Claimed OU circuit of Rosemary Ainslie

[TinselKoala]

I wonder if you know any more about this Physics than you do about Lawrence Tseung's
Physics.

What is pathetic is that you do not care to learn.

Teach me then, PaulR.

Show me what you've got.

Build a device using Tseung's "theory" and show it doing something, anything at all, that is not fully in line with conventional high-school physics.

Build the circuit under discussion here, test it however the flmp you like, and report your results.

In other words, put YOUR WORK where your mouth is.


(Oh, and by the way, there is only one "Physics", and it does not belong to anyone. It's testable and its results are public and may be repeated any time by anybody who has the right tools and the knowledge to use them. Mathematics being the primary tool.)

[TinselKoala]

And just see what a dangerous thing the TRUTH is:

http://www.energeticforum.com/renewable-energy/4314-cop-17-heater-rosemary-ainslie-16.html#post60054

[ramset]

At this point everyone at energetic is quite aware THERE IS A PROBLEM.

So now its playtime [fun for some]
Hopefully they will utilize some of Aarons parallel coil stuff or the tensor flat coil stuff In Stiffler's Thread [VERY interesting things being discussed the last few days][especially from the penguin fellow]

Here http://www.energeticforum.com/renewable-energy/3934-high-voltage-thin-air-26.html

Perhaps now the stops can be pulled out on a lot of these Ideas/facts?

Chet

[poynt99]

I have not been approved over at energetiforum, otherwise I would likely respond to some posts in the Ainslie thread and Gotoluc's bemf recirculating thread.

.99

[TinselKoala]

I have not been approved over at energetiforum, otherwise I would likely respond to some posts in the Ainslie thread and Gotoluc's bemf recirculating thread.

.99

They say you are approved now.

You will have to carry the banner of truth and accuracy of information; I have been banned and my posts removed (the recent ones anyway). And I used no profanity, no insults, I just asked questions, pointed out discrepancies, and provided true information.

In my opinion, the fact that that forum's moderators will actively censor posts and remove them, even though they are not abusive or obscene, even though they are reporting on experiments that Ainslie requested, is a travesty of the entire concepts of truth, freedom of information, open-sourcing, and so forth. The site, which seems to be at root a religious one, is clearly fascistic and totalitarian in what it will allow to be discussed.

Not like this one at all.

Thanks, Stefan, for allowing contrary opinions and facts to flourish, and to be subject to the same tests as other extraordinary claims.

Skeptics perform a very necessary role in the quest. Some are more credible than others, just like the researchers they criticize. But a real discovery is skeptic-proof, and the harder skeptics try to knock it down, and fail, the "realer" the discovery. And the real researcher welcomes the challenge to attempt to disprove her ideas; indeed, cooperates with it. Most scientific papers reporting experiments include substantial error analyses, references to published support for ideas in the paper, and so forth, and on review, if the reviewers ask for the raw data, it almost always is provided. Certainly, references to calibration and other vetting must be real and traceable, if it is to be taken seriously.