another small breakthrough on our NERD technology.

[Magluvin]

Oh yea, to the 3 readers of this thread, get a life. 49300+ reads of 54 pages?

913 reads per page on average.  man, those 3, shame on them 3.  Pitiful.

3 readers. Who is doing that math?  Yes, math. Its a numbers thing. ;]

Mags

[Rosemary Ainslie]

Rosemary, are you ever going to understand what's going on around you? No, I was not making any statement in reference to THIS thread. My comment was in reference to supporting FE research in general, which I DO. RTFP.

Magluvin carelessly saw fit to take a comment I made (which he misunderstood) out of context and post it here with mal-intent. So I had to respond HERE...get it?

LOL.  Poynty Point?  Are you ANGRY?  That Mag's did some much needed whistle blowing?  That he tried to aerate your rather dubious agenda?  I'm not sure what RTFP stands for.  Possibly 'Righteous Tantrums from Poynty Point'?  Or 'Read This First Please?' or "Right This For Pete's Sake'?  Actually that would be RTFPS.  So... Maybe - 'Rally The Fools Please'?  or 'Round The First Product'?  The options are endless. 'Reality the First Prize?  No idea.  That's my best shot.  So.  In answer I'd say RTFQ - which stands for 'REFERENCE THE FIRST QUESTION'.  WHY OH WHY - Poynty Point are you ALWAYS on the wrong side of over unity?      

And if mal-intent - as you put it - AKA - gratuitous 'hate speech' - AKA - 'trolling' - is enough reason to INSTRUCT Harti to 'remove a post' - then I think this particular thread would be 'thread bare'.  LOL.  It is comforting to learn that - contrary to all evidence - you actually support FE research.  I'd love to know on what grounds.  I, personally, don't think there's any such thing.  But that's probably because I've not been trained in a 'standard school'.  Actually I don't think I can claim to be trained in anything at all.  Except maybe Contract Bridge.  But that's because one knows the rules of the game.  You have no rules - liberated as you are - by your anonymity.  Which makes it very easy for you to traduce the likes of Bedini - and, dare I put myself in the same category? - even little old me.   

It is some small comfort that you reserve your unreserved 'spite' to blogs that are NOT on public display.  Would that you would show the same circumspection related to my hate blog.    All that MALICE?

BTW (by the way) I'm well aware of why it is you posted on this thread.  It just struck me as being rather ironic that you'd be obliged to defend your over unity interests here.  Which is all that I was trying to reference.  In the light of all those posts of yours Poynty?  I don't think that any readers here would be confused by your actual interests.  And they're patently NOT on the side of over unity.  LOL

Always and ever,
Rosie Posie.

[Rosemary Ainslie]

Actually Poynty - IF you want to prove the lie - IF you want to assure us all that you are INDEED seriously researching over unity as claimed in your blog title - OUR.COM - then here's an easy answer.  Get one of those academics who are 'astonished' at your treatise related to the delivery of a negative current flow from a battery supply source - and ask them to adjudicate a small test that Magsy suggested we run.  I'm game.  Boots and All.  Even if it leaves me rather impoverished.  I'll run that test gladly.  And that way we'll all KNOW you as a serious researcher in this particular field.  If it's doable - I solemnly undertake to make that ENTIRE TEST viewable - on line - for the duration.  That way we can all 'check the results'.  How about it Poynty Point?  And Professor Jones?

Again, and always,
Rosie

[Rosemary Ainslie]

Magsy.  What can I say?  As ever - I'm in awe of your 'integrity'.  Would that we could ALL follow in your footsteps.

I've long given up trying to understand Harti's motives.  His is the ONLY forum that tolerates our claims or even Rossi's claims.  Not that our claims are even in the same league.  But. In their own way - I'm of the opinion that they're likely to be considerably more significant.  But, as ever, that's ONLY my opinion.  The other thing is that Harti - like so many of you - are looking to find this energy in a motorised application.  I'm not in a position to comment.  I believe we may know a way of configuring this.  But it most certainly is NOT in line with any of the configs I've seen on these forums.  Not by Bedini.  Not by anyone.  And Harti's insistence that we're dealing with measurement errors is alarming.  He's basing this on the assumption that we're claiming overunity results and therefore need to prove it.  We're very specifically NOT claiming over unity.  We're alerting our academics to an apparent breach of unity resulting from standard measurement protocols.  The distinction is subtle. Surely you see this?  And then we also need to resolve the fact that there's that positive half of each oscillation.  These points may seem irrelevant.  But they're not.  They're both HUGELY significant.

Please try and get your mind around this Mags.  If our standard measurement protocols have omitted an entirely unused 'source of energy' - or IF counter electromotive force - is REGENERATIVE and NOT simply the result of 'stored energy' - then we're into a NEW AND EXCITING BALLPARK.  And that's what our measurements point to.  In other words - CHECK OUT THE NUMBERS.  They're somewhat UNUSUAL - to put it mildly. 

But either way - if Harti HAS got the right to alter our CLAIM - then, or EVEN THEN - I'm in there - boots and all.  Just make it worth our while.  I'm not about to live my life against the RUDE DEMANDS of all and sundry to PERFORM AS THEY REQUIRE.  What am I?  A servant?  And I'm also rather tired of everyone's reliance on their assumption of my stupidity.  I actually DO SEE that they're all simply sending us on a goose chase to do a whole lot of work that WILL STILL BE DEBATED.   We need to use OPEN SOURCE to better effect.  Right now it's just a parade of ego and nonsense.  And it's refreshing to see that there are those such as you and eatenbyagrue and a few others - that actually are looking for the evidence - beyond all that posturing.  I am too.  I want to do that final test.  But not for my own satisfaction.  For the benefit of over unity.  That's way more important.  And that satisfaction RESTS ON AN EVALUATION BY OUR ACADEMICS.  Right now they won't even engage.

Kindest regards,

Rosie

added

[Rosemary Ainslie]

My dear Tinsel Koala,

When you start answering my questions then I'll start answering yours.  Meanwhile I take it that you're about to show us that we can do without the batteries and just use the function generator to generate that oscillation.  Very intriguing.  We can't seem to manage that trick.  But, if it helps at all - I'll take your word for it.

LOL

From you admirer,
Rosie Posie


BTW - do you still sport a moustache? I do hope so.  I've used this to identify you amongst some personalities I'm using in a story book for my grandchildren.  I'm hoping this will be accurate enough for you to sue me.  You'll love the story line.  I'll let you know when I eventually publish it.