Rosemary Ainslie circuit demonstration on Saturday March 12th 2011

[Rosemary Ainslie]

Dear Rosemary,
                   What is it going to take for you to leave Harvey and Laurel's names OUT OF YOUR COMMENTS on and off the forums? We are not having anything to do with you or your technology. I have sent YOU private e-mails asking you to LEAVE US ALONE! I guess our request now needs to be put out in the open for all to see that we have been requesting this from you for a long time now.
                 So Stefan, will you PLEASE let OUR REQUEST be made known to the readers of your forum in this thread that we just want Rosemary to LEAVE US ALONE. We have tried to be tactful in requesting this of Rosemary on a private level but it is not working.

Laurel

Guys, for the record Laurel is also CatLady and CatLady is Harvey's wife.  Harvey's relevance to this technology is as written.  I have not done a total reveal of his duplicity but that is in the 'offing'.  Meanwhile under the name CatLady or Laurel - on either Energetic Forum or on Poynty's forum - if you care to check this - you will be able to see the level of gratuitous remark that at it's least - constitutes hate speech.  But, like Fuzzy and Ashtweth - their level of articulation is somewhat constrained by a poor grasp of language skills.  And in CatLady's case - this is compounded by an even poorer grasp of what constitutes good poetry.  LOL.  Hate speech rendered in really bad verse.  A new dimension absurditities.

I'm hoping that my constant reference to these posts will encourage Poynty to do some much needed 'scrubbing' of his forum content - if he hasn't done so already.  I noticed - with some amusement that my view was 'blocked' again last night.  It seems they 'conferred' behind closed doors.  Thankfully it's back up again.  I like to dip in there now and then to check out the level of their alarm.  Shock and awe.  It seems to have left them speechless.  The dogs are no longer barking.  I trust it will stay that way.



Kindest regards
Rosemary

And Laurel, BTW. If you want to know what it will take to stop my public references.  Here's the task.  Get rid of all those poisonous public statements and get your husband to retract whole tomes of commentary that mitigate against this technology.  It's that simple.  It will then remove 90 percent if not more of all your own internet posts.  Which makes me think that your internet presence is simply advanced to frustrate all this good news - within the absurdly trivial context of your absurdly trivial protests

corrected the spelling of the word commentary.   

[Laurel]

Guys, for the record Laurel is also CatLady and CatLady is Harvey's wife.  Harvey's relevance to this technology is as written.  I have not done a total reveal of his duplicity but that is in the 'offing'.  Meanwhile under the name CatLady or Laurel - on either Energetic Forum or on Poynty's forum - if you care to check this - you will be able to see the level of gratuitous remark that at it's least - constitutes hate speech.  But, like Fuzzy and Ashtweth - their level of articulation is somewhat constrained by a poor grasp of language skills.  And in CatLady's case - this is compounded by an even poorer grasp of what constitutes good poetry.  LOL.  Hate speech rendered in really bad verse.  A new dimension absurditities.

I'm hoping that my constant reference to these posts will encourage Poynty to do some much needed 'scrubbing' of his forum content - if he hasn't done so already.  I noticed - with some amusement that my view was 'blocked' again last night.  It seems they 'conferred' behind closed doors.  Thankfully it's back up again.  I like to dip in there now and then to check out the level of their alarm.  Shock and awe.  It seems to have left them speechless.  The dogs are no longer barking.  I trust it will stay that way.



Kindest regards
Rosemary

And Laurel, BTW. If you want to know what it will take to stop my public references.  Here's the task.  Get rid of all those poisonous public statements and get your husband to retract whole tomes of commentry that mitigate against this technology.  It's that simple.  It will then remove 90 percent if not more of all your own internet posts.  Which makes me think that your internet presence is simply advanced to frustrate all this good news - within the absurdly trivial context of your absurdly trivial protests

Dear Stefan,
                It was my great mistake for making the question of " What is it going to take " a rhetorical question for Rosemary. I just ain't got them proper words in my's vocabulary to speak what I means to such a high learned woman likes she is.

Dear Rosemary,
                 You are bringing up posts and/or conversations from Many Many Moons ago. We have been "done" with you a long time ago and we have asked that you no longer reference us in your comments on or off the Forums. Its that simple. We know you are pushing for a legal battle and frankly you are just not worth our efforts. We asked you in private e-mails to leave us alone and now in a public arena to leave us alone. From yesterday forward we should not see you referring to us on or off the forums. Very plain and very simple.

Thank you Stefan for letting us post this public request.

Laurel
CatLady
Harvey's wife

[Rosemary Ainslie]

A Sincere WARNING!

I would advise anyone wanting to replicate this oscillator, you do so without the use of an expensive, prized or valuable (to you) function generator. With the generator connected to a MOSFET Source pin, there is the real potential for high currents to pass through it, and these may cause permanent damage to the function generator. (I think we have already seen the results of this potential issue with the previous function generator used.)

There is a much better way to use this circuit without the potential danger for damage to your function generator, and I have shown that method in a previous post. Please ask if you want more information on this.

Regards,
.99

And as for this piece of nonsense.  I would have referenced this earlier but it seems that my Apple has finally been infected with those delusions that Cat tells me to stop mentioning.  Right now I'm using yet another back up and I just hope i can finish here without infecting this one too.  It seems that the name Rosemary Ainslie does not exist and when I do log in I reach some kind of internet link that I've never heard of before.  It's a fascinating place this.  LaLa land - where all is possible.  It seems urgently required that these rather incontrovertible claims of ours - be associated with all kinds of madness.  Golly. 

In any event, to continue.  If there were any dangers at all to the use of your functions generator then I can only advise you that those that I have, and have used in the past, are on Institutional Loan.  They would not have been allowed - if there was ANY KIND OF DANGER AT ALL.  So.  Please be advised.  I think Poynt is poynting you all away from what he also knows will work.  And - whatever circuit he recommends.  Take it with a pinch of salt and try your own.  He's not an EX - SPURT as it's referred to here.

Anyway guys.  I'm off to see if I can get these delusions out of these computers of mine.  Golly.  So busy these days.  I wonder if that 'shock and awe' is now turning into a less hidden insurgency campaign.  Nice when I get to see the tactics better.  I'm growing weary - but much, much wiser.

Take care all.  And BEWARE THOSE FORUMS LURKERS.

Kindest as ever,
Rosie

[Pirate88179]

Rose:

Google and get the free program "Malwarebytes".  It will find just about anything that is on your system/s.  Also, use Firefox as your browser unless you are already, not as easy to be attacked.  Plus, you can block all of the adds and the pages load lightning fast.  Just a few suggestions in an effort to help.

Bill

[poynt99]

Actually,

Rose's haphazard use of her loaned function generators is immaterial to the facts.

It is common sense that we should not be driving a high current output INTO our function generators. Perhaps there are those not familiar with how MOSFETs or transistor circuits work in general, and they do not see the MOSFET Source as a high current output, but I assure you, it can be, and in this case it is.

Why is the original circuit (see below) shown with the CSR (current-sensing resistor) located in the MOSFET Source leg? Note also that the function generator is connected to the MOSFET Gate only, not the MOSFET Source.

.99