New Rosemary Ainslie Demonstration Scheduled for Sunday, 4 August 2013

[Hoppy]

There is a hypothetical crowd funding project out there to document the stories and intrigues that have taken place in the free energy cottage industry.  It would make some people blush and really muffle some of the high-profile players in this game.  If it went viral it would be a shock to the free energy cottage industry, a tsunami and an earthquake combined.  Perhaps some filmmaker out there that is interested in the social and scientific issues relating to these phenomena will one day pick up the torch.  The film would be presented from the perspective of the majority.  i.e.; a person with average common sense and a decent understanding of science.


MileHigh

Yes! Please bring it on MileHigh. You, TK & markdansie would make ideal contributors. Documentary titled - Free Energy Inventions Exposed! I would think that most of the major TV channels would jump at the opportunity to make and screen this. There could also be some financial sponsorship available from the oil companies!

[markdansie]

@ Hoppy
what role would you have for Sterling?

[Hoppy]

@ Hoppy
what role would you have for Sterling?

Teaboy 

[TinselKoala]

It is now Monday Evening in South Africa, about dinnertime, August 12, 2013.

The false and mendacious papers are STILL UP on Ainslie's blog, still containing the Figure 3 scopeshot fabrication, which has been known and admitted to be wrong by Ainslie since June 29. The papers still contain the schematic that shows a location for the Black FG lead that Ainslie never in fact used before Saturday August 10, 2013.

Other versions of the false and mendacious papers are STILL UP on Rossi's JNP blog, still containing two differing schematics, neither of which was actually used during the reported experimental trials.

[TinselKoala]

There are only three plausible inadvertent "errors" that could have produced the Figure 3 Paper 1 scopeshot: A blown (open circuit) mosfet damaged by overheating, a disconnected cliplead to the Q1 transistor at the studs where all are connected, or the same wire(s) coming loose from its lap-soldered join to the transistor's lead itself.

As I have shown, the IRFPG50 mosfet can remain operational to over 220 degrees C. But electronic solder melts at around 180-190 C depending on the composition. My unit uses socketed transistors so they do not become disconnected until the socket actually  melts, but Ainslie's poorly mounted transistors could easily reach lead temperatures that would melt the lap-joint solder connections and cause disconnection before actual failure of the transistor, which would allow a trace like Figure 3 to appear.

The problem with calling these scenarios "error" is that they would have to be noticed and repaired before further use of the apparatus, which would call into question results obtained before the apparatus fault was noticed and repaired. (Such faults are noted by Ainslie around the time of the actual data collection, in her blog and forum posts.) But the shot _strongly supported_ Ainslie's main claim! It was just too good to discard, and of course it could not be repeated honestly with a functioning apparatus properly wired. So it was included in the papers as a MAIN ITEM OF EVIDENCE for her main claim, even though they, or she, had to know it could not be repeated and was the result of some failure mode -- the apparatus could not spontaneously heal itself!

In short.... it is a real stretch to call the data itself an "error".... but to have it included as evidence or support for her thesis claims in the paper is definitely FABRICATION of data, of the most egregious kind. And this discrepancy was pointed out to her as soon as that shot was first posted, in her blog in 2011, yet it remains in her various papers even today.

Further fabrications include the schematics published in the papers: the two schematics in the papers on Rossi's blog don't even agree with each other, and in all versions the Black or minus FG lead is shown in a position that Ainslie never actually used before 10 August 2013. None of the schematics show four "shunt" resistors. These omissions and misrepresentations are NOT ERRORS, especially the false location of the Black FG lead. They are fabrications, claims that data was collected under certain conditions, when in fact, conditions were vastly different from what was stated. The location of the Black FG lead shown in the schematics only appeared after it was pointed out to her that the location she actually used to collect the data in the papers allowed significant current to bypass the current measuring resistor and thus was making all of her data erroneous. How did she fix this? She, or her team, simply re-drew the schematic to show the "proper" location of the Black lead... even though this location was never used before this past Saturday. The solid evidence for this bit of fabrication is in the March 2011 demonstration video, where the team demonstrates the circuit as it was actually used. The Black FG lead can be clearly and plainly seen to be connected at the common circuit ground. Ainslie has attempted to repudiate this video that she posted, claiming several times that "she did not post that video" when of course she did, and finally removing it from her YT account (one of four different YT accounts she has.) But of course the video still exists and is viewable and the proofs of her fabrications are easy to see in that video. All other photographs of Ainslie's apparatus, even those of the single mosfet version in use before 2011, show the Black FG lead at the common circuit ground, NOT the position shown in the posted schematics in the papers.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hPb-3av12AI

Since that statement was made, she actually went back to claiming that she could make the Figure 3 scopeshot, first with 8 volts, then with 4 volts on the gate. But as the demonstration this past Saturday showed to her, she needs under 3 volts on the gate to prevent Q1 from turning on partially, just as we have been telling her all along. And Donovan Martin is fully aware of this property of mosfets .... yet he has allowed his name to remain on the papers claiming the original Figure 3 is legitimate. This is NOT ERROR !

(Anyone who believes Ainslie is "blind as a bat" clearly hasn't viewed her cartoon caricature videos on her YT channel. She is a visual artist working in gouache or watercolors, pencil, pen-and-ink. A blind artist! Right. That's a miracle in itself.)


Once again  we are back to the point of the lying troll queen insulting me and disparaging my work, without offering any proof or refutation of my work, just insults and name calling .... so I will continue to point out, with solid evidence, her mendacity and fabrications. Does she want me to stop? Then she must fulfil her obligations.