Read the thread Rosemary, I've laid out the terms in a very simple and unambiguous way.



They don't need to identify themselves for me to make another donation in the first instance - that's in your hands.




ETA: I have already donated as you'll see in that thread. And I'll donate more, just for evidence you have someone qualified who believes what you're telling us. What are you going to do?

Quote from: TinselKoala on June 22, 2012, 11:51:29 AM
Ainslie, you are truly a vile and despicable person. Your recent posts show your true lack of character. I have MANY documented instances of your outright lies, your ignorant statements about your circuit, your faulty mishmash concept of power and energy, and your mathematical ignorance and incompetence.

You have NOTHING.  NOTHING AT ALL.  All you can manage is ALLEGATION and INSINUATION.  And you're not even aware of the fact that NO-ONE believes you. 

Quote from: TinselKoala on June 22, 2012, 11:51:29 AMI have all these things organized and documented and referenced, mostly by your own words in blog posts and forum posts, and your own data. I can demonstrate to ANYONE, at any time, that you are incompetent, a liar, ignorant, and insulting, uncooperative and arrogant. I can refute many of the claims you've made by direct experiment and demonstration, and I do it in such a manner that ANYONE ELSE can also refute your claims, should they care to do so.

This is RUBBISH.  You have PROVED NOTHING.  NOT ONE SINGLE ENERGY MEASUREMENT ANYWHERE EVER.  All you do is show that you can replicate a negative wattage and then you SPIN that it MEANS NOTHING.  And then you PRETEND to endorse this by utterly irrelevant reference to numerous posts that I've made that can BARELY be read and that are INTENDED TO IMPLY THAT THEY ENDORSE YOUR SPIN.  All of it spin and wind.  NOTHING of force and effect.  Just another technique that is also a rather absurdly redundant attempt at diminishing our claims.

Quote from: TinselKoala on June 22, 2012, 11:51:29 AMI am eager to see what "your" laboratory will come up with, although I actually doubt that it even exists. I have complete confidence in the results I've posted and I'm quite sure that ANYONE can repeat what I've done and show the same things. They will NOT, however, be able to repeat what you've claimed. A negative mean power... sure, that's easy, and it means nothing except that you are not using standard measurement protocols, as you so often mendaciously claim. Making scope traces like your Figure 3 ..... that's easy too, and some of us know just how it's done.

NOT ACTUALLY.  We are ENTIRELY satisfied that with the application of standard measurement protocols there is unequivocal evidence of a negative wattage.  That NUMBER - the importance of which you've been trying SO HARD to diminish is AN ANOMALY.  BY ALL RECKONING.  It is - all by itself - MORE THAN ENOUGH to re-evaluate MUCH in the standard model.  Left to you it would have been brushed under the carpet.

Quote from: TinselKoala on June 22, 2012, 11:51:29 AMYour lies are soon to be ONCE AGAIN uncovered, Ainslie, if "your" laboratory is honest. Just as they have always been by anyone who truly tests your circuit. And you continue to be dishonest on your new forum, every time you do NOT correct Ahern's bad math. Of course you cannot correct his math because you don't understand it yourself AND the correct math makes your claims look bad and you yourself look stupid.  But anyone who actually knows how to do it will see those posts, punch their calculators, and just shake their heads and move on. If your laboratory calculates battery capacity in the same manner as Ahern has done.... then I suppose you will get just what you pay for. And you will remain the laughingstock that you are.

What exactly do you mean when you say IF the laboratory is HONEST?  Are you that steeped in dishonesty that you assume that registered laboratories are likely to LIE - about RESULTS?  And there is no PAYMENT involved in this research.  You silly little man.  The research is to be funded by the laboratory.  Are you now trying to imply that they're being paid to LIE?  WHAT an absurd - horrible little man you are.

R.

Quote from: mrsean2k on June 22, 2012, 11:53:36 AM
And I'll donate more, just for evidence you have someone qualified who believes what you're telling us. What are you going to do?

I'll continue to avoid looking at your thread. 

R

Ainslie will simply insult, bloviate, misrepresent, and attempt to denigrate your efforts. She won't produce anyone, nor will anyone come out in support of her.

There are no collaborators left, not even anonymous posters can find anything supportable in Ainslie's arguments any more. This current fiction of a laboratory of boffins, eagerly awaiting a handful of magic mosfets and clipleads, and a hunk of white pegboard that will keep batteries charged forever while boiling water for tea.... is laughable.

She simply ignores any and all refutations, as if they do not exist. She STILL hasn't responded to the Function Generator current video, except to post page after page of useless comments and insults trying to cover it up every time I've posted it.

Her statement:

QuoteWhat you are trying to do is to get me to believe that a function generator is able to pass current from a battery supply source via its terminal to its probe. Since I KNOW that is is impossible I'm afraid I'm not receptive to you trying to teach me or anyone else.  So NO.  I spare me your 'lessons'.

And the video that refutes her silly, ignorant and arrogant claim like a red-headed stepchild:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GuBWVmRmUtc

But now... I have come to realize that she cannot even understand this video, as simple as it is.

Quote from: Rosemary Ainslie on June 22, 2012, 12:08:33 PM
I'll continue to avoid looking at your thread. 

R

Like you are doing now?

I'd hate to be driving on the same freeway as you, Ainslie, with the way you "avoid" things.