Testing the TK Tar Baby

[WilbyInebriated]

So you are either crazy or you are a fifth column psyops operation run by the government and Big Oil to discredit all free energy research.  ha ha ha

another logical fallacy from milelow...   hey troll... see 'false dilemma' and educate yourself.

and quit trying to continually drag this thread off topic with your asinine logically fallacious accusations... idiot.

[MileHigh]

Wilby:

How about you quit trying to make other people miserable and unhappy as you slop and slosh your way around this web site looking for people to intimidate and play your silly games in logic with and show us that you know some phrases in Latin?  You have some weird psychological compulsion?  Can't you switch that compulsion over to basket weaving or something?

Making you unhappy makes Wilby happy.  He is the ultimate one-monster web site party pooper.

[picowatt]

Sorry Guys.  I meant to post a link.     Here it is
As this is still very topical I'm re-posting this...

http://newlightondarkenergy.blogspot.com/2012/02/261-much-needed.html

Regards,
Rosemary

Quote from link:

..."an oscillation that defies any known explanation within the standard model."

[TinselKoala]

Quote from link:

..."an oscillation that defies any known explanation within the standard model."

That's one of the three perpetual standard lies from Ainslie.

1. She claims things like the above: "No known explanation within the standard model." This is absurd because in the first place she has no idea what the Standard Model of electronics physics really is: QED, Quantum electrodynamics, embodied in the full expression of Maxwell's Equations and other formalisations that Ainslie simply does not have the prerequisites to grasp, much less discuss coherently. Her absurd statement about the oscillations is refuted by her own data, the experience of many years of circuit designers who understand them perfectly well and know how to avoid them or produce them on demand, and even simulator programs which use nothing other than the "standard model" of physics and electronic components to make the same... ordinary.... feedback oscillations.

2. She claims repeatedly to use "Standard Measurement Protocols" when she does not, and apparently has no idea how to do so. Standard measurement protocols, for just one example, recognize the need for filtering noise out of measurements, whether systematic noise like Ainslie's or random noise like a scratchy pot makes. Standard measurement protocols to track time temperature profiles of a resistive load for the purposes of energy calculations would never just hang the load in ambient air and measure the temperature "over" it.
And standard measurement protocols do not include cherry-picking data, ill-formed hypotheses, and concealed and altered data. Again, she refuses to learn just how NOT standard her "protocols" are, nor to correct them and actually use industry-standard power and batttery measurement protocols like the various IEEE and NIST standard publications describe in detail, even though these have been pointed out to her many times.

3. And last but not least.... "DO THE MATH".  Every time she utters that little catchphrase it has been followed by the most incredibly ignorant and ridiculously absurd "calculations" or claims based on such. She has the arrogance and temerity to tell Hard Scientists and Electrical Engineers to DO THE MATH.... when they have all of them suffered through mathematics classroom and home study for YEARS, including, for many of us, two or more years of Calculus, Differential Equations, and practical engineering mathematics, solving dozens of difficult problems, and being evaluated on them, every week for years of schooling. And also using the simpler of these calculations in our daily work and home life. Ainslie cannot even punch the right buttons on her calculator, does no checking or alternate solution methods, only seems multiply things together, neglects units and dimensional analysis (doesn't even grasp the meaning or importance of it, in spite of Groundloop's excellent example) and almost always gets the answer wrong, even if the equation itself might be correct. But usually it isn't....

Correctly it is one Joule per second - but since 1 watt = 1 Joule and since 1 Joule = 1 watt per second - then AS I'VE EXPLAINED EARLIER - the terms are INTERCHANGEABLE.  Which is ALSO explained in WIKI.

The three Standard Lies of Rosemary Ainslie, the queen of disinformation, clearly a well-paid propagandist seeking to discredit the entire Free Energy research community.

[TinselKoala]

@.99:

As far as I can determine, you were the first to notice and poynt out the backwards Gang of Four Q2s, in April of last year, over three weeks after the video demo was released.

I'd like to know the story... what prompted you to look so closely at the video, to be able to analyse the actual schematic in use?

The discussions up to that point in the thread -- and the sim efforts of yourself and humbugger/cheeseburger -- were based on the 5 mosfets being in strict parallel. Ainslie was an active participant in those discussions.

But when you poynted it out in the forum, Ainslie's response was apparently that she knew it all along, and that she was testing you somehow to see if you would "pick up on it".

Clearly, this statement of hers, IF TRUE, indicates egregious scientific and just plain misconduct and mendacity, to engage in deliberate discussions about a known _majorly_ incorrect schematic. And on the other hand... IF the statement that she knew about it all along is FALSE... well, then, a false statement is called a LIE in the Northern Hemisphere of Earth.

I've posted the image of her statement made in the old thread along with humbugger's comment about it, so the interested reader can decide: Three or more weeks of blatant scientific misconduct, OR... a simple outright lie, yet again, from Ainslie?

But still... I'd like to know exactly what prompted .99 to look so closely at the video, at that late date after she posted it.