Testing the TK Tar Baby

[TinselKoala]

How about replying here, instead of on your honeypot tracking forum, you cowardly and devious she-snake.

The fact remains: Either you were lying for a month or even more, while you knew your true schematic but were discussing it with people who did not,  OR you were lying when you told .99 that you "made full disclosure" and already knew before he posted it. Either way... you lie, and both ways are pretty damning for you, Ainslie. There is no imaginable way for you to weasel out of that one, spin as you might.

Personally, I think you had no clue, had to ask your "advisors" who explained .99's discovery to you, and then you were forced to try and save face by claiming to have known all along-- what seemed to you to be the lesser of two evils -- instead of being outed, yet again, as a totally incompetent fumblefingered tinkerer without the most basic error checking or 3-d imagination skills. But scientific misconduct is not the lesser of those two evils, Ainslie. You should just admit that your post to .99 was a lying attempt to save face and that you were totally ignorant, because the reason that you did give is a frank admission of scientific misconduct bordering on outright fraud.

[TinselKoala]

Look at this garbage bunch of lies.

AINSLIE, you lie again and again. NOBODY BUT YOU has ever said anything about the FG passing the huge current YOU are misrepresenting me to have claimed.

WE HERE HAVE REPEATEDLY EXPLAINED AND SIMULATED AND MEASURED up to 200 MILLIAMPERES or so of current passing through the Function Generator as the bias source.

200 milliamps, AINSLIAR, and I've illustrated that very same current MANY TIMES IN MY VIDEOS. I generally run at 150-180 mA, AS ANYONE CAN SEE FOR THEMSELVES BY LOOKING AT THE VIDEOS OR BY DOING IT THEMSELVES. Even you, probably, could manage to put an ammeter in series with your function generator and SEE FOR YOURSELF what it reads. Complain about frequency response? THEN DO WHAT I DID: PUT A CVR IN THAT PART OF THE CIRCUIT AND SCOPE IT. You idiot.

Now, I DEMAND that you remove and retract the LIES that you are telling about me and my work. I NEVER CLAIMED NOR IMPLIED WHAT YOU ALLEGE IN THE "REPLY" THAT I HAVE IMAGED BELOW.

And look at the crazy paranoid allegations. Rifled directly off her flash drive. That, my dear, is an accusation of a crime, and therefore it is ACTIONABLE, and I've preserved it for the imaginary lawyers to look at. YOU POSTED EVERY SINGLE ONE OF THE ITEMS PUBLICLY and that is where I got them, Ainslie, you paranoid lying silly old woman who cannot even control her own data.

AND YOU CANNOT REFERENCE A SINGLE "MATH GLITCH" IN MY WORK, not one. I check my math over and over and if anyone corrects me RIGHTLY I immediatly post a correction/retraction IF NECESSARY... which it has not been in recent memory. AND FURTHERMORE anyone with the brains to look at my spreadsheet, posted here repeatedly, can see that I indeed used the inductive reactance of the CVR in my calculations, several different values for it, in fact... so AGAIN SHE LIES and misrepresents my work out of sheer overweening arrogance and ignorance... because she doesn't even grasp or understand what my work even IS or SHOWS.

I am truly disgusted by this miserable lying mendacious ignorant bloviating fool of an old wench. She probably can't even cook.

[TinselKoala]

And this one wraps it up.  TK HEAVILY depends on those multiple posters who DISCLAIM everything - somewhat neurotically and CERTAINLY hysterically - when he promulgates his APPALLING misdirections... the minute I make a reply.  That way they can drown out the 'real truth'.  LOL.   

http://www.energy-shiftingparadigms.com/index.php/topic,2313.msg2465.html#msg2465

Kindest as ever,
Rosemary

You are a lying hypocritical idiot, not deserving of the least respect. You constantly misrepresent the work of others, as is perfectly clear every day from your posts. Not just mine, but EVERYBODY's work that you talk about, you get wrong, and you make conclusions based on your wrongness. It's crazy.

Bearing that in mind, why would ANYONE trust your reports of your own work? Why should they?

They should not, since your original data cannot be examined, and you continually are proven to lie about everybody else's work.

You have been relegated to the status of the boy who cried wolf.  Even when you might discover something that is significant, nobody will pay any attention to you since you are known to be such a miserable blatant liar. So you'll wind up getting eaten.

[TinselKoala]

Scoposcopy: Using AC coupling to display a small varying signal "riding on top" of a much larger constant DC level.

http://youtu.be/ykX4nZglnGE

S'matter, Ainslie, too much to handle?

[Rosemary Ainslie]

And Guys,

Here's yet another answer.  This time related to our 'schematic' which MOST ASSUREDLY was NOT correct.  But there is nothing in the history of these threads of mine or threads about me and our work - that requires the KIND of disclosure that TK seems to think that I am beholden to given him.  Frankly - neither he nor anyone of those who contribute so diligently here - can demand ANYTHING AT ALL  of me in the light of their multiple and legal abuses of calumny malice and slander.

http://www.energy-shiftingparadigms.com/index.php/topic,2311.msg2466.html#msg2466

Kindest regards,
Rosemary