Testing the TK Tar Baby

[TinselKoala]

No poynty-head! Your method does NOT work and you have NO standard, accepted measurement method against which to verify your flawed technique.

On the contrary: .99 has researched his technique quite well and has published full descriptions of his methodology including comparisons with other methods. You are either tragically misinformed, or simply lying, like Ainslie does. If you do not think his method is valid IN SPITE OF THE VALIDATIONs that he and others have done, then it is up to YOU to provide evidence that it is not valid by showing that it gives incorrect results when used on a known system. You have not INVALIDATED his technique by doing this but more importantly you have NOT VALIDATED YOUR TECHNIQUE in any accepted manner at all.

You and TK should go get married ... you make the perfect couple.

As far as I am aware, .99 is a man, and so am I. I don't know about where YOU live, Gmeast, but same- s e x  marriages are not yet legal in Texas, and besides, he's much too young and handsome for me. So don't worry, Gmeast.... I won't interfere with your courting attempts. But I must admit: I am having trouble trying to figure out what a person's sexuality or preference or gender identification has to do with anything we are discussing here on this thread, except as an element of Ainslie's delusional system.... since SHE is the only one who has made any comments of that nature. But apparently you are also of the opinion that a person's sexual preferences determine whether or not they measure overunity on a switched mosfet.
Maybe YOU and AINSLIE should get married.... you make the perfect couple.

And TK, nothing you say merits a response in any form.

So you say, in your continual responses to me. Too bad your "form" is one of ad hominem argumentation and mud-slinging, rather than one of addressing the issues pointed out and, if you can, refuting them with facts and outside references and properly done demonstrations of your own. But you cannot, so you engage in the kinds of rhetoric that we see here, whining, insulting and abusive but never addressing the actual issues and points raised, like your double duty cycle mistakes and your false precision and utter reliance on numbers in boxes from digital instruments.

And poynty-head, what's your definition of acknowledging a mistake ... a 100 page dissertation recognizing YOU as the king of science and presented before Congress?

You could simply RE-WORK THE PROBLEM using your same input numbers and the correct computation and state the correct result. That would require a single post, shorter than many you've made lately. But you've not seen fit to do that, just as your mentor Ainslie has NEVER CORRECTED the egregious math errors that led her to hold her bogus conclusions in the first place. No, your "100 page dissertation" is something that YOUR EGO has manufactured, when all you really need to do to convince me and .99 that your understanding is now correct is to simply rework the same problem and correct your posted results. Simple, easy, and in fact it's been done FOR YOU several times.

Your ego is enormous!

And yet he and I both post under pseudonyms and need no official credit for our work. Ainslie though, and you, post under your real names, go back and edit and remove errors and mistakes to cover them up, and seek acknowledgement and reward from official sources for your "work" and your claims. That's "ego" for you. The points we make are factual and you cannot refute them so you descend into these ad-hominem arguments. That is a classic expression of an EGO DEFENSE MECHANISM and shows that you, GMEAST, GREG, are severely invested from an ego viewpoint in this project. I can simply walk away from it whenever I like and let you and Wilby have your trollfest insulting me, certain in the knowledge that you cannot and will not refute me with facts, and certain in the knowledge that you will eventually give up your wasted efforts and move on to something else. Who knows.... when you've accumulated as much experience with your Ainslie circuit variants as Fuzzy or .99 or I have with ours, you too might decide that Ainslie is a mendacious manipulator and that you have been a victim of that vampirish prevaricator as well. Go ahead and laugh then.

As I said before, I am having the last laugh, and so are some of the people following this thread and seeing how easy it is to get you two to waste so much time typing all of your babble. 

Really? Does it take a lot more time to TYPE this "babble"..... than it does to read it? But really.... are you admitting here that you are deliberately "getting" us to waste our time by punching our buttons? It certainly seems that way. Where is a corresponding post from any of us, deliberately insulting and trying to get a "rise" from YOU? Don't we always deal with specific points, with facts and references, with defenses against the libels that you and Ainslie sling at us? Isn't your admission rather a DEFINITION of trolling behaviour? Of course it is.

Do either of you have real jobs? Your buttons are SO EASY to push.

Personally, I'm semi-retired and I do spend a lot of time at the computer, doing various things. Often, while I'm processing an advanced astrophotograph on one desktop, I'll look in on a forum thread on another desktop and make a response. When I see a troll trying deliberately to "push my buttons" rather than engage in a real dialog by addressing the points made and either acknowledging them or refuting them.... then I have to agree:

This thread is not a scientific forum, it's a social forum of the worst defaming, character assassinating type.

And let's go back in the history to see who is the most egregious character assassin, liar, and defamer: it is Rosemary Ainslie, and I have a burgeoning database full of her insults, lies, attacks on character and so on to prove it. Who has threatened to reveal personal information, and has in fact done so? Who is so deluded and off-base that she even persists in insulting and attacking someone who probably isn't even aware that she exists? This thread in this forum has actually been called, by external observers, one of the best and most scientific explorations that has been seen here, and it would be a lot purer in that regard if YOU, Gmeast, and ROSEMARY AINSLIE, could actually discuss and address the actual points made and either refute them with facts and references or acknowledge their correctness. But that is not what happens. Just look back through the thread and compare/contrast. We point out errors and you lot come back with insults. We defend against the insults and support ALL of our counter-attacks with REFERENCES that show our correctness.

You both act as children pouting and stomping your feet because either you're not getting your way or someone is disagreeing with you view(s).  Misery loves company. It is comical entertainment at its best. Done.

But Gmeast.... it is YOU who are behaving like that, not us. YOU have been demonstrated objectively to be wrong in your approach, your measurements, your calculations, your conclusions, and your style of discussing, so it is YOU who are pouting (removing your data and posts), stomping your feet (editing away your errors without explanation, removing posts from other people, making posts like your latest ones here) and holding your breath until you are blue in the face (withholding data, refusing to support your methodology by verification, etc.) When someone disagrees with .99 or with me, they are welcome to refute us with facts and references, demonstrations and experiments. But they do not. However when WE disagree with YOU, we provide those things, over and over. My video channel on YT contains literally DOZENS of calmly reasoned, carefully constructed solid REFUTATIONS of various ridiculous claims that Ainslie has made concerning these circuits. All that you and she have presented in return is.... foot stomping and pouting and insults, like you've done above.

Comical entertainment at best? Right, and you are the comedian.
But when Ainslie decides to attempt publication of papers filled with lies and misrepresentations and bad measurements, and applies for three different monetary awards based on her mendacious and discredited and disPROVEN claims, then it's actually not comedy any more, it's attempted fraud, and scientific (or in this case pseudoscientific) misconduct of a serious nature. And you are participating in that fraud by perpetrating her errors and faulty conclusions based on them.

[Magluvin]

WilbyInebriated,


Thank you. Regards,


Greg

Hey GM

Here you are thanking the devil himself.  He comes to her aid very well knowing that her circuit(s) do not produce the results she claims. He is all about the lies she produces, the negativity and flying spaghetti monsters. Read some of his post in the "probality of God" thread.  Theres some comic relief for ya.

What is funny is Rose implies the help of God many times. Yet her verbiage and intent comes from quite a lower level.  Wilby defends her, and never comes down on her for using God in her posts. The reason why is he knows that she just 'uses' Gods name to further her lies and deceit. Join the club?

Go ahead an look in that thread to see what the great Wilbert posts when someone even mentions God in a positive way.  Just simply nashing. Yet Rose the liar gets a free pass. Because he knows she is just using Gods name for cover of her evil doings.

From your posts, I see you have learned a lot from Rose. Soon you will be just meat with eyes as she loads you up with fallacy.

You use her same attacks without actual cause, so you must be a believer in all she says.

Your posts here. What is the purpose of them?  Calling names? Trying to make these guys look bad?

I used to be in your shoes, as I said before. You are ignoring the 'truth' and falling for lies and detriment.

Instead of coming over and proving that Poynts methods are wrong, you just come for name calling and silliness.  You have no grounds for any of it other than you following Rose down a path of foolishness.

One day hopefully you will figure it out. Hopefully. ;]


Mags

[powercat]

I think a Rosemary circuit must be transmitting a waveform that induces delusional
behavior in susceptible people that suffer from an acute lack of common sense.

There seems to be no other rational reason for anyone to believe Rosemary circuit
can do what she claims, given the last 10 years of overwhelming evidence against it.

[TinselKoala]

Wait until Gmeast receives this promised email list of all of my and .99's "errors". I wonder if he'll have to wait as long as I've been waiting for the promised transcripts and refutations of my videos, or as long as we've been waiting for her to refute us by reproducing those scopeshots showing the blown or miswired mosfets.

Meanwhile, the deluded idiot continues her libels against "poor little" Bryan Little, in her continuing fantasy that she has figured out who I am. When she discovers, finally, that she has been utterly and foolishly wrong about this, all this time, from the very first time she ever called me "little".... I expect her to simply brush it under the rug like she always does when she's been proven wrong about various absurd things she's said. Like the equinox (or solstice) coming in July, for example, or "PER" not indicating division, or "no such animal" as inductive reactance, or a dozen other absurdities from Ainslie.

Like the present case where she accuses me, or Bryan, or someone, of "seriously proposed to calculate energy without any reference to frequency", and where she accuses .99 of claiming a battery can "deliver a negative current". This, coming from a person who failed math in grade school and doesn't even know or understand what the "dt" in her vaunted "VI dt" parroting actually means.  Where are the references for these ridiculous claims that Ainslie makes against us? They do not exist, because she doesn't even understand what she's talking about and continually gets her concepts and terms muddled.  The problem is that she then draws conclusions based on her false, muddled misconceptions and misquotes, and when the misconceptions are corrected.... the conclusions aren't. In short, Ainslie is a liar, a fool, and an arrogant idiot, and her forum is full of posts like the one below that PROVE beyond doubt, in her own words, that what I say here is true.

[gmeast]

Hi all,


Thanks for the attention.  Admittedly, my variation on Rosie's circuit does not, or perhaps can not operate at COP>17 (or whatever).  As I have admitted, I got very caught up in the excitement of it all and made some analytical errors, but you can't let it go at that.  Fine, that's your problem.  Rosie won't share her current evidence or test results with me supporting COP>1. So I'm not on her 'inner circle' or on her 'team' like you all might think.  I have only what I'm presently testing and I'm encouraged by what I personally see, not by what I'm told.  And that means I'm beholding to NO ONE.  It is so easy to clump together like you guys do and argue why something 'won't or can't work'.  That is a far easier cowardly task than exploring why something 'will or can work'.


My enthusiasm for this has not diminished in the least. 


Question: Why are you guys NOT attacking every other OU endeavor  presented on the many forums here on overunity.com?


Oh ... and YES, those delusional energy waves given off by my circuit are quite addicting. That's why I enjoy working on it so much.


Regards