Rosemary Ainslie circuit demonstration on Saturday March 12th 2011

[Rosemary Ainslie]

Something also doesn't seem right to me. Here you have Poynt99 trying to explain the measuring procedure and points and instead of indicating or discussing why you are doing it the way you are, you try to discredit him.

Are you serious?  Do you really propose that it's me trying to discredit Poynt.99? That's got to be a joke.  Here's a man who has actively encouraged and advanced whole THREADS on his forum to his members to let rip on my reputation.  NO HOLDS BARRED.  On record is a solemn undertaking not to moderate anything at all.  To this day they hold record of post after post after post where I am accused of FRAUD - LUNACY - DUPLICITY - DELUSIONAL CONFUSIONS - IDIOCY.  Actually that last was qualified. Apparently it's presumptuous to even consider myself an IDIOT.  I'm in fact - MORONIC.  He has gone on record to say that he will DEBUNK our claim and has advised all and sundry that I have ABSOLUTELY NO KNOWLEDGE OF ANYTHING SCIENTIFIC.  He has written spiteful emails to me to tell me that it's laughably absurd for me to comment on anything at all - least of all matters scientific.  He has INVITED people to join his forums for the sole purpose of - let me emphasise this - with NO OTHER AGENDA THAN TO DISCREDIT ME IN ANY WAY THEY SEE FIT.  And while all this was going on he BLOCKED MY VIEW OF THESE COMMENTS through the simple expediency of accessing my IP ADDRESS.  And if you think - like he claims - that I am LYING - then I suggest you take a stroll there and look at this for yourself.  Nor does it end there.  He contributed to and actively supported a BLOGSPOT dedicated to maligning my reputation.  He has allowed publication and links to private videos that I rather recklessly trusted to certain replicators who then attempted to claim our technology as their PERSONAL DISCOVERY.   And if you want proof of all that - then it's also all there.  Loud and clear and unambiguous.  Not only that - but this is the REAL JOKE.  All those members ONLY JOINED his forum to INDULGE THAT ATTACK ON MY GOOD NAME.  Never joined before.  Never seen since.  That little pack of dogs, the Pickles, and Mookies and Fuzzies.

SO MR MAG.  I suspect that your pointing your finger at the wrong person.  All you can accuse me of is that I tried to stay motivated NOTWITHSTANDING.  What I'm now trying to do, rather urgently - is to try and point out that POYNTY POINT seems to have a disproportionate need to discredit these results.  And you can put any spin on that which you prefer.  Personally I'm satisfied that there's an agenda.  But that's just my opinion.  It's rather born out though in that, somewhat against the traditions of good science - he now refuses to acknowledge the very results that his own simulations show.  Which is a joke.  Or it would be - if it were actually funny.  And meanwhile he - like so many of you - is also ACTIVELY encouraging REALLY expensive builds of Romero's device.  Probably because they all know that results here - unlike on our own device - will probably remain inconclusive - unhappily.  Another successful distraction.  So.  That way the members here will move away from working and proven technology and waste their time on yet more replications.

To me, there are more credible people telling me that you are wrong then there are agreeing with you.

Which only goes to show how successful is that agenda.     More's the pity.

The simple fact is this.  We - that is - the ENTIRE OU COMMUNITY - all those MANY who have worked - for countless hours - at untold expense - to generate and puzzle out the significance of that SPIKE - that ETERNAL EVIDENCE OF SOMETHING BACK FOR WHAT APPEARS TO BE AT NO COST FROM A SUPPLY  - when we, our small team of dedicated researchers here in SA - FINALLY - determine that that SPIKE IS TRULY MEANINGFUL - TRULY AMAZING - TRULY PROOF OF THE GENERATION OF ENERGY rather than the result of STORED ENERGY - THAT IT IS TRULY GREATER THAN UNITY - IN FACT THAT ALSO NOW MEASURES COP INFINITY - THAT IT CAN BE APPLIED IN JUST ABOUT ANY WAY AT ALL - AND THAT IT WILL ALWAYS ADVANCE CLEAN GREEN - when FINALLY - we manage to UNFOLD the ACTUAL PROOF - then you would, nonetheless - prefer to believe Poynty Point and his utterly pointless, utterly absurd, utterly unscientific equations?  Like I say.  More's the pity.  And JUST CONSIDER.  That's a tragedy in the making for Over Unity.  And how COMFORTABLY this falls in with that REQUIRED AGENDA.  May I suggest, with the utmost respect - that you too are DUPED.

Why haven't you run the circuit continuously for the last 6 months? Don't you think that it would be a way to prove your claim?

This is why.  We use a functions generator.  The setting on ALL THOSE GENERATORS are brittle. Either that or something in the experiment factors in.  The settings CHANGE.  For whatever reason - it then it develops SO MUCH ENERGY over the circuit apparatus that EVERYTHING COOKS and we've even had an occasion where the battery caught alight.  THEREFORE IT NEEDS CONSTANT MONITORING.  If it's run continuously - it would need to be monitored DAY AND NIGHT.  I do not have the energy to manage this.  I do not have the funds to pay for this continual monitoring.  BUT I AM ON RECORD.  IF THERE IS ANY SOLEMN UNDERTAKING BY THE SCIENTIFIC COMMUNITY THAT SUCH A RESULT WILL BE CONSIDERED UNEQUIVOCAL - THEN I WILL HAPPILY RUN THIS TO THE EXTENT OF THE BATTERIES'  WATT HOUR RATING.  But I'm NOT about to embark on that test UNLESS there's that undertaking.  Because my experience is that NOTHING - NO EVIDENCE WHATSOEVER - is going to cut it.  Unhappily.


Rosemary

[poynt99]

- he now refuses to acknowledge the very results that his own simulations show. 

Those that have followed my posts and the recent analysis I gave, know that the truth is quite the opposite.

In actual fact Rose, it is you that is refusing to acknowledge what the simulations show.

.99

[Rosemary Ainslie]

Those that have followed my posts and the recent analysis I gave, know that the truth is quite the opposite.

In actual fact Rose, it is you that is refusing to acknowledge what the simulations show.

.99

Truth or otherwise has nothing to do with this. Experiments can't lie.  Nor - for that matter can they 'tell the truth'.  It simply 'is what it is'.  What you've done is to so profoundly alter the bases of that experiment that it's no longer experimentally relevant.  And your subsequent analysis of that experiment has nothing to do with the evidence put forward either by ourselves or by you.  It has even less to do with standard measurement protocols and good scientific practice.  And it has absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with acceptable mathematical practices and protocols.  It's a romp in misinformation, muddled mathematics and sundry confusions. 

The 'lie' comes in when you try to pass yourself of as having sufficient knowledge to comment.  Because you clearly need a refresher course in power computations.  The only other thing that I can barely accept is that the members here are that ill informed that they also cannot see it for the nonsense that it is.  But I still depend on the caliber of those many readers of this thread Poynt.  I think the saying is that you can fool some of the people some of the time - something like that.  But that's when TRUTH really has the edge.  It survives abuse and it survives all that nonsense. And experimental evidence survives EVERYTHING.  That's always the final arbiter.

Rosemary 

[MrMag]

Rosemary, your first statement does sound a little delusional and idiotic. Just because threads are not moderated it doesn't mean he is out to get you. I think it is more of a " freedom of speech" thing. Do you know for a fact that he invited people there "only to discredit you"? I know there was a couple of guys there that might of got a little carried away but you have to understand that this is expected. As strong as you are for your thoughts of this circuit, you are going to have others who are far more against it. I do check into Poynt's forum 3 or 4 times a week and right now there is very little discussion of your circuit. I'm still trying to figure out if this is a good thing or not.

This forum and Poynt's forum are overunity forums. If you really think they are against a system that shows a COP of infinity, there is definitely something wrong. I really think he is only trying to point things out to you not discredit you but I can see from your point of view that it would look that way.

As far as your second statement goes, I am not a product of his agenda or duped. The only "Actual proof" that would convince me that your circuit has a COP of infinity is a continuous run to the watt hour rating. It's really too bad that you will not do the continuous run unless the "Scientific community" will accept it. You know this will never happen. Who is the scientific community and do you think that they would actually make a decision? They are comfortable in their little boxes and don't want anything to shake it up. Who I would want to prove this to is other OU researchers. If you did this test and there was no drop in the batteries watt hour rating, I wouldn't care what anyone said against the circuit. To me, and I'm sure a lot of others, that is the proof I'm looking for.

If you really want acceptance from the OU community, the only way you are going to get it is with a continuous run of the circuit. If I were you, I would find a way to do this because if you don't, I feel it will never be accepted.

I honestly do hope you are right and I give you credit for sticking with it so long. This does show your faith and belief in the circuits capabilities. Your next step is to convince us and you know what it will take. You just need to do it.

[Rosemary Ainslie]

No Mr Mag.  I am absolutely NOT interested in convincing you or, indeed, ANY members on the overunity forums.  I only post here because I can depend on those adverse and usually absurd objections and arguments to strengthen our own.  If I write for anyone at all it's for those silent and noncontributing readers. It's like all democracies.  We only ever hear from the noisy minority.   I would have to be delusional indeed to think that there's an ounce of courtesy, loyalty or integrity in the most of the members here - let alone the forum owners.  They, like you, are fickle and self-serving and pretend to authority that is absolutely not yours or theirs to own.  Very few exceptions to this.  Poynty knows NOTHING about power analysis - much less equations.  Stefan knows NOTHING about our circuit that he presumes to comment on.  Both ACTIVELY work against our evidence.  And why?  If, indeed, they want to promote clean green?  Because there's nothing cleaner or greener than the circuit that we've now reported on.

And DO NOT TELL ME TO DO THAT BATTERY TEST UNLESS YOU CAN ALSO TELL ME WHAT THE ADVANTAGES ARE.  Convincing you is certainly of NO advantage to me.  You'll endorse it today and then deny it tomorrow.  THAT'S how the members here work.

Rosemary