Rosemary Ainslie circuit demonstration on Saturday March 12th 2011

[Rosemary Ainslie]

No.

I admit I am losing patience with you and I prefer not to get into another arduous discussion that results in you still not understanding anything I am trying to convey.

.99

lol.  That's a cop out.  There's not too much wrong with my comprehension Poynty Point.  Try me.  Otherwise I take it as a cop out and you don't know the answer - which, unhappily, is what I suspect.

Kindest regards,
Rosie

[Rosemary Ainslie]

Guys - the sad truth is that when it gets down to that final question - how can the positive current flow find a path through either Q1 and/or Q2 during the oscillation phase - then we've actually got the the nub of the what's going on here.  No surprise that Poynty's begged off.  He can't answer it.  There's no explanation within standard thinking about the properties of current flow.  When they get to this point then everyone becomes horribly vague and fall into an excessive use of acronyms and muddled nonsense.  Because they have NO SENSIBLE ANSWERS.

I'd love to hear an explanation that fits mainstream concepts.  How about it Poynty Point.

Rosie

[WilbyInebriated]

your response doesn't address a single salient point from my post... imagine that.

After all these years I should know better than to respond to your post, as generally you seem to thrive on confrontation, so I'll give it one shot

Your defence of Rosie's work indicates that you believe that it actually works and she has achieved OU, is this blind faith in what she is telling you or have you actually done a practical test ?

what i have done and/or what i believe is irrelevant...  i know you don't thrive on logic, but i'll give it one shot.

You probably intend to answer this by attacking me and my level of knowledge in these matters and asking me why I have not done the test myself.
I generally find myself guided by others on the forum and over the years have come to trust the judgement (generally) of certainn members.
In this link Wilby you will recognise members from this forum they all failed to match that OU claim
http://www.youtube.com/results?search_type=videos&search_query=Rosemary+Ainslie+circuit&search_sort=video_date_uploaded&suggested_categories=28&uni=3

wrong. i'll leave the red herrings and strawman arguments to you guys... you excel at them. 
and as an aside, there was no OU claim... it was a COP>1 claim if i recall.

Over the years that I have  followed these threads of Rosie's I have hoped that successful replications were going to start appearing within a reasonable amount of time,  specially as Rosie comes across as being sincere and dedicated, 
unfortunately  after all these years there have been no successful replications of Rosie circuit by anyone here,
but of course we have not seen your replication Wilby, if I believe as strongly as you do that this circuit works as claimed I would have started replication a long time ago.

you don't have any idea what i "believe"... please refrain from making yourself look so asinine by positing such ignorant assumptions and conjectures.

I have a lot of respect for Rosie's dedication and I believe there has to be a way of making an OU device I just don't believe Rosie's device is it,  research yes  claiming OU no

great, grand, wonderful. you made your opinion more than known... on more than one occasion... we get it. will you shut up now?

It would be fantastic Wilby if you could show the members here how to make this circuit work as claimed.

catty

i'm no longer willing to demonstrate anything at this site. if you want reasons, look at my last posts in stiffler's thread... so dream on little pussycat.


added: and once again, why is it that science, and all these 'educated' (read as indoctrinated) people like pussycat, the dancing bear and poynty, etc, etc, ad infintum, ad nauseam still CANNOT tell me exactly how much 'juice' is in a battery...  that to me speaks volumes about their 'science' and its level of understanding.

if you have any more questions for me pussycat, please send me a pm instead of polluting threads with your irrelevancies... and next time you respond to one of my posts, please try to address the points i made with a cogent argument (if you know what one is...) instead of responding with irrelevant logical fallacies. thanks!

[powercat]

and as an aside, there was no OU claim... it was a COP>1 claim if i recall.

This one was worth responding to, the claim was COP 17 and COP Infinity amongst others made.

Only Stefan can tell me what to do on this forum, wow you remind me so much of Omnibus.

In this link Wilby you will recognise members from this forum they all failed to match that OU claim
http://www.youtube.com/results?search_type=videos&search_query=Rosemary+Ainslie+circuit&search_sort=video_date_uploaded&suggested_categories=28&uni=3

If you go through the pages on that link you will see the members from this forum, maybe you could explain to them what they did wrong,  but I guess you won't  that's a real shame,  it would really help if someone from this forum could have success with this circuit.

Now if you are not going to help then why bother posting support for Rosie's claims, you're the one with all the knowledge or so you insinuate.

pussycat

[WilbyInebriated]

This one was worth responding to, the claim was COP 17 and COP Infinity amongst others made.

yeah that's what i said... cop>1... if you could read and comprehend.
furthermore, i didn't "tell you what to do"... i made a couple requests of you, i even used the word please.

the rest of your post isn't even worth responding to, you are simply repeating the irrelevant garbage from your first fallacious reply to my post.