Rosemary Ainslie Circuit Demonstration, June 1 2013

[TinselKoala]

Hey.... Poynt99..... perhaps you could poynt out to Ainslie that she should stop making statements like this one, which reveal not only that she doesn't understand her own apparatus, but that she doesn't do her homework.

Please explain to her that I have "replicated" and explained the Figure 3 Paper 1 scopeshot quite well, several times, and further, the issue is NOT that I do it, but that SHE do it, under the conditions she has claimed in her paper.

AInslie said,

By the same token – IF you are claiming that TinselKoala has replicated our experimental evidence – he needs to be able to replicate Fig3 Paper 1. IF he cannot replicate this then he also CANNOT replicate our experimental evidence.

Again, Tar Baby is constructed of the same components that Ainslie uses, according to the same schematic that she CLAIMS to use, and produces the same waveforms and all of the same phenomena that Ainslie has actually demonstrated. In other words, I HAVE INDEED replicated ALL of the actual evidence and phenomena actually demonstrated or supported by real data by Ainslie.

What I have not done, and what SHE HAS NOT DONE, and what nobody can do, is to produce any experimental evidence that support her outrageous claims.

I have offered many times for Tar Baby to be tested side-by-side with Ainslie's apparatus to PROVE THIS POINT. Her feeble protests to avoid doing this are on record. She fears any real comparison because she knows that I have already proven her claims wrong with Tar Baby and she knows that Tar Baby and her circuit will perform identically when tested identically. Tar Baby is ready to travel TODAY and has been for the past year.

Here, once again, are my videos demonstrating that I can and do "replicate" the Figure 3 and Figure 5 features that we have been discussing. And I show how it is done, simply by removing the mosfet, AND I prove that my mosfet is functional. Let Ainslie do the same, before she has the absolute arrogant effrontery to claim that my work is "unsatisfactory". SHE CANNOT.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nbkpQQvuP2I
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O5svsFA8XRg


Notice the twisted reasoning she uses, anyway. We say that the Figure 3 scopeshot is impossible to make under the conditions she claims, with an intact mosfet in place wired correctly etc etc. And then she says that my work is not a replication unless I make the Figure 3 scopeshot, presumably under the conditions she claims..... but she CANNOT DO IT HERSELF !!
The woman is a one-person vaudeville sketch, still stumbling around on stage long after most of the audience has given up and gone home.

"There can be NO OTHER EXPLANATION."

[picowatt]

PW,

I need the increased accuracy, and hopefully I will be able to demonstrate why later.

"0" is at the zero ref line on the display, "+255" is the top graticule, and "-255" is the bottom graticule. If you use bits (either from a DC level at your input, or DC shift with vertical position), you effectively lose resolution.

.99,

Then I guess "numbers in boxes" it is.

Still hard to believe offset values are not displayed on such a pricey scope...

PW

[TinselKoala]

As anyone can see, Ainslie's posts have made it through to Mark's website.... and somehow neither I nor The Boss seem to have been told. Heads Will Roll!

So we have Yet Another Website where Ainslie has been permitted to insult, misrepresent, distort and lie about me and my work, not to mention her own, without even being challenged at all to provide proof of her assertions or support for her claims by checkable references or solid demonstrations of her own.

-several of her abandoned blogs
-her four YouTube accounts
-this forum
-Energetic Forum
-PESN
-and now Mark Dansie's site.

[poynt99]

.99,

Then I guess "numbers in boxes" it is.

Still hard to believe offset values are not displayed on such a pricey scope...

PW

I think I can compromise. I'll use the offset only for the testing where I require it.

[markdansie]

Hi TK
You have the right to reply, just like anyone else, but I am going to put a cap on the number of reply's including hers.
One reason for doing our site was not to have extreme censorship of views, but abuse will not be tolerated. I made it clear where I stood, but I was surprised how many private emails I got that actually supported her but did not post as they were afraid of being cut down. They may be wrong, but they are also entitled to their view.
The proposed test if cancelled or fails to live up to something credible then its game all over, I want this brought to a conclusion.
Do not shoot the messenger.
Mark