all.  And as delectable as a million dollars may be - nor do I believe there is any sincere intention of proving anything at all.  If it's perpetual motion that he wants to see - then properly it should have been paid out by now.  There is at LEAST one working device on show that has been working perpetually for some many years now.  I just, for the life of me, can't remember the man's name.  If I do I'll append it here.

What I am anxiously trying to do - in fact what the entire team is trying to do - is to HIGHLIGHT QUESTIONS that this can get to the academic table.  That's the only barrier that needs to fall.  Once it's there then we can all rest easy.  Because they certainly have the skills and the expertise to develop this argument and this technology to where it needs to go.  What we represent is a fringe minority of dedicated researchers - who do NOT have the required academic recognition to progress this technology at all.

The sad truth is that until this gets academic recognition then it is dead in the waters.  That's the only respectable arena that will satisfy our public and will justify the research funding required to get this all fully developed.  Sad but true.  And that's why my efforts are entirely in this direction.

Kindest regards,
Rosemary

[utilitarian]

Utiliarian - I am not about to try and impress anyone about anything at all.  And as delectable as a million dollars may be - nor do I believe there is any sincere intention of proving anything at all.  If it's perpetual motion that he wants to see - then properly it should have been paid out by now.  There is at LEAST one working device on show that has been working perpetually for some many years now.  I just, for the life of me, can't remember the man's name.  If I do I'll append it here.

What I am anxiously trying to do - in fact what the entire team is trying to do - is to HIGHLIGHT QUESTIONS that this can get to the academic table.  That's the only barrier that needs to fall.  Once it's there then we can all rest easy.  Because they certainly have the skills and the expertise to develop this argument and this technology to where it needs to go.  What we represent is a fringe minority of dedicated researchers - who do NOT have the required academic recognition to progress this technology at all.

The sad truth is that until this gets academic recognition then it is dead in the waters.  That's the only respectable arena that will satisfy our public and will justify the research funding required to get this all fully developed.  Sad but true.  And that's why my efforts are entirely in this direction.

Kindest regards,
Rosemary

The prize is awarded only to those who apply for it and where a mutual agreement is reached as to the testing procedure, so as to remove the possibility of fraud.

Currently, there are exactly zero functioning overunity devices in the world.   Yours would be the first.