Quote from: poynt99 on August 03, 2012, 01:09:47 PM
I am trying my best with the time I have.

I feel that some progress is being made, and as long as that continues, I will too, providing I have the time and inclination.

Would you care to summarize here the actual progress you've made so far... if you have time, that is?


(From my perspective, had any actual progress been made, at the very least a CORRECTED version of this second manuscript might have been submitted for publication, with an errata sheet explaining her new insights gleaned from your progress. But the same old error filled version is up. To me this indicates that she still cannot even read or interpret a simple schematic. So where is the progress?)

Sure... we have lots of progress, when you have to edit away half or more of her "restatement" of your position.


Have you noticed that whenever she brushes up against the truth, she tries to "wrap up" the discussion? How she tries to move on to some other topic? Her present "summary" is another attempt to do this thing.

A Lunar mosaic.

This is a mosaic of 5 frames of pieces of Luna, stitched together with VIPS/nips and further processed with PixInsightLE and gimp.

The 5 individual frames were taken last night, with the Celestron EdgeHD 9.25 aplanatic Schmidt-Cassegrain reflector, with the Canon Xti at prime focus, ISO200, 1/500 sec exposures.

This is a large image, over 2300 pixels wide, with fair detail.

Ah, progress is a wonderful thing, isn't it?

"If you're right, your right."


So we are down to lines in the sand now. Too bad they are so fuzzy, and look different, depending on which side of the line you are.

More paranoid fantasies, lies, unfounded accusations and slanders from the Queen of Disinformation.

She has a lot of time to criticise, but somehow.... she has no time to correct her errors and lies.

The "publication" of her second daft manuscript on Rossi's JNP blog still contains WRONG DIAGRAMS..... or does it?

At any rate, it contains a DIFFERENT SCHEMATIC than the first paper, yet both pretend to describe the same set of trials. It also contains, as an EXPLANATION of the circuit's behaviour, a set of cartoons that don't correspond to ANY of the circuit arrangements that were actually used. It also contains scope traces that are impossible to obtain with functioning parts wired as claimed.

IN SHORT, what has been "published" on Rossi's blog "journal" is a mishmash of errors, mendacity, and ignorance, and illustrates not only Ainslie's own incompetence and arrogance, but also the profound defects in a process that pretends to be "peer review" at Rossi's blog.

Now, Ainslie can hallucinate and respond to her delusions of me being some kind of super hacker all she likes; each time she does she demonstrates unequivocally, once again, that she is both amazingly ignorant and mentally ill--- for one who is mentally healthy does not have those kinds of paranoid delusions.

One day, there will be an accounting, and that is why I am saving all of this information, both in my own records, and here in public.

And meanwhile... there continue to be NO TESTS PERFORMED by Ainslie, and we still don't know WHAT HAPPENED TO THE ORIGINAL BATTERIES, which.... according to her.... should still be fully charged and ready to go.