Thanks, Mark, I'm glad you are still having fun.

I just want to point out a few things here as we go along.

First and foremost, Ainslie, as anyone can see, has not been able to respond with any substance, references, facts or demonstrations to any of the criticisms from anyone leveled at her here or especially in the comments to the postings on PESN and Revolution-Green.

Second, she appears to have abandoned the PESN page and Sterling, as well as any plans for him to host her webcast demo. This is of course because Sterling permitted the critical comments from Mark E and myself and others to be posted. And, ironically, he only permitted those because she had already rubbed him the wrong way.

Third, there is nothing especially critical in the main articles on PESN or Rev-Green; the criticisms are only seen if one bothers to scroll down and read the comments.... and Ainslie, when she deigns to reply there, never produces any facts or evidence, she just produces words and insults.

I think this is a deliberate tactic on her part. She makes an announcement and convinces some website or forum to start talking about her, and at the top she gets to post her daft manuscripts, her bogus OU claims, her claims about all the engineers and companies and "declined bursary awards" and all the rest, without having to provide any evidence. Then when the criticisms start, in the comments, she winds up either abandoning the site, like she has with PESN, or getting herself deliberately banned, like she did here.

But the sites remain, like the PESN page. So when some naive innocent person learns about Ainslie and searches for information, these sites come up.... but one has to look especially hard for the critical information buried down in the comments, and Ainslie never actually addresses the critical points.

Is this going to happen at Revolution-Green? The first steps have begun; there is nothing particularly critical in the head article, it only highlights her claims, while mentioning the "controversy". Criticisms are found only down in the comments, and in those comments Ainslie is not providing evidence for her contentions, she is just providing more words.

But really, there is no "controversy". There is only Ainslie making claims on the one side, against everyone who has built and tested her device and her claims or analyzed them in circuit theory on the other side. Ainslie's "side" can produce no empirical evidence in support of her claims. There really isn't any controversy, there is just a noisy and ignorant claimant sucking up time and energy with her silly "thesis" and the malignant comedy of errors that she pretends are "experiments".

TK:

I agree with you that all of the talk of her "team" of knowledgeable "experts" is probably all a lie.  If any of these alleged people were real they could have posted anonymously at any time on a multitude of forums and made their presence known without "sullying" their alleged reputations.

Many people are not fooled by the psychology of Rosemary Ainslie.  Look at the example of the bad MOSFET as shown in her own scope traces.  Her first reaction was to deny that there was any issue.  She seemingly can't accept the idea that some mistakes were made when she did her tests.  The tests have to be "perfect" in her mind and this "perfection" is important to hold up the overall structure of her proposition.  Therefore any suggestion that there is imperfection is fought tooth and nail.  This refusal to accept that there were any problems will then be defended by her to absurd and extreme lengths of irrationality.  It's a kind of child psychology, irrationally resisting ideas contrary to your own without seeing how ridiculous and irrational you look to others in your opposition.

So as Poynt does his testing and reporting of results, Rosemary will get more and more defensive and upset.  She will challenge Poynt's logic and measurement techniques.  When she finally "flips" on Poynt you can imagine that the challenges will go to irrational extremes and stop making any sense at all.   Poynt will keep a cool head and simply do his testing and the reporting of his results.  Rosemary will soon not be able to follow the logic and will get confused and start to make statements that reveal (again) how little she actually understands.  We have already seen an incident like this where she completely missed or misunderstood one of Poynt's preliminary postings and video clips from just the other day.

So you will end up with good solid irrefutable data presented by Poynt and Rosemary as a menacing and screeching and whining and completely lost and unhappy person.  There will be lots of vim and vigor and cantankerous ugliness, but Rosie will be shooting blanks.  Her "arguments" and pleadings and complaints about Poynt's measurements and data will get her nothing and go nowhere, she just can't argue against the truth as shown by the measurements as made by an expert (Poynt) from her position of abject ignorance.

It's gunna be a really big sheww, and then let's hopefully put this one to bed forever.

MileHigh

Just as has happened at least three times before. She won't stop, she'll just move on to another bunch of hopeful experimenters.

Are you having difficulties getting that waveform Poynty?

QuoteDo you want our settings?  We set the duty cycle to MAX 'OFF' MIN 'ON'.  And the offset on the function generator to its most extreme negative value.  Then the waveform gets generated - as day follows night.

That's all there is to it, as day follows night.
Of course, you have to wait until the mosfet blows:

QuoteBut I doubt that we'll be doing more than that fig3 because we'll run out of time.  It takes almost 26 minutes for that setting to resolve itself.

There has STILL been no discussion about how Ainslie is going to show that her mosfets are still fully "in tact" after "that setting resolves itself". And time is drawing short. But that's OK because the first re-postponement of the twice-postponed demo has already been announced:

QuoteThe team member doing the demo is away in Namibia until Saturday morning.  So we're cutting a fine line for the demo and it may be as well to delay this until our time 18.00 hours - 6.00 pm. 

The Team Member doing the demo? She's not sure "what all" HE wants to show you?
WHOSE CIRCUIT IS THIS, ANYWAY? Ainslie didn't build it, can't explain it, can't understand it, can't operate the apparatus and can't operate the test equipment...... but she is critical of us.

Do you see? She has absolutely no clue, and can't even try the thing for herself because she doesn't even know how to set up or operate the equipment. WHO IS PULLING HER STRINGS, and why?

And let's not forget, since a "Team Member" is going to be "doing the demo"..... that Ainslie has gotten other people to lie for her, blatantly and on camera, before this. As I have illustrated several times.