Testing the TK Tar Baby

[Rosemary Ainslie]

guys - I am not about to sit back and allow our hard work and the potential benefits of that hard work be drowned out by the malicious interference of those personalities here who are disproportionately anxious to DISPROVE those benefits.

I am NOT rich.  But I have more than one arrow to my bow - so to speak.  And I have enough commitment to this general cause to use whatever liquidity is available to me - to COUNTER this rather disgusting attempt at silencing me and killing off the benefits of our hard work.  If we make this proof available through a series of tests that are publicly demonstrated on the internet - or if we make the this proof available through a series of tests that are publicly demonstrated in a Court of Law - OR BOTH - is immaterial.  Provided ONLY that the proof is made available and publicly and to as WIDE AN AUDIENCE AS POSSIBLE.   And I would be DELIGHTED to engage on either or both options.

And if I am thereby somewhat impoverished... so be it.  It is LONG OVERDUE that someone take a stand against this pernicious requirement to silence over unity claims - or better put - to silence 'claims of efficiency that DO NOT comply to classical prediction'.

Kindest regards
Rosemary

[MileHigh]

Rosemary:

We've explained this FULLY in both our first and second part of that 2-part paper.

Then explain it again for all of us right here and right now.  If you don't then you are full of it and are just being evasive - again.

And exactly WHAT 'scopes electro-monkey trial' are you referring to?

Your Scopes Electro-Monkey trial.  That's the one where your side argues for the devolution of science and technology so that we go back to the 18th century.

Are you again indulging in your fantasies MilesOutOfReach?  Some bewildering drug induced trip?  Maybe?  I'm reasonably certain that this is hardly of interest to science - unless it's to some branch of psychology that is dedicated to advanced mental confusions related to excessive use of hallucinogens.

Slander!  Slander!  Pants on fire!  You will be hearing from my team of attorneys.

MileHigh

[TinselKoala]

Ainslie lies yet again when she says that I am attempting to discredit her scope shots.

ON THE CONTRARY, AINSLIE, you liar, your scope shots are the ONLY reliable data that you have presented. Even most of the descriptions of the conditions under which they were obtained are unreliable... but the SCOPE SHOTS THEMSELVES are telling us the entire story of your circuit's behaviour and your claims about it.

What I AM discrediting... and will do so in any forum anywhere.... are Ainslie's continued lies, her false claims and bogus mathematics and her unsupported conclusions about her circuit.

ETA: Here again is what Ainslie should have done for you: all the scopeshots I've been able to find, in one place. Don't forget that her 301kb "jpg" files are really .bmps. I've converted most of them.  And there are a few more in here since I uploaded the first SCRN.zip file.

[TinselKoala]

guys - I am not about to sit back and allow our hard work and the potential benefits of that hard work be drowned out by the malicious interference of those personalities here who are disproportionately anxious to DISPROVE those benefits.

I am NOT rich.  But I have more than one arrow to my bow - so to speak.  And I have enough commitment to this general cause to use whatever liquidity is available to me - to COUNTER this rather disgusting attempt at silencing me and killing off the benefits of our hard work.  If we make this proof available through a series of tests that are publicly demonstrated on the internet - or if we make the this proof available through a series of tests that are publicly demonstrated in a Court of Law - OR BOTH - is immaterial.  Provided ONLY that the proof is made available and publicly and to as WIDE AN AUDIENCE AS POSSIBLE.   And I would be DELIGHTED to engage on either or both options.

And if I am thereby somewhat impoverished... so be it.  It is LONG OVERDUE that someone take a stand against this pernicious requirement to silence over unity claims - or better put - to silence 'claims of efficiency that DO NOT comply to classical prediction'.

Kindest regards
Rosemary

I perceive this as YET ANOTHER threat to my physical safety, however empty and feeble it might be.

[Rosemary Ainslie]

Rosemary:
Slander!  Slander!  Pants on fire!  You will be hearing from my team of attorneys.

MileHigh

LOL MilesOutInOrbit

I'll PM you with a service address.  Hang ten.

Rosie Posie