Testing the TK Tar Baby

[Rosemary Ainslie]

Hi there,

it is not my party, but since this is an official forum, I want to state my opinion.

As a newbie in this forum I am really surprised and a little bit shocked about the fact, that obviously some people (hero members!) are fighting war against each other (I guess you know whom I talking about).

This is not free energy, it is the opposite -> LOST energy    From the technical discussions inbetween the "war in words" I assume that you are brilliant engineers/scientists. Why don't you put all "your energy" into the tremendously interesting topic of this thread? Stop fighting, and if not, exchange email adresses and do it there.

Peace (also to you) 
Kurt

Dear Kurt,
I've answered you here...
http://www.energy-shiftingparadigms.com/index.php/topic,2311.msg2615.html#msg2615

[SeaMonkey]

Please understand that I do not defend anybody's standpoint here. I am certainly not qualified enough to enter this technical discussion in this super-long thread. But I went through most of it and found it very interesting, but it's becoming quite tidious to sort out the highlights from the rest of your battle.

Again, for me it's not about he or she is ultimately right, it's about living in peace with Each other and make this world a better place. Free Energy is of great importance, but consciousness will be required as well to make the right use of it.

Peace,
Kurt

Well said Kurt.  Your heart is definitely in the right place.

Unfortunately (and sadly) those who are addicted to
mischief and the "high" it is able to generate will
find it very, very difficult to relinquish such behavior.
Or even to admit that there is any mischief going
on.

But then, (on the brighter side) not all is as it seems.
Often what appears to be mischief is simply crude
sounding hyperbole among friends.

Let us all be hopeful...

[TinselKoala]

Think about it.

If Ainslie's device was made of some unusual parts or substance, or was put together in some not-well-understood manner or with uncommon tooling, or needed special environmental conditions to work.... that would be one thing.

A laboratory trying to understand such a device might NOT be able to "replicate" or reproduce it or its behaviour easily. They might try, get something that looks close.. but just isn't right somehow since it doesn't do what the claimant claims. So THEN there IS a reason for an interested lab to want  to examine the ORIGINAL DEVICE, since there "must" be something special about IT in particular that is important for success.

However.... IN THIS CASE..... the device in question is made from thirty dollars worth of COMMONLY AVAILABLE well understood electronic components and an RV water heater element, and is assembled with all the skill and technique that an eight-year-old mind can muster. It can be built from OFF THE SHELF PARTS in an afternoon, and all the parts can be delivered to your location ANYWHERE IN THE NORTHERN HEMISPHERE inside of three days from placing the order from DigiKey. And all the various schematics we are assured were used are available.

Yet this laboratory NEEDED TO SEE AINSLIE's ORIGINAL APPARATUS. Why? It can ONLY be because they tried to build their own-- costing less than the POSTAGE to send Ainslie's halfway around the world.... and IT DID NOT WORK as advertised. So they, in good faith, needed to see Ainslie's itself to see what the Special Sauce could have been. (I've told them it's the pegboard, but nobody listens to me).
And now that they have seen and "tested" it.... yep, they discover that identical apparatus tested the same way give the same results. Duh, let's apply for the Nobel Prize now.

So they tested, and confirmed BOTH Ainslie's numbers AND.... that the battery charge was depleting, NOT staying constant or recharging.

(In other words they DISCONFIRMED and FALSIFIED Ainslie's main claim, right there, and CONFIRMED what the rest of us have been saying all along: the NUMBERS can be easily obtained, and do NOT indicate what Ainslie claims, since THE BATTERIES DO DISCHARGE. The laboratory has ALREADY falsified Ainslie's claim... BECAUSE THE BATTERIES DO DISCHARGE.)

Under those conditions.... what possible reason would they have to send THEIR OWN EQUIPMENT AND COMPONENTS to South Africa to be used BY AINSLIE... someone who cannot even draw a schematic diagram properly (documented), and who cannot even FIND THE KNOB to make her FG produce an offset sometimes (documented), and who blew up two batteries and a bunch of mosfets by SHORT CIRCUITING THROUGH AN INSTRUMENT GROUNDLOOP, requiring replacing the FG and sending the scope off for repair (all documented) ...... Yes, these scientists are sending their stuff half way around the world so it can be used by Ainslie in a demonstration... of what?

We already know that the numbers can be obtained, and how. We already KNOW that the batteries are discharging.

The only thing that remains to be demonstrated PUBLICLY is that the device does not work as she claims. And the only person who NEEDS that demonstration is Ainslie herself.

And now we are told.. AGAIN... that there won't be a report.

DO THE MATH...... one conclusion just sort of LEAPS out at one, doesn't it. And other conclusions are much much more far-fetched.

[Rosemary Ainslie]

Sorry.  I see I made a duplicate post.

R

[Rosemary Ainslie]

My dear Little TK

WHY would I lie about this?  I just DON'T  GET IT?  I'm not trying to con anyone out of their money.  So WHY?  And what about my colleagues - those collaborators - all us free energy nuts?  IF I was lying then they'd know all about it.  Surely?  They visit me.  They know the house.  They know when the apparatus is here.  And they CERTAINLY see when it's not?  Do I HIDE IT?  Somewhere?  So that they just THINK that I've sent it.  And then?  What about the free circulation of our emails that I copy them?  Even to members of this forum?  I wouldn't know HOW to fabricate that.  All those contactable numbers - those referenced names? 

AGAIN.  WHY WOULD I LIE?  I am simply reporting on the good news that our apparatus is now getting the attention that it so richly deserves.  It's good news for most of us.  It's just you and your colleagues here who are rather distressed at these new developments. Quite honestly you attribute me with considerably more inventiveness than I'm capable of - I assure you. 

Rosie Pose

And by the way - the reason they gave me for needing that equipment is that they need to evaluate a claim against a demonstration BEFORE they invest.  They're in America.  It's cheaper to get that demonstration to them than to get 3 scientists to Africa to a demonstration.  Surely that's not difficult to wrap your mind around?  To me it seems like a reasonable proposal and  it certainly has financial merit.
R

And another little addendum.  They're well aware of your thread.  They think it's despicable.  NOT ONLY THAT - but they could see that your arguments against this are SPURIOUS.  You can't claim a measured COP infinity and then PRETEND THAT IT MEANS NOTHING.  UNLESS OF COURSE YOU'RE A FOOL.  OR.  UNLESS YOU THINK THAT EVERYONE ON THIS FORUM IS A FOOL.

And here's a download of the apparatus just unpacked - that they sent me...