Rosemary Ainslie Circuit Demonstration June 29, 2013 Video Segments

[TinselKoala]

I do not wish to discuss anything, I enjoy the reading. You can try and turn it around but just go back to your reply # 75 and its plain to see you are everything I say you are.
I do not know Ainslie or any of her partners or friends. But regardless I do not think men should speak to women the way you do.
I was following your dissection of her circuit with interest, and actually agree with your findings, so I am no Ainslie fan. But your rudeness is what comes through rather than the important content. And all because you have a personal beef.
You can not deny that you decided you would turn your venom on me because you thought my reply to Mark was all about you.

Should I expect an apology ?

No, just more refutations.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xUzsCVNXaGs
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J_LjNBdSvc8

[TinselKoala]

Part 3 is up now.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3vm2ZTDUyyA

[SeaMonkey]

Your post, though, with all its extra hard returns, isn't _quite_ long enough to drive my video demonstrations off the front page. It just doesn't seem like your heart is really into your work tonight.

Is it nice to read into a response more than
is actually there?

Rosemary may not yet understand all that
there is to know about biasing of active
amplification devices but she is making
progress.

Although, it is entirely possible that you've
learned more during the course of this drama
than Rosemary has.  Take that as you will...


P.S.  Hard Returns are useful when a format
is desired that is easily read by all.  News-
papers, magazines, and numerous printed
publications utilize this ages-old format for a
beneficial reason.

[TinselKoala]

Well, aren't you special, saving us all that work scanning our eyeballs. Thanks!

And I don't think anyone has ever accused me of being nice. Koalas aren't nice, in general, and I'm no exception.

And I'm quite certain that I am indeed learning more than Ainslie.... she has demonstrated the depth of her learning many times... and it isn't.

Why exactly do you think I am engaging in this present deconstruction, or rather, reconstruction of her circuit from the gills up?  I am making tiny little bitesized pieces that lead from one to the other in an absolutely unavoidable trail of crumbs. Whether or not a little Polly Parrot bird decides to gain nourishment from them isn't up to me... but for her to complain of hunger, after this, will be seen to be more deserving of mockery and ridicule than ever.
Dispassionate scientific refutations went out the window, as far as I'm concerned, on Saturday 29 June 2013 when they set down the phone and went out to supper, with thousands of people watching. Feel me?

Meanwhile, here is the schematic for Part 4:

(the video is still uploading and should be ready in a half hour or so, sorry... slow uplink)

http://youtu.be/1jENARrROGs

Now do you see why she thinks the Source of Q2 is "floating" and the battery is disconnected during the Q2 osc times?

[TinselKoala]

Apart from another test for the curious,  I think it is time to pack this one up.
I feel the outcome is clear and definitive. TK, you were always correct and I do not know anyone who would question that after the demo
You are held in much higher esteem than you give yourself credit for. I also applaud Ponty99
I really think its about the ability to move on with grace. A lot of bad blood was split, and its time to leave the battle field...move on.
Go read this letter, I thought it said it out well in reflecting perhaps how we should all behave in the future.


http://revolution-green.com/2013/07/05/the-human-element-of-original-thought/


Next Month is Mr Wayne.......stay tuned.

Mark, I read Chris's letter and I quite agree with him, in principle. But it is also very clear that he does not know the history of the Rosemary Ainslie affair. Ainslie is willfully ignorant. She is not the simple, naive uneducated researcher that Hunter wants us not to mock. She has had these issues explained to her over and over by literally dozens of people, who have worked with her side-by-side and who eventually fell away because she isn't simply ignorant, she is willfully so, and overweeningly arrogant about it. She insults her critics in the worst ways imaginable: by not respecting their learning, skills, experience and credentials. She is manifestly NOT the kind of person that Chris is talking about here:

I also don't join those who judge a  researcher based on a lack of education to explain the phenomenon being tested or observed. I simply ask that while leaving the dignity of the person intact, it would benefit both sides to focus only on the science for validation, implementation and not let the efforts go in vain.

The efforts that are going in vain are evident: Ainslie's critics wish to focus on facts, references and repeatable demonstrations. Ainslie ignores facts, doesn't cite checkable references.... and we have seen what passes for a "repeatable demonstration" this past Saturday. She replies to valid criticisms with insults and threats. She is uncooperative in releasing data. Where are the scope captures and why is she giving .99 a hard time about HIS shots when she won't provide hers... etc etc.
I invite Chris Hunter to take a look at Rosemary Ainslie's forum. Then let's see if he still feels the same way after he reads her own words on these matters.
http://www.energy-shiftingparadigms.com/

Also, as a deaf person... it is truly unfortunate that he cannot hear the audio in this clip:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=miOXBOx4Kso

Maybe someone can transcribe it for him, but he'll still miss the tone of voice coming from Ainslie.