Claimed OU circuit of Rosemary Ainslie

[fuzzytomcat]

Glen,

If you recall, some time ago I informed the group that I invited David to the EF topic before I was pressured into leaving, and expectantly, he did not join in. I doubt very much he would be interested in joining the discussion here either, so I have not even bothered him with this request. So addressing him here will not likely elicit a response from David.

I am curious what Lisa Bieker's background and technical know-how is in terms of being able to provide the detailed technical support and recommendations as David does on a daily basis as a technical support engineer? I am not insinuating Lisa is not qualified, but it should not be assumed either. A Product Marketing Manager is not necessarily someone that has the technical expertise of an experienced electrical engineer specializing in measurement.

You are obviously curious (and perhaps doubtful I even sent one?) what I asked David, so here are my emails to him so far:

So, as you can see, I gave him information on your tests and my own as well. The discussion is on-going, and he is out of the office today.

.99

Hi .99

The posting of mine was a copy of a e-mail sent to David McDonald and I also sent as a "CC" to Lisa Bieker the "Product Marketing" manager at the Beaverton, Oregon campus, whom has assured us after talking to Engineers at the USA and European Divisions of Tektronix's Corporation about this circuit or device, including the application of the TDS 3054C with the standard P6139A probes and its capabilities of measurements we require for data collection.

Fuzzy

[poynt99]

Glen,

That was not so PC 

David is not likely going to come here or go to EF to check out your links and test data. Please be respectful of the service folks like him provide, and keep the contact professional. Please also be respectful of the fact that he and I are having a technical discussion, and it is my choice if I decide to post any of it, and what has been posted should be appreciated, not abused.

Infringing on my contact with David and underhandedly putting him up against Lisa as you have done is also not professional. This may have seriously jeopardized his desire for any further advice or contact on the subject. Nice going.

.99

[Rosemary Ainslie]

Glen,

That was not so PC 

David is not likely going to come here or go to EF to check out your links and test data. Please be respectful of the service folks like him provide, and keep the contact professional. Please also be respectful of the fact that he and I are having a technical discussion, and it is my choice if I decide to post any of it, and what has been posted should be appreciated, not abused.

Infringing on my contact with David and underhandedly putting him up against Lisa as you have done is also not professional. This may have also seriously jeopardized his desire for any further advice or contact on the subject. Nice going.

.99

Poynt - YOU talk about what is politically correct?  And you have the added temerity of suggesting that your edited posts should be 'appreciated' and not 'abused'.  Golly.   

These last few posts are somewhat cryptic and, for those who are not cognisant of what has transpired both off and on forum - let me see if I can do a quick overview.

Some time back Poynt contacted Aethertech which is the technical arm of Tektronix - to solicit the participation of one of their representatives on one of our threads.  The contact was made by him under a certain name and in association with a certain law enforcement group that I have solemnly undertaken not to reveal.  That first contact also asked for comment on the 'negative dominant waveform' that had been recorded by Aaron at Energetic Forum.  You will recall that we were accessing the information from our TDS.  That he contacted Aethertech was intended to strain the relationship between Tektronix and ourselves.  The negative dominant claim is associated with some anomalous results that confronted classical predictions and, traditionally mainstream will disassociate itself from any such.  Poynt was expecting complete endorsement and some added muscle to his own attack against us.  Dave, in turn replied.

Poynt posted Dave's replies - in two stages.  Firstly he posted the considered evaluation concluding with the possible need to run a calibration programme.  Then he posted Dave's conclusion saying that such data would - indeed - be intriguing in the event that it persisted.  As Poynty had already disclosed his intention to invite David onto the forum and into the argument - and since this never transpired - then we also concludeded that David had declined to enter into the forum discussion.

Then Poynt saw need to delete his posts relating to this discussion with Dave.  And, immediately thereafter came an elaborate attempt to advise me, by personal message - that he had never heard of Aethertech.  Although I had NEVER even mentioned the matter in writing he proposed that I had possibly confused any such reference to his own discussion with aethertech - the co-incidental and arbitrary name used by one of our contributors.   My suspicions were alerted precisely because I hadn't given any further thought to his posts.  But,  as a result of those deletions Poynt was then banned from Energetic Forum.  The need to delete the posts were clearly required to 'cover his tracks' and the questions are still out there as to why he needed to cover his tracks at all?

His next attack on our team was based on the use of the probes - again as a last ditch effort to discredit the data that our team had collated.  Now and again using the well worn tools of aspersion and implication - the claim was that any data collected from any probe other than a differential probe or, alternatively, a current probe - would be considered erroneous.  To do this he posted a slew of technical information relating to the use of the differential probe - and to those that missed this - the use of the differential probe is to get values that are driven at frequencies that are way in excess of any that we are generating on our cicuit.  That was the only point at which our circuit may - indeed - have required such a component.

As recently as post 2552 he stated 'I have pointed out the need for a higher level of measurement standard based on my own results and the results of the data presented by the Ainslie team - which obviously and clearly by anyone's standards are not useable.'  (The emphasis is my own).  This then followed by the following pejorative statement

"I pointed out the weakness in your arguments with real substantiation.  I leave it to the audience to judge for themselves the level of your "expertise". The fact that you choose to continue touting the errors tht you do is your prerogative (I assume he meant perogative), but expect them to be questioned if and when they are made.  I have yet to see the substantiation of these erroneous statements."

That is as good as stating that the tests results are not only defective but that we are touting them in the full knowledge of their error.  This was then followed excessive gratitude offered for the typical endorsements from various contributors including Grumpy and ION.  And this - in the wild hopes that 2 such references would also give the general impression of a wider representation of those in the audience who accepted all such aspersions, cast with such reckless abandon, at the integrity of our experimentalists.

But here's the hell of it.  Let me remind our readers.  Firstly Poynty has never posted unedited data.  Secodly he has employed such extraordinary levels of deceptions that his credibility is now entirely at question.  He is now flying off at three or more tangents - simultaneously losing his poynt as he does so.  I have it in writing - barely 1 week old - that he has never heard of Aethertech.  This is curious as we are all now aware of his having contacted them and even who he contacted and when.  Does he suffer from long term memory lapse?  Then we were promised a dissertation from a representative at Tektronix which would explain why our data is erroneous.  We're still waiting.

Since we all know who we're referring to and why - POYNTY POYNT - get something in writing from a measurements expert to discount the validity of our data - or alternatively disclose your real name and show us whether you are qualified to comment here at all.  Alternatively  change your argument or get out of the argument.  Personally I am satisfied that, yet again, Fuzzy has tied you up in knots. 

edit  spelling

[poynt99]

Wow Rose,

I truly am impressed with your ability to spin a false story.

A sign of desperation I suppose. Pity 

btw, aethertech is a user here at the forum. I do not know where he works, nor do I know his real name. HE PM'd me first here at OU as a positive gesture towards helping me out with a few suggestions, such as the filtered shunt. I think you jumped to several disconnected conclusions about him and my relationship to him. Remember the desperate PM you sent me about his contact information? I truly believe you are sadly mistaken and very confused about what's transpired over the last several weeks. Here is your PM to me in case you have misplaced it:

Poynt  Very URGENT.  Please forward me the phone number for aethertech   I've lost this and I need to reach them urgently to set up a full on 'live test' that everyone can get into 'live'.  What fun

In one Skype text chat you and I had, you mentioned that you had spoke to aethertech, so next time I contacted him via PM, he responded with the following:

Poynt,

Was away for a while (some business, some "fun in the sun").  I have not been able to catch up on the whole RA thread, but it looks like it is coming to an end.

As far as discussion with RA, that never happened.  No voice, no email, nada, nothing.  So either a false claim was made, or someone contacted her appearing to be me.  I'll have to dig thru the thread to find those claims.

I see Aaron has drifted into the background noise, and what of his equivalent heat battery run down time tests and extended use of the Tek?   Did any of that happen while I was gone?

I see you have done a lot of testing, and continue to have to defend the simplest (yet complex!) of issues, such as the inductance of a straight wire...

Good to hear from you,
aethertech

When I PM'd you with a message saying aethertech had never ever been in contact with you, you replied:

Don't know what or who you're referring to here.  I spoke to two different people at Aethertech during 1 conversation - per telephone and subsequent to your own application to them.  There's record on my phone account and there's some other reference to this conversation.  I think on Email?  I'll have to check.  You printed the email reply you got from ?  Can't recall his name off hand.  Not sure if that's who I spoke to - but I definitely spoke to a guy and a woman - and in conference. 

But I'm not sure that I need to establish this for your benefit.  And I'm not sure why you're asking the question?  Is is related to the disclosure of your name?  Your work?  I don't think your name was given if your name is what you told me.  It was another name altogether and I'm not about to reference that either.  it's likely that most of these communiques are open to inspection by our hackers.

Not sure of your concern here Poynty?  As far as I'm concerned the matter's closed.  But if you're checking on my representations - as always - I'm willing to give proof.  I find it a bit insulting.  But am happy to oblige.  Also I'm just not getting to understand your concerns.  Are you worried that I'll disclose your name on the forum?  I would never do so.  Not ever.

I expressed the following in a PM to you:

Rose,

Perhaps I am confusing the forum user named "aethertech" with whomever your "Aethertech" is. I assumed it is one and the same person.

aethertech is someone that contacted me on the forum some time ago and suggested the power supply add-on in order to help make power measurements easier. I posted his suggestion and gave him credit for this at least twice.

Remember, it was you that was asking me for aethertech's phone number, so that is how I made the association between the aethertech I know, and the one you mentioned. If this is not the same person, then please advise.

Again, only you would know if this was the same person, but now I doubt it is. I've not heard of Aethertech. Do they have a website? What do they do?

.99

I think you're confused, and hopefully the PM's speak for themselves.

Also, you've fabricated so much in that last post of yours, I wouldn't even know where to start, nor do I even wish to. Gosh, talk about ad hom.

And for the record, I didn't delete any of my posts, neither here, nor at EF. If there are any deleted posts at EF, they were deleted by one of the administrators, not me.

.99

[Grumpy]

Wow! We sure have a delusional bunch of peeps here, don't we?

My post are merely to detract from the ridiculous rantings on this thread, which is approaching 300 pages with nothing gained.  Hence the images of pissing into the wind.  Which sums up this whole exercise in futility.

Small amounts of what appears to be excess energy occur all the time.  Whoop-dee-doo.  Say you are hot shit and you're getting 2 watts out for every 1 watt in.  It isn't enough.  Look at your usage in your home, your car, your office, etc.  You need kilowatts! 

So you can light LED's or charge batteries - move on - scale it up - do "something" with it.  Stop wasting your time trying to prove a speck of energy that doesn't amount to a wart on a toad's ass.

A lot of good stuff has been posted on this site in the last year or so - A tetrahedral version of the TPU, replication of the kicks, the toroidal rings document that disappeared for years and "mysteriously" resurfaced, Tesla's work replicated by several people - and very few people have done anything with any of it.  Instead you piss away your life arguing with each other.

If Aethertech was affiliated with Tektronix, I doubt it/he/she would be called "Aethertech".

So, in case anyone missed my "poynt", if you think you have "something", then just use it!