Rosemary Ainslie circuit demonstration on Saturday March 12th 2011

Rosemary Ainslie · July 01, 2011, 04:50:04 AM

Quote from: powercat on July 01, 2011, 03:32:56 AM

... however you want to dress it up and twist everything the fact remains that despite many people trying to reproduce your circuit none of them can match your results,

WHO EXACTLY? Where do you find anyone trying to reproduce our circuit? THERE IS NO-ONE. There has been NO-ONE. For NO-ONE read NONE. Zilch. Nada. NOTHING. SO? Who exactly are you saying has TRIED TO MATCH OUR RESULTS?

Quote from: powercat on July 01, 2011, 03:32:56 AMand you do nothing to help them,

WHO? WHO HAVE I REFUSED TO HELP? WHERE ARE THEY? WHO ARE YOU REFERRING TO? BE SPECIFIC. There has been NO-ONE. For NO-ONE read NONE. Zilch. Nada. NOTHING. SO. Who exactly are you saying that I refused to help?

Quote from: powercat on July 01, 2011, 03:32:56 AMand if they question why it is not working you generally attacked them,

WHO HAS QUESTIONED why it is not working? BE SPECIFIC. There has been NO-ONE. For NO-ONE read NONE. Zilch. Nada. NOTHING. Who exactly are you saying is questioning why this circuit is not working?

Quote from: powercat on July 01, 2011, 03:32:56 AMyou keep coming up with arguments that have already been covered in previous posts...

Because you keep coming up with the same counter argument.

Quote from: powercat on July 01, 2011, 03:32:56 AMthere is not one person on this forum who believes your circuit will produce any excess energy,

THIS IS ALSO NOT TRUE. There are two members of this forum who are collaborators on that paper. They NOT ONLY believe the circuit results but are RESPONSIBLE FOR PRODUCING THEM.

Quote from: powercat on July 01, 2011, 03:32:56 AMand that is why your supporters can't make the circuit.

WHAT supporters can't make this circuit? Would there not first be the requirement to TRY? To the best of my knowledge there have been no attempts. NONE. Zilch. Nada. NOTHING. SO. Who exactly are you saying can't make this circuit? Again. BE SPECIFIC.

Quote from: powercat on July 01, 2011, 03:32:56 AMyou have a good political way of getting your message across, but when most people look at the reality of the history of your circuit on this forum and you're refusal to do any new test.
it is clear to most of them that you are just using this forum for grandstanding and publicity.

Well. If I have a good political way of getting my message across it seems to be ELUDING you. Therefore exactly how good can it be? THE REALITY OF THE HISTORY OF MY CIRCUIT ON THIS FORUM IS THAT IT WORKS. I have NEVER refused to do any new test. AND IF THIS IS GRANDSTANDING - then God help us all. I would have said it's an effort to keep the EXPERIMENTAL EVIDENCE ALIVE AND WELL IN THE FACE OF AN UNDESERVED AND UNQUALIFIED ATTACK. And I'm reasonably certain that IF this generates any kind of publicity then it is ENTIRELY the wrong kind.

Rosemary

Rosemary Ainslie · July 01, 2011, 05:16:25 AM

I ENTIRELY MISSED THIS PIECE OF NONSENSE.

Quote from: powercat on July 01, 2011, 04:12:26 AM
Hi Bill

The main problem here is that Rosie keeps insisting that her circuit produces excess energy, many members on this forum replicated that circuit failed to get any excess energy, if they complain about the circuit not working properly Rosie generally attacks them.

If you are going to claim excess energy on this forum you are expected to interact with reasonable requests for new tests, I think that it's only reasonable when making such claims.

there are plenty of people out there claiming they have got a free energy circuit if we invited them all on here, and told them that they didn't have to interact with anyone who made requests for them to prove their case, this forum would lose all credibility.

Yes Rosie's work is very interesting and can be considered good research material,are but her attitude to members here that make reasonable requests or suggest that her circuit might not work,is appalling

I think you know Luke's work (gotoluc) very well like by most of us, he is such a polite person he generally does not look to argue with anybody, and yes he failed to make Rosie's circuit produce any excess energy

LUKE HAS NOT TRIED TO REPLICATE THIS CIRCUIT. NO FORUM MEMBER THAT I KNOW OF HAS TRIED TO REPLICATE THIS CIRCUIT OTHER THAN THE TWO WHO ARE ALSO MEMBERS OF OUR TEAM. NOTA BENE CAT. THEY NEITHER OF THEM POST HERE. CAN YOU GUESS WHY? SO. AGAIN. WHEN EXACTLY DID LUKE TRY AND TEST THIS CIRCUIT? CAN YOU EVEN GET HALF WAY TO THE TRUTH? JUST NOW AND AGAIN?

Rosemary

powercat · July 01, 2011, 09:44:45 AM

Quote from: Rosemary Ainslie on July 01, 2011, 05:16:25 AM
I ENTIRELY MISSED THIS PIECE OF NONSENSE.

LUKE HAS NOT TRIED TO REPLICATE THIS CIRCUIT. NO FORUM MEMBER THAT I KNOW OF HAS TRIED TO REPLICATE THIS CIRCUIT OTHER THAN THE TWO WHO ARE ALSO MEMBERS OF OUR TEAM. NOTA BENE CAT. THEY NEITHER OF THEM POST HERE. CAN YOU GUESS WHY? SO. AGAIN. WHEN EXACTLY DID LUKE TRY AND TEST THIS CIRCUIT? CAN YOU EVEN GET HALF WAY TO THE TRUTH? JUST NOW AND AGAIN?

Rosemary

CAN YOU EVEN GET HALF WAY TO THE TRUTH? JUST NOW AND AGAIN?
This is the first time I have mentioned Luke and like all the other times, you have suggested I might be wrong, I go back and check, and you are correct Luke has not reproduced your circuit, his name came up in a YouTube search of all the people that have experimented with your circuit, that is where I made my mistake,
so I apologise in if I have misled anybody it was a genuine mistake, and I withdraw the statement.

I do not lie about people like Rosie would have you all believe, I do occasionally make mistakes and when I do,I make all efforts to put things right as soon as possible.

powercat · July 01, 2011, 10:31:08 AM

Quote from: Rosemary Ainslie on June 25, 2011, 03:27:38 AM
And yet again you fail to read the evidence. Here's that link again. If this does NOT constitute a replication then BY RIGHTS it needs must be withdrawn. As of NOW it is NOT withdrawn. This is published by Fuzzy on his own Scribd file. EXPLAIN THAT if you can. To the best of my knowledge Fuzzy is a forum member.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/23455916/Open-Source-Evaluation-of-Power-Transients-Generated-.

Rosemary Ainslie · July 01, 2011, 10:38:38 AM

Quote from: powercat on July 01, 2011, 09:44:45 AM
CAN YOU EVEN GET HALF WAY TO THE TRUTH? JUST NOW AND AGAIN?
This is the first time I have mentioned Luke and like all the other times, you have suggested I might be wrong, I go back and check, and you are correct Luke has not reproduced your circuit, his name came up in a YouTube search of all the people that have experimented with your circuit, that is where I made my mistake, so I apologise in if I have misled anybody it was a genuine mistake, and I withdraw the statement.

I do not lie about people like Rosie would have you all believe, I do occasionally make mistakes and when I do,I make all efforts to put things right as soon as possible.

YOU ARE STILL WRONG. I DO NOT KNOW IF IT'S A GENUINE MISTAKE OR BECAUSE YOU NEVER READ MY POSTS. AGAIN. NO-ONE HAS REPLICATED THIS CIRCUIT. FUZZY TOM CAT DID NOT REPLICATE THIS CIRCUIT. NO-ONE HAS REPLICATED THIS CIRCUIT. CERTAINLY NOT ANYONE WHO HAS POSTED ON THIS FORUM. HOW MANY MORE WAYS MUST I SAY THIS. YOU ARE LYING EVERY SINGLE TIME YOU SAY THAT SOMEONE HAS REPLICATED THIS CIRCUIT. JUST AS YOU LIE EVERY TIME YOU SAY I REFUSE TO DO THOSE TESTS THAT YOU DEMAND. JUST LIKE YOU LIE EVERY TIME YOU SAY THAT I DO NOT HELP PEOPLE WHO TRY TO REPLICATE THIS CIRCUIT. EVERY SINGLE PRESENTATION THAT YOU MAKE IS A LIE. SO. DON'T SAY YOU DON'T LIE. THAT'S ALL YOU DO.

THERE HAVE ONLY BEEN REPLICATIONS OF OUR PREVIOUS CIRCUIT.

GOD. WHAT IS WRONG WITH YOU?

Rosemary