signal from gold [Archive] - LongRangeLocators Forums

Clondike Clad

12-06-2008, 03:09 AM

Ok let start learning the signal from gold.
FIRST IS RF, IF NOT WHAT IS IT.
THE KEY IS TO DETECT AND SEE IT ON A SCOPE.
We have a Lecroy WaveExpert 100H scope and still no signal from our 999.9 1oz gold bar or our 1.3oz gold and quartz,14k ring STILL NO SIGNAL.
WHAT IS THE SIGNAL?
We must have a signal to detect it
THE KEY IS TO POST HOW TO DETECT THE SIGNAL AND ANYONE CAN ALSO DETECT IT.
WHAT TYPE OF SCOPE, PICKUP, ETC NEEDED TO PICK UP THIS SIGNAL.
I EVEN HAVE AN OLD TUBE 585A TEK SCOPE THAT IS STILL A KILLER SCOPE.
SO NOW WHAT IS THE SIGNAL.
ALL I WANT TO DO IS PICK UP THIS SIGNAL 1 INCH FROM THE GOLD SAMPLES WE HAVE.
Carl is doing this with his hammerhead lll and we can try to do the same.
first step is the signal.:razz:

humhum

12-06-2008, 08:54 PM

Gold receiver frequency maybe 59000Hz.

Metals frequency list:
http://curezone.com/forums/m.asp?f=292&i=1812

Carl-NC

12-06-2008, 09:41 PM

Gold receiver frequency maybe 59000Hz.

Metals frequency list:
http://curezone.com/forums/m.asp?f=292&i=1812

Bogus.

Clondike Clad

12-07-2008, 11:04 AM

Gold receiver frequency maybe 59000Hz.

Metals frequency list:
http://curezone.com/forums/m.asp?f=292&i=1812

Can't pickup or detect this signal.

At this time we need proof or how to detect it.

Carl gave his input,why did he say the 59k is crap.

How do we detect this 59k or is Carl right and this is crap.

This is a start.
Anymore inputs on the signal type (am,fm,rf,if,optical and etc) and how to detect it.

Great_Alex

12-07-2008, 11:47 AM

http://www.royalrife.com/metalfreq.html

METAL FREQUENCIES

This frequency list was researched by Dr. Toshihiko Yayama in Japan. He used the F-Scan with reagents and patients with known metal poisoning.

Frequencies have been rounded to the nearest 100 Hz. To test for metals, a DIRP is done from 30,000-60,000 Hz in 100 Hz steps. The mercury frequency has been confirmed by others. These frequencies are intended for research in detecting the presense of metals. They are not intended for use as treatment. Treatment should include chlorella and other materals as needed.

Arsenic 30400
Aluminum 31900
Beryllium 32700
Vanadium 32800
Titanium 35300
Thallium 36600
Palladium 37700
Lead 38000
Chromium VI 39200
Silver 43300
Mercury 43700
Magnesium 45300
Gallium 45400
Manganese 45700
Tungsten 47500
Lithium 47900
Indium 48300
Tantalum 48900
Rubidium 49200
Molybdenum 49800
Nickel 55200
Zinc 56200
Cobalt 56300
Iridium 57000
Cadmium 57300
Copper 58600
Gold 59000
Osmium 59200
Platinum 59300
Tin 59700

where's the Iron position ?
so , we build a 59000 hz BFO metal detector and it detect only gold nothing else metals , i think the PD is something similar :D

humhum

12-07-2008, 01:40 PM

Regards

Esteban

12-07-2008, 02:16 PM

Bogus.

I don't know about this list and I don't made based in it. In particular I made oscillator 50+50 turns wire 0.15 mm in form 10.5 cm wich has best peak with correct capacitor and resonates at 59.5 Khz. I found gold with it and even gold plated buttons war times, century XIX. This not mean that gold resonates at 59...60 Khz, yes the peak in transmittion occurs at 59.5 Khz with the values in wire and capacitor.

Regards

Esteban

Clondike Clad

12-07-2008, 05:37 PM

Regards
Ok are you tellingus this is the pickup for gold at 59k.
Can you give step by step on using this to pick up the gold signal.
WE NEED 3 PEOPLE TO MAKE AND DETECT THIS SIGNAL.
I WILL TEST THIS PICKUP,now we are getting somewhere with this.

Clondike Clad

12-07-2008, 05:43 PM

I don't know about this list and I don't made based in it. In particular I made oscillator 50+50 turns wire 0.15 mm in form 10.5 cm wich has best peak with correct capacitor and resonates at 59.5 Khz. I found gold with it and even gold plated buttons war times, century XIX. This not mean that gold resonates at 59...60 Khz, yes the peak in transmittion occurs at 59.5 Khz with the values in wire and capacitor.

Regards

Esteban
How far and what type of signal?
Esteban as you know I am working hard at this LRL stuff.
BUT AT THIS TIME NOT ONE WILL WORK FOR ME......SO I AM STARTING OVER TO LEARN. SO FAR CARL AND OTHER ARE PROVING RIGHT.
SO I AM LOOKING FOR PROOF.

Geo

12-07-2008, 08:08 PM

I don't know about this list and I don't made based in it. In particular I made oscillator 50+50 turns wire 0.15 mm in form 10.5 cm wich has best peak with correct capacitor and resonates at 59.5 Khz. I found gold with it and even gold plated buttons war times, century XIX. This not mean that gold resonates at 59...60 Khz, yes the peak in transmittion occurs at 59.5 Khz with the values in wire and capacitor.

Regards

Esteban

With 0.15 wire you have a low Q!! Maybe this is the reason that you located gold at 59500. If you put 0.30 or 0.40 wire and tune it at 59000 maybe it is better.
If you will find time try it at the place where it is the buried gold ring from the "child"
Regards:)

Esteban

12-07-2008, 08:22 PM

With 0.15 wire you have a low Q!! Maybe this is the reason that you located gold at 59500. If you put 0.30 or 0.40 wire and tune it at 59000 maybe it is better.
If you will find time try it at the place where it is the buried gold ring from the "child"
Regards:)

This wire permits me use just low capacitor for small diameter. If I use .30 or .40, must made more big coil for to mantain low tune cap. Prefer small coil with 0.15 wire for small objects.

The child looses the ring playing. Today the child is not the child... :lol:

Regards

Esteban

Great_Alex

12-08-2008, 09:27 AM

when you searching for lost ring , maybe the signal comes obove your head , watch the tall trees for crow nest, maybe the crows stole your ring

Theseus

12-08-2008, 01:19 PM

If only Gold and other metals were actually generating some form of physical signal, this thread (and others like it) would make some sense. Since there are no signals from Gold, the only thing that can be detected by all your gadget circuits is random noise (at random frequencies). Tune to a non-station area of the AM band and you can experience the same stuff.

Esteban

12-08-2008, 02:25 PM

Clondike Clad

12-08-2008, 07:03 PM

Adjusting with the noise in area, well, the difference is causes by the phenomenom inherent of good conductive metal buried for long time, not only gold.

ok what is this AM,FM,IF.OPTIC OR WHAT AMI DETECTING?

Esteban

12-08-2008, 11:23 PM

ok what is this AM,FM,IF.OPTIC OR WHAT AMI DETECTING?

I explain what I think it is 1,000 times, will no repeat here. Sorry. I'm tired!

Fred

12-08-2008, 11:44 PM

Clondike Clad

12-08-2008, 11:44 PM

I explain what I think it is 1,000 times, will no repeat here. Sorry. I'm tired!
can someone give me some of the post of Esteban explanding the signal please. I need to read or reread them thanks.
Carl do you know some of his post on the signal?

Fred

12-09-2008, 12:56 AM

can someone give me some of the post of Esteban explanding the signal please. I need to read or reread them thanks.
Carl do you know some of his post on the signal?

Click on his name and go to "find all posts from Esteban",
For sure it will keep you occupied for a while....:D
BTW, could you share results and pictures of your experiments?
you were asking all the time for diagrams and info, so you could build all of them, how it went?

Esteban

12-09-2008, 02:14 AM

Esteban,
If what you are trying to detect is a local anomaly in the electric field ,but this field is variable by nature, why dont you make 2 detectors,use one as a noise cancelling system ,the other for searching ,and both signals mixed so you only detect the real anomaly?

I wish to made it. Much filters, also poor detection... Saw an old circuit in J. Markus book wich can detect masked signals by noise, and this noise can be more in magnitude than useful signal. This uses a square wave 60 V peak to peak as reference.

Clondike Clad

12-09-2008, 03:00 AM

Click on his name and go to "find all posts from Esteban",
For sure it will keep you occupied for a while....:D
BTW, could you share results and pictures of your experiments?
you were asking all the time for diagrams and info, so you could build all of them, how it went?
Yes I build some of the circuits and all of them from Carls circuits to others DID NOT WORK FOR ME.
BUT ALL THE METAL DETECTORS ( BFO,IB OR TR,PI )I MADE DID WORK.
FUNNY THAT SOME PEOPLE CAN MAKE THEM WORK(OR SAY IT WORKS) AND OTHERS CAN'T.

Fred

12-09-2008, 03:49 AM

I wish to made it. Much filters, also poor detection... Saw an old circuit in J. Markus book wich can detect masked signals by noise, and this noise can be more in magnitude than useful signal. This uses a square wave 60 V peak to peak as reference.

If noise is random,it should cancel itself.You just need to invert one of the outputs ,if you use the opamp idea just reverse it and mix the output , then with both detectors in parallel you should detect nothing, as long as you separate them or point to 90º should begin to see results :???: :D

Yes I build some of the circuits and all of them from Carls circuits to others DID NOT WORK FOR ME.
BUT ALL THE METAL DETECTORS ( BFO,IB OR TR,PI )I MADE DID WORK.
FUNNY THAT SOME PEOPLE CAN MAKE THEM WORK(OR SAY IT WORKS) AND OTHERS CAN'T.

Many says they dont work, but among them i dont see (m)any that actually built them.:lol:
Actually i am one of the few that did (seriously) , i could find some strange and yet unexplained behaviour. Did you? If i may give you an advice,don´t spend too much time lurking around, or you will have no time left to build and field test them :razz:

Esteban

12-09-2008, 12:17 PM

If noise is random,it should cancel itself.You just need to invert one of the outputs ,if you use the opamp idea just reverse it and mix the output , then with both detectors in parallel you should detect nothing, as long as you separate them or point to 90º should begin to see results :???: :D

Many says they dont work, but among them i dont see (m)any that actually built them.:lol:
Actually i am one of the few that did (seriously) , i could find some strange and yet unexplained behaviour. Did you? If i may give you an advice,don´t spend too much time lurking around, or you will have no time left to build and field test them :razz:

Fred, maybe you're right...

Also I know in forum many persons can't replicate with success "normal" MD. :razz: This is, some scientific devices as MD based in principles known for all.
I will no insist in some things. To make a stable BFO maybe is an "art"... :lol:

J_Player

12-10-2008, 03:32 AM

Here are some tests you can try that are designed to allow you to pick up a gold signal from long range:

Test 1:

Get a small battery powered radio and a gold coin. Turn on the radio and tune it to a strong station, then bury it along with the coin about 2 inches deep in dry soil. Walk 10 feet away and turn on your LRL. Point it all directions and see if you can find the hidden treasure. If this doesn't work, then turn up the sound on the radio and try again. (This method takes advantage of an audio signal emitted from the location of the buried gold, and radio).

Test 2:

Get a small battery powered AM radio transmitter and a gold coin. Turn on the transmitter and then bury it along with the coin about 2 inches deep in dry soil. Walk 10 feet away and turn on a portable AM radio that uses a coil antenna, and tune it to the same frequency as the transmitter. Try rotating the radio all directions until you find a null position. Continue moving around and rotating the radio to see if you can find the hidden gold coin and transmitter. If you can't find it, try lengthening the transmitter antenna so it reaches near the surface of the ground. If you can find the hidden gold coin, then you may honestly claim that your AM receiver is a treasure locating device because it produced a treasure. (this method takes advantage of the electromagnetic waves sent out from the location of the buried gold, and radio transmitter).

Test 3:

Get a quarter-stick of dynamite and a gold coin. Dig a hole 6 inches deep, then drop in the gold coin and stick of dynamite. Fill the hole until only the top of the dynamite showing. Light the fuse and Walk 100 feet away quickly. Soon you will hear an explosion, and you will see things flying through the air. Now go back to the hole where the gold coin was. If you are lucky it will still be there. If not, then we can see that the amount of energy released from this gold signal is very large. The coin has probably shifted its location. If you can't find the gold coin, Don't worry. Your test was still successful. The signal accurately marked the location where the gold coin was at one time. This is all that is required to prove your LRL works! It has never been necessary to actually recover a treasure when proving your LRL located it. (This method takes advantage of an audio and visual signal emitted from the location of the buried gold and 1/4 stick of dynamite).

8)
Best wishes,
J_P

Geo

12-10-2008, 05:43 AM

Here are some tests you can try that are designed to allow you to pick up a gold signal from long range:

Test 1:

Test 2:

Get a small battery powered AM radio transmitter and a gold coin. Turn on the transmitter and then bury it along with the coin about 2 inches deep in dry soil. Walk 10 feet away and turn on a portable AM radio that uses a coil antenna, and tune it to the same frequency as the transmitter. Try rotating the radio all directions until you find a null position. Continue moving around and rotating the radio to see if you can find the hidden gold coin and transmitter. If you can't find it, try lengthening the transmitter antenna so it reaches near the surface of the ground. If you can find the hidden gold coin, then you may honestly claim that your AM receiver is a treasure locating device because it produced a treasure. (this method takes advantage of the electromagnetic waves sent out from the location of the buried gold, and radio transmitter).

Test 3:

8)
Best wishes,
J_P

Hi J_P.
I believe that the portable radio will work better with ferrite !!!!!
Regards:)
http://www.postsmile.com/img/emotions/221.gif (http://www.postsmile.com/)

Steve in MS

12-10-2008, 09:00 AM

ok what is this AM,FM,IF.OPTIC OR WHAT AMI DETECTING?

From what I read here the LRL is not sensing the gold object but the ground surrounding the gold object or maybe an electrical charge or ions around the gold object:D:D:D:D.
So you need to forget about LRLs actually being able to detect gold:D:D:D:D.
You need to find an incredibly old gold object in the ground and make a device that will pick up that halo or whatever else it is called:D:D:D:D.
If a LRL actually picks up the gold itself, then there would be a means to know that it actually works:D:D:D:D.
I hope I haven't misrepresented the usefulness of LRLs:D:D:D:D.
I know, I know, it sounds incredible doesn't:D:D:D:D?
Just have faith that they work, then make one or buy one since you will never know for sure if it really works or not:lol::lol::lol::lol::D:D:D:D.

J_Player

12-10-2008, 11:51 AM

I believe that the portable radio will work better with ferrite !!!!!
RegardsHi Geo,
Of course an AM radio works better with a ferrite. In fact, most AM radios have a ferrite rod placed inside the coil antenna to improve performance when a small coil is used. However, these radios still use a coil for the antenna as opposed to a whip antenna. And this coil type antenna is responsible for the phenomenal directional LRL abilities of an inexpensive portable radio. :rolleyes:

Best wishes,
J_P.

Geo

12-10-2008, 04:08 PM

Hi Geo,
Of course an AM radio works better with a ferrite. In fact, most AM radios have a ferrite rod placed inside the coil antenna to improve performance when a small coil is used. However, these radios still use a coil for the antenna as opposed to a whip antenna. And this coil type antenna is responsible for the phenomenal directional LRL abilities of an inexpensive portable radio. :rolleyes:

Best wishes,
J_P.

:lol::lol::lol:
Regards:)

Esteban

12-10-2008, 08:57 PM

Fred

Maybe, is not good idea to use IC for eliminate noises and also great part of the signal generated by the "phenomenom". Do will better reference voltage in opposition to noise? This circuit claims that can be detected useful signal masked by noises, even if noises are superior in magnitude than signal... This uses a 60 V peak to peak square wave as reference. According the text, can be detectable signal in order of milivolts masked by noises... 1964 circuit and maybe forgotten, but don't know if is useful, but is interesting.

Regards

Esteban

Fred

12-10-2008, 10:34 PM

Esteban,
I am not talking about cancelling the noise, but cancelling the signals of 2 identical devices, one with the needed signal the other without.
This way you can remove the natural variations of the field you want to explore.
Below i call this e-field but you can call it whathever you want :-)
Regards,
Fred.

Clondike Clad

12-11-2008, 02:39 AM

J_Player

12-11-2008, 03:23 AM

Is this rf?Hi Clondike Clad,

The graphs you are looking at show a typical method of noise canceling. This will work for audio or for RF. The idea is to generate two identical signals in opposite phase. One signal is sent to the LRL search head to interact with any "treasure signal" and noise that happens to be present that would give a false reading. The other signal is shielded from the treasure signal, but is exposed to the same noise as the first signal. Then these two signals are mixed, which should cancel each other out to a zero-volt signal. The only difference is the signal that was exposed to the treasure is expected to have any treasure signals added to it in addition to the noise. So when we mix the two opposite phase signals, they cancel to zero, except for the treasure signals that comes through as a single spike. This noise canceling method is used in order to allow the electronics to actually detect a treasure, rather than a continuous stream of noise signals.

What frequency? This depends. Many LRLs operate in the RF range from about 5 khz to 200 khz, with 40khz-60 khz being a popular range. There are also LRLs that operate in the audio range as low as 400 hz. In some cases, this audio frequency is the result of a beat frequency from an oscillator that runs in the 15khz to 60khz range. There are also some LRLs that do not use an oscillator to broadcast a signal. They may use a plain antenna connected to sensitive amplifiers. In this case, the wave you see in the graph could be natural electric or magnetic waves in the air, and may be less tan 1 hz or in the khz ranges. It seems pretty nebulous when there are no defined absolutes in LRL construction. Because there are so many approaches, we have no common starting point, and each project LRL must be considered separately. Keep in mind, many LRLs have been stated to work on different principles such as electrostatic, ionic, absorptive, reflective, etc, etc.

The principle of noise cancelling works regardless of the frequency. All that is required is that the two identical opposite phase signals are exposed to the same environment of noise, except one of them is shielded from the "treasure signal".

Best wishes,
J_P

Dell Winders

12-11-2008, 03:22 PM

JP, For what it's worth, In my years of field experience testing Frequency discrimination, I find what you say to be true. Dell

Clondike Clad

12-11-2008, 09:17 PM

Hi Clondike Clad,

The graphs you are looking at show a typical method of noise canceling. This will work for audio or for RF. The idea is to generate two identical signals in opposite phase. One signal is sent to the LRL search head to interact with any "treasure signal" and noise that happens to be present that would give a false reading. The other signal is shielded from the treasure signal, but is exposed to the same noise as the first signal. Then these two signals are mixed, which should cancel each other out to a zero-volt signal. The only difference is the signal that was exposed to the treasure is expected to have any treasure signals added to it in addition to the noise. So when we mix the two opposite phase signals, they cancel to zero, except for the treasure signals that comes through as a single spike. This noise canceling method is used in order to allow the electronics to actually detect a treasure, rather than a continuous stream of noise signals.

What frequency? This depends. Many LRLs operate in the RF range from about 5 khz to 200 khz, with 40khz-60 khz being a popular range. There are also LRLs that operate in the audio range as low as 400 hz. In some cases, this audio frequency is the result of a beat frequency from an oscillator that runs in the 15khz to 60khz range. There are also some LRLs that do not use an oscillator to broadcast a signal. They may use a plain antenna connected to sensitive amplifiers. In this case, the wave you see in the graph could be natural electric or magnetic waves in the air, and may be less tan 1 hz or in the khz ranges. It seems pretty nebulous when there are no defined absolutes in LRL construction. Because there are so many approaches, we have no common starting point, and each project LRL must be considered separately. Keep in mind, many LRLs have been stated to work on different principles such as electrostatic, ionic, absorptive, reflective, etc, etc.

The principle of noise cancelling works regardless of the frequency. All that is required is that the two identical opposite phase signals are exposed to the same environment of noise, except one of them is shielded from the "treasure signal".

Best wishes,
J_P
I know about cancelling circuits,Now it looks as if the target is putting out a signal in the af to vlf range? and it is some kind of RF is this the case?

Clondike Clad

12-11-2008, 09:25 PM

JP, For what it's worth, In my years of field experience testing Frequency discrimination, I find what you say to be true. Dell
Ok Dell now what is the best way to detect iron for a start.
I would like to try a step by step from you.
If I can detect iron at 10 feet with a LRL it would be a start.
I will go for Carl's $25,000 after I can do a 1oz gold bar at 10 feet.
Just think a guy who slams LRL using one to take Carl's money:)

Fred

12-11-2008, 10:14 PM

I know about cancelling circuits,Now it looks as if the target is putting out a signal in the af to vlf range? and it is some kind of RF is this the case?
The frequency is not so important, just the principle.But i see this more like a signal at the DC range (if i can say so), if we are talking about measuring the potencial above ground...

Dell Winders

12-12-2008, 01:33 AM

Ok Dell now what is the best way to detect iron for a start.
I would like to try a step by step from you.
If I can detect iron at 10 feet with a LRL it would be a start.

Sorry, I can't teach you from afar.
I stated that Iron concentrates a strong emanating "Field" for you to start with. I certainly didn't say that an LRL, or Frequency Discriminator, actually detects Iron, or Gold, for that matter. As far as I know, they don't. Dell

sweatofglory

12-12-2008, 06:52 AM

Hi GEO

What are the reasons why remote sensing equipment always failed to perform in actual tests???

sweatofglory

Geo

12-12-2008, 08:33 AM

Hi GEO

What are the reasons why remote sensing equipment always failed to perform in actual tests???

sweatofglory

Hi.
Not always failed to perform in tests.
There are machines that work really as LRL. But if a person has a good LRL why to come here and to show it ???? He take the treasures and nothing else :lol::lol:
I saw LRL that work medium or good, and now (3 years ago :lol:) i try to build a good clone. Also i worked with medium LRL. For me is a simple small secret, and i try to learn it:(. Nothing else

Regards:)

Clondike Clad

12-12-2008, 03:23 PM

Sorry, I can't teach you from afar.
I stated that Iron concentrates a strong emanating "Field" for you to start with. I certainly didn't say that an LRL, or Frequency Discriminator, actually detects Iron, or Gold, for that matter. As far as I know, they don't. Dell

Now please tell me what is going on?????????????????????????????????????

Dell it telling me he is scamming people??????????????????????????????????

If LRL don't work why is he selling them.:shocked:

Dell Winders

12-12-2008, 05:23 PM

What the f@ck Dell told me that LRL don't WORK
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dell Winders
Sorry, I can't teach you from afar.
I stated that Iron concentrates a strong emanating "Field" for you to start with. I certainly didn't say that an LRL, or Frequency Discriminator, actually detects Iron, or Gold, for that matter. As far as I know, they don't. Dell
Now please tell me what is going on?????????????????????????????????????

Dell it telling me he is scamming people??????????????????????????????????

If LRL don't work why is he selling them.

Clondike Clad, what to heck is wrong with you?????????????????? I never said anything of the sort.

I truthfully told you, from personal field experience, that as far as I know LRL's, or Frequency Discriminators, Do not actually detect the physical targets of Iron, or Gold.

Where do you get off claiming I am scamming people when I state honestly that my products appear to be detecting an emanating "Field" concentrated by these elements, and NOT the physical target itself????????????

I posted my telephone number for you, and offered to freely spend the time to show you what I have learned about Frequency Discrimination & LRL, when you came to Florida. Is that a scam?????

Your opinionated display of dis-respect for me, a person you have never met, and don't know, is beyond my understanding. I hope you will cease your inferences of fraud, and attack on my character, and permit me to reply without reasons to have to defend my honesty, and integrity against you.

Thank you for your consideration. Dell

Clondike Clad

12-12-2008, 08:54 PM

Clondike Clad, what to heck is wrong with you?????????????????? I never said anything of the sort.

I truthfully told you, from personal field experience, that as far as I know LRL's, or Frequency Discriminators, Do not actually detect the physical targets of Iron, or Gold.

Where do you get off claiming I am scamming people when I state honestly that my products appear to be detecting an emanating "Field" concentrated by these elements, and NOT the physical target itself????????????

I posted my telephone number for you, and offered to freely spend the time to show you what I have learned about Frequency Discrimination & LRL, when you came to Florida. Is that a scam?????

Your opinionated display of dis-respect for me, a person you have never met, and don't know, is beyond my understanding. I hope you will cease your inferences of fraud, and attack on my character, and permit me to reply without reasons to have to defend my honesty, and integrity against you.

Thank you for your consideration. Dell

Oh i misunderstand...sorry.
It is the way you wrote it.

Theseus

12-13-2008, 01:45 AM

Oh i misunderstand...sorry.
It is the way you wrote it.

He sort of jumped all over you for no reason. I read it the same way you did.

If I had to guess, I'd say Dell was having a bad day today. Or, maybe he's trying out for a part in a movie sequel to Grumpy Old Men. :D

Carl-NC

12-13-2008, 02:21 AM

Dell Winders

12-13-2008, 04:58 AM

I can provide examples of people who have used magnetometers and metal detectors to locate and retrieve all sorts of valuable objects, from individual items to caches to massive hoards of treasure. And lots of it, too.LRL proponents can do none of this.

- Carl
Carl, is that expressed as your personal opinon, or are you stating this as a fact? Please clarify.

And of course, "LRL proponnents can do none of this" is blatenly untrue. There you go Carl, two lies from you in two weeks. Last week on TNET, you said MFD was a Dowsing Rod Scam.
This is your Scam, Carl, and you may feel being untruthful has worked for you in the past, but trying to cover one lie with another is catching up with you.

Now if you had stated that LRL PROPONENT, BASHER'S can do none of this, you would have been closer to the truth. Dell

Steve in MS

12-13-2008, 08:46 AM

Fred

12-13-2008, 12:52 PM

Carl, is that expressed as your personal opinon, or are you stating this as a fact? Please clarify.

And of course, "LRL proponnents can do none of this" is blatenly untrue.
It a fact of course ! don´t you know that ?

Clondike Clad

12-13-2008, 01:22 PM

:)Technically, a magnetometer does not detect iron, rather it detects the magnetic field distortion caused by an iron target. And a metal detector does not detect metal, rather it detects the magnetic field distortions caused by the eddy currents that are induced by a primary magnetic field.

That said...

I can tell you exactly how a magnetometer or a metal detector works, down to the very physics involved.
I can use a magnetometer or a metal detector in a randomized double-blind test to objectively prove they work as I claim they will work.
I can tell you exactly how to build a magnetometer or a metal detector, that you can build for yourself, that you can test for yourself, and that you can use to independently verify everything I tell you about how they work.
I can provide examples of people who have used magnetometers and metal detectors to locate and retrieve all sorts of valuable objects, from individual items to caches to massive hoards of treasure. And lots of it, too.LRL proponents can do none of this.
That is why I want to make one Carl.
If I can take your money it would be proof for me:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D
BUT AS YOU KNOW YOUR MONEY IS STILL SAFE.....MONEY OH MONEY I LIKE TO GET YOU:)

- Carl

Clondike Clad

12-13-2008, 01:24 PM

Carl, is that expressed as your personal opinon, or are you stating this as a fact? Please clarify.

And of course, "LRL proponnents can do none of this" is blatenly untrue. There you go Carl, two lies from you in two weeks. Last week on TNET, you said MFD was a Dowsing Rod Scam.
This is your Scam, Carl, and you may feel being untruthful has worked for you in the past, but trying to cover one lie with another is catching up with you.

Now if you had stated that LRL PROPONENT, BASHER'S can do none of this, you would have been closer to the truth. Dell
Mr Dell we all know that told some BIG ONES

Qiaozhi

12-13-2008, 01:59 PM

J_Player

12-13-2008, 02:34 PM

Technically, a magnetometer does not detect iron, rather it detects the magnetic field distortion caused by an iron target. And a metal detector does not detect metal, rather it detects the magnetic field distortions caused by the eddy currents that are induced by a primary magnetic field.

Technically, a magnetometer does not detect iron, rather it detects the magnetic field distortion caused by an iron target. And a metal detector does not detect metal, rather it detects the magnetic field distortions caused by the eddy currents that are induced by a primary magnetic field.

That said...
I can tell you exactly how a magnetometer or a metal detector works, down to the very physics involved.
I can use a magnetometer or a metal detector in a randomized double-blind test to objectively prove they work as I claim they will work.
I can tell you exactly how to build a magnetometer or a metal detector, that you can build for yourself, that you can test for yourself, and that you can use to independently verify everything I tell you about how they work.
I can provide examples of people who have used magnetometers and metal detectors to locate and retrieve all sorts of valuable objects, from individual items to caches to massive hoards of treasure. And lots of it, too.LRL proponents can do none of this.

- Carl
-----------------------------------------
Originally Posted by Dell Winders
Carl, is that expressed as your personal opinon, or are you stating this as a fact? Please clarify.

And of course, "LRL proponnents can do none of this" is blatenly untrue. There you go Carl, two lies from you in two weeks. Last week on TNET, you said MFD was a Dowsing Rod Scam. This is your Scam, Carl, and you may feel being untruthful has worked for you in the past, but trying to cover one lie with another is catching up with you.Well Dell, It is getting hard to believe you this time. You are calling people names that you can't substantiate. Let's take a look at proof:

Carl:
1. Has shown us exactly how a magnetometer and a metal detector works, down to the very physics involved in the articles he published on this website.
2. Is able to pass a double blind test with a metal detector or a magnetometer just as he claims.
3. Has told us exactly how to build a magnetometer and a metal detector many times in his articles, that many of us have build for ourselves, tested for ourselves, and have used to independently verify everything he told us about how they work.
4. Can provide examples of people who have used magnetometers and metal detectors to locate and retrieve all sorts of valuable objects, from individual items to caches to massive hoards of treasure. And lots of it, too.

It seems like Carl is telling the truth. The proof is right here on this website, and with the hundreds of people who have built and used the detectors and magnetometers published on this website.

So what can Dell do?
Dell sells LRLs that are depicted on his web page to find hidden dollar bills in a home as well as other LRLs which he says are able to locate signals from treasure.

1. Can Dell tell us exactly how to use these devices? His reply was "Not from afar". Apparently you can only get instructions bu visiting him personally, or by making a telephone call to him. Dell has not published information telling how these LRLs work, down to the very physics involved.
2. Can Dell pass a double blind test with an LRL? Apparently not. He failed when he tried to pass the Randi test, then complained that the test was not fair, and there is a video that proves he did not fail. However, he can't produce this video. Not only did he fail the randomized test, he refused to take part in any future double blind test with his LRLs.
3. Can Dell tell us exactly how to build an LRL, that we can build for ourselves, that we can test for ourselves, and that we can use to independently verify everything he tells us about how they work? I doubt it. Not the same LRLs that he sells. I don't think even Dell knows how to build his LRLs, as evidenced by his posts where he claims he has no clue what the speaker coil in a pot housing was for in one of his LRLs.
4. Can Dell provide examples of people who have used LRLs to locate and retrieve all sorts of valuable objects, from individual items to caches to massive hoards of treasure. And lots of it, too? Maybe. I have heard stories of great treasures coming from Dell. Somehow, I didn't see a strong connection to LRLs and recovered treasure in these stories, but there may be some. In fact I have read many posts made by people who say his LRLs don't work at all.

So let's tally the score:
Carl = 4 out of 4
Dell = maybe 1 out of 4.

So who is full of BS, Dell?

Best wishes,
J_P

Carl-NC

12-13-2008, 04:51 PM

Back in the past, LRLs were said to be able to detect gold that had not been buried for a long time but it seems more recently that they only detect longtime buried gold items.
Is this like playing a card card where the rules change in the process on the game:D?

At one time, the LRLs on Fitzgerald's web site included the statement, "Finds fresh targets too!" Then I came along with my LRL challenge; that statement quickly vanished, and suddenly his LRLs could only find long-time buried targets. :lol: Is that knee-slapping funny or what?

- Carl

Carl-NC

12-13-2008, 05:10 PM

Last week on TNET, you said MFD was a Dowsing Rod Scam.

Very true. MFD is a dowsing rod scam. It doesn't work. Never did.

I will gladly meet with you, and do an objective test that proves this. Unless, like Fitzgerald, your MFD suddenly only locates long-time buried gold. BTW, sunspot activity is virtually non-existent right now, so that alibi is gone. In fact, 2008 should have been a banner year for MFD recoveries. Let's take a look at some of those recovered treasures... [crickets chirping].

So, I'm willing to meet you to back up what I say. Are you willing to meet me to back up what you say?

- Carl

Dell Winders

12-13-2008, 07:30 PM

Very true. MFD is a dowsing rod scam. It doesn't work. Never did.

That of course, is a blatant lie, and you are the liar.

Unless, like Fitzgerald, your MFD suddenly only locates long-time buried gold. Nope, you have never heard me say that, have you? You are baiting.

I'm sure you have heard me state that Frequency Discrimination, has physical limitations that must recognized , and understood to obtain the best results? And that there has been a lot mis- information, misleading advertising, and false claims about these products that some in this industry promote to be competitive with rip-off prices to warrant their advertising claims.

You can't honestly compare me with those who use unscrupulous marketing ploys.

I will gladly meet with you, and do an objective test that proves this.
:lol::lol::lol::lol: Now that is knee slapping funny. The egotistical, prejudicial, Randi loving skeptic, Carl Morland, thinks he can create an "objective" test for LRL, or Frequency Discrimination? Who are you trying to fool today? :lol::lol::lol:

As I have said before, you are one of the very few in the world that I have no interest in meeting. You have betrayed my trust more than once in the past.

But I have offered my services to you numbers of times as a knowledgeable field operator of any LRL, MFD, or device,you wish to conduct legitimate Scientific testing on, for a fee. Apparently, you are not interested in approaching these concepts from legitimate scientific studies to learn the truth of how wrong you are. Invest your $25,000 in legitimate field research, then you will be qualified to intelligently discuss the subject of LRL, Frequency Discrimination, and the related physics of Earth Science, in which they operate.

Originally Posted by Carl-NC
Technically, a magnetometer does not detect iron, rather it detects the magnetic field distortion caused by an iron target. And a metal detector does not detect metal, rather it detects the magnetic field distortions caused by the eddy currents that are induced by a primary magnetic field.

You mention a Primary Magnetic field. This implies secondary magnetic Fields.

How many secondary Magnetic fields are there? What is their purpose? What type of Magnetic fields are they? And how are you measuring them to know their realativity to a primary field? Dell

Theseus

12-13-2008, 09:23 PM

Dell said to Carl:
Invest your $25,000 in legitimate field research, then you will be qualified to intelligently discuss the subject of LRL, Frequency Discrimination, and the related physics of Earth Science, in which they operate.Oh Mighty BSer Himself Has Spoken From Up On The Mountain! :D:D:D:D:D

Why would anyone in their right mind invest so much as 25 cents to learn about the pseudo scientific subjects of LRL, MFD and Frequency Discrimination? None of those things are real, they all relate to subjectively observing a series of random events, and those that talk about them as if they were real science, can arrive at any conclusion that best fits their own agenda (ie. marketing scheme).

.................and you have.

Simple truths about nature can't choose to hide from the skeptical minds and be seen by the gullible at the same time.

Dell Winders

12-14-2008, 12:15 AM

#55
Today, 04:23 PM

Theseus
Senior Member

Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Well above sea level
Posts: 163

Dell said to Carl:
Quote:
Invest your $25,000 in legitimate field research, then you will be qualified to intelligently discuss the subject of LRL, Frequency Discrimination, and the related physics of Earth Science, in which they operate.
Oh Mighty BSer Himself Has Spoken From Up On The Mountain!

Why would anyone in their right mind invest so much as 25 cents to learn about the pseudo scientific subjects of LRL, MFD and Frequency Discrimination? None of those things are real, they all relate to subjectively observing a series of random events, and those that talk about them as if they were real science, can arrive at any conclusion that best fits their own agenda (ie. marketing scheme).

.................and you have.

Simple truths about nature can't choose to hide from the skeptical minds and be seen by the gullible at the same time.
__________________
The Wallet-Miner's Creed
Why bother with the truth, when it doesn't suit the argument?

This is the rationale you get when an Idiot trys tp speak for Carl. Dell

Carl-NC

12-14-2008, 01:00 AM

That of course, is a blatant lie, and you are the liar.

As usual, I'm willing to back up what I say, and you are not. And, as usual, you stoop to name-calling. This is where we've been for years, eh?

Nope, you have never heard me say that, have you? You are baiting.Not specifically, but there's always an alibi. Since solar interference is out this year, I figured you needed another alibi. Just trying to help!

I'm sure you have heard me state that Frequency Discrimination, has physical limitations that must recognized , and understood to obtain the best results?Metal detectors and magnetometers have physical limitations that should be understood to obtain the best results. But I can still demonstrate one, even in a randomized blind test, and objectively prove it will do what I claim it will do, to anyone, anywhere, any time. I can show how they work. I can demonstrate the very physics behind their operation. I can show people how to design and build them. I don't need alibis, because They Really Work.

And that there has been a lot mis- information, misleading advertising, and false claims about these products that some in this industry promote to be competitive with rip-off prices to warrant their advertising claims.

You can't honestly compare me with those who use unscrupulous marketing ploys.Have you ever made dishonest claims about your products? Have you ever represented your products, even implicitly, as having any ability to locate, or assist in the location of, buried treasure?

Yes, I already know that you will either deny all evidence, or blame someone else. It's always someone else's fault. There's always an alibi.

The egotistical, prejudicial, Randi loving skeptic, Carl Morland, thinks he can create an "objective" test for LRL, or Frequency Discrimination?As I've said before, I'll let YOU design an objective test for your own equipment.

But I have offered my services to you numbers of times as a knowledgeable field operator of any LRL, MFD, or device,you wish to conduct legitimate Scientific testing on, for a fee. Apparently, you are not interested in approaching these concepts from legitimate scientific studies to learn the truth of how wrong you are.A scientific test is only legitimate if I pay you a fee? After all these years, why not finally prove ol' Carl wrong? Put me in my place. Embarrass the heck outta me. The real reason has nothing to do with a fee, that is just another alibi. There's always an alibi!

You mention a Primary Magnetic field. This implies secondary magnetic Fields.

How many secondary Magnetic fields are there? What is their purpose? What type of Magnetic fields are they? And how are you measuring them to know their realativity to a primary field?For what? A metal detector? Read my article on Induction Basics (http://geotech.thunting.com/pages/metdet/info/induction.pdf), it explains all this. And if you want to discuss further I'll gladly do so, no alibis needed.

- Carl

Theseus

12-14-2008, 02:03 AM

This is the rationale you get when an Idiot trys tp speak for Carl. Dell

I speak for myself; guess I must've missed where this thread is restricted to only you and Carl.

Besides, I'm only following your lead. Wasn't it just a day or two ago that I was trading remarks with one Tim Williams, and you butted in and tried to come to his rescue? Right after that he ducked out, and left you holding the bag; guess it got too warm for him.

Incidentally, trys is spelled t-r-i-e-s. Maybe if your blood pressure wasn't quite so high when you post your replies you could spell better. Take a chill pill.

BTW, do you ever make a posting where you don't call people names? When you do that, does that somehow make you feel superior? :nono:

Dell Winders

12-14-2008, 04:12 AM

Originally Posted by Dell Winders
That of course, is a blatant lie, and you are the liar.

As usual, I'm willing to back up what I say, and you are not. And, as usual, you stoop to name-calling. This is where we've been for years, eh?

REALITY CHECK:. It was you, Carl Morland, that originally came on to the internet publicly attacking me, Dell Winders, with untruthful inferences, ineuendo, and accusations that I am a Scam artist, selling fraudulent products, in order to make a name for your self with the Skeptic organization. NOT, the other way around. It appears there was a peer recognization bounty to the first who defamed me, and put me out of business. An ambitious Carl, worked eagerly, spoke untruthfully about me, created publicity gimmicks, and became a hypocrite, for the attention of his peers,.and the public. Now, even your beloved Randi, has given me up as a lost cause, and you are stuck in the agenda with few supporters, and little recourse.

Yet, I am still here. I am still in bussiness at the age of 75 and excellent feed back from my customers. Honesty and integrity prevails.

Nope, you have never heard me say that, have you? You are baiting.

Not specifically, but there's always an alibi. Since solar interference is out this year, I figured you needed another alibi. Just trying to help!

That's a rather ridiculous rationale from a person who claims Scientific and knowledge of physics.

I'm sure you have heard me state that Frequency Discrimination, has physical limitations that must recognized , and understood to obtain the best results?

Metal detectors and magnetometers have physical limitations that should be understood to obtain the best results. But I can still demonstrate one, even in a randomized blind test, and objectively prove it will do what I claim it will do, to anyone, anywhere, any time. I can show how they work. I can demonstrate the very physics behind their operation. I can show people how to design and build them. I don't need alibis, because They Really Work.

Me too, by referencing the same sources as you. Big deal!

Have you ever made dishonest claims about your products? Not that I know of, but you certainly have. Have you ever represented your products, even implicitly, as having any ability to locate, or assist in the location of, buried treasure? Of course. It's a known fact.

Yes, I already know that you will either deny all evidence, or blame someone else. It's always someone else's fault. There's always an alibi.

What Evidence? What alibi? What to heck are you talking about?

[quote]
The egotistical, prejudicial, Randi loving skeptic, Carl Morland, thinks he can create an "objective" test for LRL, or Frequency Discrimination? [/quote

As I've said before, I'll let YOU design an objective test for your own equipment.

Thanks! Been there, done that hundreds of times over the past 28 years. Blind tests, double blind tests, Thousands of field tests, comparison tests, etc, etc, with all types of Geophysical products. I have been a Professional Treasure hunter/ Salvor, for 35 years, or more. How long has Carl Morland, been a Professional Treasure Hunter/Salvor?

[quote]
But I have offered my services to you numbers of times as a knowledgeable field operator of any LRL, MFD, or device,you wish to conduct legitimate Scientific testing on, for a fee. Apparently, you are not interested in approaching these concepts from legitimate scientific studies to learn the truth of how wrong you are.

A scientific test is only legitimate if I pay you a fee? Not True! After all these years, why not finally prove ol' Carl wrong? I really don't care if you are wrong. It's already obvious to me, and those who have field experience and success with my products, but certainly, you have legal reasons to care if you are wrong. Put me in my place. I don't know where your place is? Embarrass the heck outta me. You do an excellent job of doing that for yourself. You don't need my help. The real reason has nothing to do with a fee, that is just another alibi. There's always an alibi! What an imagination! Of course it's the money. That's the only way I would offer you my services.

You mention a Primary Magnetic field. This implies secondary magnetic Fields.

How many secondary Magnetic fields are there? What is their purpose? What type of Magnetic fields are they? And how are you measuring them to know their realativity to a primary field?

For what? A metal detector? For a metal detector, or any device that supports the use of magnetic induction. Read my article on Induction Basics, it explains all this. And if you want to discuss further I'll gladly do so, no alibis needed. I read your your article, and apparently the information is copied from other sources. It didn't answer my questions. Do I need to give you time to look for other sources to answer those questions? Have you ever developed a product of your own concept totally without depending on other sources for your information? Dell

J_Player

12-14-2008, 06:43 AM

You mention a Primary Magnetic field. This implies secondary magnetic Fields.

How many secondary Magnetic fields are there? What is their purpose? What type of Magnetic fields are they? And how are you measuring them to know their realativity to a primary field?

... It didn't answer my questions. Do I need to give you time to look for other sources to answer those questions?Ummm... Dell,
This is real basic stuff. Maybe Carl didn't answer your questions because the answers are already in his article. But if you must have an answer in a post rather than reading the article, I can give some answers that would satisfy most of the readers of this forum:

In reference to a metal detector:
1. How many secondary magnetic fields are there? There are as many as are induced by the primary field. This would depend on how many objects capable of producing eddy currents are in range of the primary field.
2. What is their purpose? They have no intrinsic purpose. They are a natural phenomenon of the physics of magnetism and electricity when a primary magnetic field fluctuates in range of an object capable of producing eddy currents. However, a metal detector exploits the presence of these secondary fields to locate the objects that send out the secondary fields.
3. What type of magnetic fields are they? I suppose they are the type that have magnetic properties generated by an electric current. What types do I have to choose from?
4. How are you measuring them to know their realativity to a primary field? This is a bit of a confusing question. I presume you mean "How are you measuring the secondary magnetic fields to know their relative distance from a primary field? Actually there are a number of methods used by different kinds of metal detectors. In Carl's Hammerhead design, He shuts off the primary field, then waits for the secondary field to interact with the search coil and produce an electrical impulse that is amplified in the electronics of the detector. This all happens very fast, and repeats itself often enough that you can actually connect an amplifier and speaker to hear the signal become stronger as you approach the object providing eddy currents. Or you can connect a circuit that indicates the object's field by a meter, or lights or any other method you choose. This is the beauty of Carl's Hammerhead design. He stayed away from the extreme high tech methods and parts, and allowed many options so a novice hobbyist could build it and adjust it for simple metal detecting, or by tweaking the controls and adding options, he can produce a very high-end metal detector.

But you will find many other metal detector projects on this website that don't use this method at all. Many send out an alternating primary magnetic field that interacts with the secondary fields in ways that cause the frequency of the alternating primary field to vary. Other detectors use different schemes to detect the secondary field when sending out an alternating primary field. These are all posted on this website, and are fairly well documented.

The idea that Carl needs to copy his ideas from someone else is ludricous. If you read his instructions for the Hammerhead project, you will see it is pretty obvious that nobody could write those instructions except the designer of the circuitry... namely Carl Moreland. The hammerhead has a relatively easy to understand set of instructions. I believe Carl kept it this way so novice hobbyists could easily understand the basics and the reasons for building the circuits in the manner he designed, as well as understanding what optional features they could incorporate. But if you read some of Carl's posts in the more technical forums on this site, you will quickly come to realize he is quite brilliant in electronics, and a master of his trade.

I hear a lot of rhetoric and name-calling coming from the Dell Winders trailer, But I don't see anything substantial to support anything you say. You call anyone who thinks you are full of BS names, and even threaten to sue them if they won't take their words back. Yet the things people are complaining about are centered around the fact that your posts are full of rhetoric and name-calling as well as your statements that you back up all your products .... with nothing to substantiate anything you say. In other words... a bunch of hot air.

For example, when will you demonstrate your X-Scan finding hidden dollar bills in a house like it is depicted to do on your web page?
When can we see the published results of all the double-blind tests you claim you performed with your LRLs?
When will you show us the proof that Randi lied about you failing his LRL test, or take the retest that he offered?

Best wishes,
J_P

Steve in MS

12-14-2008, 06:48 AM

LRL stands for long range locators:D?
Just for discussion, do LRLs give a stronger response the closer it gets to a
gold object:D?
If this is true then if one passes a gold object very close to an LRL then it should be observable to anyone and would therefore prove the effectiveness of the device, correct:D?
If the above is not true, how would one ever know if an LRL is working or not
:lol::lol::lol::lol::D:D:D:D:razz::razz::razz:?

Carl-NC

12-14-2008, 07:37 AM

Dell,

This "debate" is same ol' same ol'. The bottom line is, I am willing to back up everything I say about LRLs, and you are not. LRLs are junk; they simply don't work. Until you are willing to meet with me and prove me wrong, further debate is pointless.

However, I will gladly answer any questions you have on induction & magnetic fields.

- Carl

hung

12-14-2008, 10:13 AM

Thanks! Been there, done that hundreds of times over the past 28 years. Blind tests, double blind tests, Thousands of field tests, comparison tests, etc, etc, with all types of Geophysical products. I have been a Professional Treasure hunter/ Salvor, for 35 years, or more. How long has Carl Morland, been a Professional Treasure Hunter/Salvor?

I usually don't hang out often in this forum anymore simply because besides the fact I'm busy with my own projects,it's a waste of time talking about LRLs with 'typos' everybody knows very well here who they are, either having a hidden agenda, being hungry for a working LRL due to inescrupulous comercial interests or being as ignorant and blind as a rhino towards the LRL subject.

Dell's, statement above should be enough to end for good discussions and arguings like the ones in this thread with LRL 'rookies and pretenders who pose stating that 'physics prove LRLs don't work'...
Ha,ha,ha.:lol:

If people like Carl knew only 20% of the physics they think they know, they would probably be here stating the opposite or at least that they can't explain how it works. But NEVER SAYING IT DOES NOT WORK.

Again, comparing Dell's long time field experieces, knowledge about several devices he used, and data he collected along all this time against some 'new born babies' in this forum who still smells fresh s**t regarding LRL subject and also against Carl who had never walked 10 feet outside home with the FG80 in his hands for a field research and conducts his tests employing an 'electric dog fence'... :lol: it's just plain ridiculous.

So as I said in the begining, the above quote from Dell should end this non sense arguing for good. It should. But probably it won't.

The m**r*ns of the hour won't let it.:rolleyes:

Qiaozhi

12-14-2008, 03:08 PM

Now, even your beloved Randi, has given me up as a lost cause, and you are stuck in the agenda with few supporters, and little recourse.
:lol: :lol: :lol: "lost cause" - you said it, not us! :lol: :lol: :lol:
Yet, I am still here. I am still in bussiness at the age of 75 and excellent feed back from my customers. Honesty and integrity prevails
So many wasted years..... :rolleyes:
That's a rather ridiculous rationale from a person who claims Scientific and knowledge of physics.
Me too, by referencing the same sources as you. Big deal!
What Evidence? What alibi? What to heck are you talking about?
You must secretly derive pleasure from visiting this forum, in a masochistic sort of way. Why else would you come here?
Strangely, this always seems to happen just before Christmas. You come here making accusations, name calling, and threatening to sue, before eventually stating that you'll never return here again ... only to come back later for another bashing. :stars:
Thanks! Been there, done that hundreds of times over the past 28 years. Blind tests, double blind tests, Thousands of field tests, comparison tests, etc, etc, with all types of Geophysical products. I have been a Professional Treasure hunter/ Salvor, for 35 years, or more. How long has Carl Morland, been a Professional Treasure Hunter/Salvor?
So which double-blind tests did you actually pass successfully? Can you provide any evidence? (Hmmm.... just more crickets chirping).
I usually don't hang out often in this forum anymore simply because besides the fact I'm busy with my own projects,it's a waste of time talking about LRLs with 'typos'...
But (like Dell) you still do come back. Why is that? Are you another LRL masochist?
Dell's, statement above should be enough to end for good discussions and arguings like the ones in this thread with LRL 'rookies and pretenders who pose stating that 'physics prove LRLs don't work'...
Maybe it's good enough for you, but to the rest of us it's just more pseudo-scientific claptrap.
The bottom line is, I am willing to back up everything I say about LRLs, and you are not. LRLs are junk; they simply don't work.
Carls' statement above should be enough to end for good discussions and arguments like the one's in this thread. ----- Hang on ----- that's sound familiar! Must be deja vu.
:) "WHAT DOESN'T WORK, CANNOT BE MADE TO WORK." :)

Clondike Clad

12-14-2008, 03:16 PM

As usual, I'm willing to back up what I say, and you are not. And, as usual, you stoop to name-calling. This is where we've been for years, eh?

REALITY CHECK:. It was you, Carl Morland, that originally came on to the internet publicly attacking me, Dell Winders, with untruthful inferences, ineuendo, and accusations that I am a Scam artist, selling fraudulent products, in order to make a name for your self with the Skeptic organization. NOT, the other way around. It appears there was a peer recognization bounty to the first who defamed me, and put me out of business. An ambitious Carl, worked eagerly, spoke untruthfully about me, created publicity gimmicks, and became a hypocrite, for the attention of his peers,.and the public. Now, even your beloved Randi, has given me up as a lost cause, and you are stuck in the agenda with few supporters, and little recourse.

Yet, I am still here. I am still in bussiness at the age of 75 and excellent feed back from my customers. Honesty and integrity prevails.

Not specifically, but there's always an alibi. Since solar interference is out this year, I figured you needed another alibi. Just trying to help!

That's a rather ridiculous rationale from a person who claims Scientific and knowledge of physics.

Metal detectors and magnetometers have physical limitations that should be understood to obtain the best results. But I can still demonstrate one, even in a randomized blind test, and objectively prove it will do what I claim it will do, to anyone, anywhere, any time. I can show how they work. I can demonstrate the very physics behind their operation. I can show people how to design and build them. I don't need alibis, because They Really Work.

Me too, by referencing the same sources as you. Big deal!

[quote}
And that there has been a lot mis- information, misleading advertising, and false claims about these products that some in this industry promote to be competitive with rip-off prices to warrant their advertising claims.

You can't honestly compare me with those who use unscrupulous marketing ploys.

Have you ever made dishonest claims about your products? Not that I know of, but you certainly have. Have you ever represented your products, even implicitly, as having any ability to locate, or assist in the location of, buried treasure? Of course. It's a known fact.

Yes, I already know that you will either deny all evidence, or blame someone else. It's always someone else's fault. There's always an alibi.

What Evidence? What alibi? What to heck are you talking about?

The egotistical, prejudicial, Randi loving skeptic, Carl Morland, thinks he can create an "objective" test for LRL, or Frequency Discrimination? [/quote

As I've said before, I'll let YOU design an objective test for your own equipment.

Thanks! Been there, done that hundreds of times over the past 28 years. Blind tests, double blind tests, Thousands of field tests, comparison tests, etc, etc, with all types of Geophysical products. I have been a Professional Treasure hunter/ Salvor, for 35 years, or more. How long has Carl Morland, been a Professional Treasure Hunter/Salvor?

A scientific test is only legitimate if I pay you a fee? Not True! After all these years, why not finally prove ol' Carl wrong? I really don't care if you are wrong. It's already obvious to me, and those who have field experience and success with my products, but certainly, you have legal reasons to care if you are wrong. Put me in my place. I don't know where your place is? Embarrass the heck outta me. You do an excellent job of doing that for yourself. You don't need my help. The real reason has nothing to do with a fee, that is just another alibi. There's always an alibi! What an imagination! Of course it's the money. That's the only way I would offer you my services.

For what? A metal detector? For a metal detector, or any device that supports the use of magnetic induction. Read my article on Induction Basics, it explains all this. And if you want to discuss further I'll gladly do so, no alibis needed. I read your your article, and apparently the information is copied from other sources. It didn't answer my questions. Do I need to give you time to look for other sources to answer those questions? Have you ever developed a product of your own concept totally without depending on other sources for your information? Dell
OK DELL WHY IS IT YOU CAN'T HELP SOMEONE USE AN LRL ,I ALSO HAVE ONE FROM CARLS WEBSITE ,BUT CAN'T GET IT TO WORK.
NO PROOF AND YES YOU ARE MORE LIKE A SNAKE OIL MAN TO MANY PEOPLE.

SHOW PROOF,CARL DID SHOW PROOF,PROOF AND MORE PROOF.
WHAT CAN YOU SHOW BUT TALKING CHIT TO PEOPLE.

Theseus

12-14-2008, 05:32 PM

I usually don't hang out often in this forum anymore simply because besides the fact I'm busy with my own projects,it's a waste of time talking about LRLs with 'typos' everybody knows very well here who they are, either having a hidden agenda, being hungry for a working LRL due to inescrupulous comercial interests or being as ignorant and blind as a rhino towards the LRL subject.

So why do you drop in at all? Are you selling something? ...and like Dell, use the dowsing and LRL forums to keep his name and his products in the face of those gullible and technically-challenged folks who might stop by here.

Dell's, statement above should be enough to end for good discussions and arguings like the ones in this thread... End the discussion? How ludicrous! Dell has had literally thousands of opportunities to offer up proof of his pseudo science claims and paint roller handle locators, and yet to this very day he has not been able to come up with a shred of substantiated evidence. But forget about coming up with the evidence, that is obviously not going to happen.

A bigger problem is the fact that both Carl and Randi still have their Challenge Money. Taking their money would not involve revealing any "LRL secrets" (as you claim to have) and it would not require you or Dell to explain how your contraptions work. Yet Carl and Randi have still got their money. I know why Dell won't try for the Challenge Money, but what is your excuse?

J_Player

12-14-2008, 07:59 PM

Dell,

This "debate" is same ol' same ol'. The bottom line is, I am willing to back up everything I say about LRLs, and you are not.

Originally Posted by Qiaozhi
You must secretly derive pleasure from visiting this forum, in a masochistic sort of way. Why else would you come here?

... But (like Dell) you still do come back. Why is that? Are you another LRL masochist?

Originally Posted by Theseus
So why do you drop in at all? Are you selling something?

Sure this debate is the same ol' same ol'.
Dell is not here to prove he is right or demonstrate any of his LRLs working. Neither is hung. They are here to try to use their rhetoric and name-calling to defame anyone who questions the baseless nature of their extraordinary claims. Their general technique is to wait until someone concludes they are reading BS that has no foundation, rather than facts that can be demonstrated repeatedly, and wait for these persons to post that they think Dell or hung is fullo BS, and their alleged long range locators don't work. Then they use name-calling, threats, demands and defamation to attempt to make these people change their mind and agree that they have really produced some extraordinary device for locating treasure.

But why defame people who question their baseless claims? In Dell's case, It appears he thinks Carl has caused havoc with his LRL sales business, and he has stated he is in a financial condition that leaves him dependent on a meager social security income and whatever supplemental LRL profits he can accumulate by assembling his LRLs. Does this sound likely? Is it possible that one electronic engineer can single-handedly put an LRL manufacturer out of business, or even make a dent in the LRL business? It seems to me that every metal detector shop I have contacted except Kellyco tells me flat out that LRLs don't work, and buy at your own risk. I also hear this same opinion from every metal detectorist I have come into contact with. I don't think any of these people ever heard of Carl except maybe Kellyco. So I must conclude that if Dell is destitute, it cannot be due to Carl's influence, but from poor business administration methods. Otherwise, Why is he not doing well like the other LRL manufacturers? After all, there is a sucker born every minute.

I believe the real reason Dell calls names and tries to defame people is because he knows he cannot demonstrate any of his LRLs working, And Carl actually took some of his machines apart to show what they really are. It appears that Dell was embarrassed by the proof that his LRLs don't work, and unable to prove Carl wrong, so he attacks with name-calling and baseless rhetoric.

But why is hung posting here when he ends up looking like a general idiot every time he comes around? He has nothing to sell (for money). So what does he want us to buy? Could it be he wants us to buy into the idea that he is a very knowledgeable expert who knows even more than the brilliant engineers who post in this forum? Is he trying to convince us that he has built a secret treasure machine that finds treasures from miles away? Are we reading posts from the new "Nicola Tesla" of the treasure hunting industry, and too stupid to realize it?

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
Hahahahhahahahahaaaaa.... I will believe this after I first become convinced that Santa Clause comes down the chimney every year with lots of free presents. It sure seems to me that hung is posting here to try to convince someone in this world that he is and important accomplished builder of treasure equipment, and his ideas are very important. This makes me wonder if nobody listens to him in his home town. Oh well, I never paid much attention to his theories, except for their humor value.

Although their reasons appear to be different, the methods of hung and Dell seem to be similar, with the common theme of making extraordinary claims and nothing to back up what they are saying except empty words.

Best wishes,
J_P

Clondike Clad

12-14-2008, 08:48 PM

All I wanted was a working LRL.
So I post and post.
I build some circuits and talked with others.
I now know if I keep asking ...someone will talk about the good the bad and the snakeoil of LRL.
So until someone or I takes carls money.....LRRRRRRL are just that SNAKEOIL.
NOW DELL YOU NEED TO POST PROOF AND THIS YOU CAN'T DO.

HUNG IF YOU DO HAVE A WORKING UNIT SHOW US A SIMPLE CIRCUIT THAT WILL GIVE PROOF.
THA IS ALL I AM ASKING.
NOW AS FOR WHAT CARL SAID.....HE HAS PROOF AND WE CAN MAKE HIS CIRCUITS AND YES ANYONE CAN MAKE THEM WORK...THAT IS PROOF.
CARL'S LRL CIRCUITS DIDNOT WORK,BUT CARL SAID THE CIRCUITS WILL NOT WORK........PROOF.
SO UNTIL WE HAVE PROOF IT IS ALL TALK.
I WAS ON THE MOON BUT I WON'T TELL YA HOW I GOT TO THE MOON.

Carl-NC

12-15-2008, 03:04 AM

Dell's, statement above should be enough to end for good discussions and arguings like the ones in this thread with LRL 'rookies and pretenders who pose stating that 'physics prove LRLs don't work'...
Ha,ha,ha.:lol:

Hung, I believe you are right, that Dell's 35 years as a "Professional Treasure Salvor" should count for something in the debate over LRLs. We should therefore look at all the treasure recoveries Dell has made with LRLs:
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Er, OK, maybe that's not such a good idea. Despite 35 years as a "Professional Treasure Salvor" I guess there's not much to show for his use of LRLs, except for all those "finds" that never seemed to have gotten dug up for one reason or another. But if you include all those unrecovered treasures, Dell's LRLs have an impressive record indeed! Wow!

In any case, I have personally bought, tested, and dissected practically every type of LRL being peddled. Not only do they not work, but they are often laughably obvious frauds such as the Ranger-Tell Examiner, which you actually believe is something other than a complete joke! That says a lot, and it's not good. Not good at all.

Again, all the LRLs I'm aware of are total junk; they do not work, at all. And, unlike LRL proponents, I'm willing to back up what I say about them.

- Carl

Steve in MS

12-15-2008, 05:19 AM

Dell's, statement above should be enough to end for good discussions and arguings like the ones in this thread....
Again, comparing Dell's long time field experieces, knowledge about several devices he used, and data he collected along all this time....

We really don't care what Dell's statements are or yours:D:razz::lol:
or what LRL devices that some have that are not available to the public
and are supposed to be so great:D:D:D.
Since this is a public forum we could care less about such secret devices:D:D:D.
Since there is no evidence that LRLs work we just plain don't believe you or Dell
:D:D:D:D:D:razz::razz::razz::razz::lol::lol:.

hung

12-15-2008, 10:14 AM

Could it be he wants us to buy into the idea that he is a very knowledgeable expert who knows even more than the brilliant engineers who post in this forum?

I regret to inform that you are completely mistaken on this. If I for some reason, led you or others to believe that my knowledge is superior than anyone else's here, I deeply excuse myself. This was never my intention.
Scientific knowledge and moral knowledge are the most valuable treasures of all. I learn everyday and know how much insignificant the amount of data I have represents compared to what is out there to be learned.

But if you carefully analyze your sentence against me, you will find that it can be very well applied to your 'brilliant engineers' here who are the ones who really pose as 'know it all' typos thinking they are sure about issues which they simply don't understand.
And worst, thinking there's nothing to be learned anymore. Their egos would never allow them to stand correct if necessary.
This contradicts all scientific lines of thought when they pre judge as fact what they don't compreehend. Dign of the middle ages.

Also, the 'brilliant engineers' here could not make the PD to work.

Is he trying to convince us that he has built a secret treasure machine that finds treasures from miles away?

There's nothing secret on this as all technology is already available.
You people here think that long range detection is like a time machine top secret technology. You people are completely lost on it.
Simplicity is the beauty of nature.

hung

12-15-2008, 10:24 AM

In any case, I have personally bought, tested, and dissected practically every type of LRL being peddled. Not only do they not work, but they are often laughably obvious frauds such as the Ranger-Tell Examiner, which you actually believe is something other than a complete joke! That says a lot, and it's not good. Not good at all.

You dissected them and still were not able to comprehend what it was all about.

Fact 1: Many people can't make a particular LRL to work and bash it.
But then there's fact 2: Also many people DO MAKE this particular LRL work and are happy and busy in the field. A few of them come to a forum once in a while to release their experience.

Regarding the RT, the way it's presently built is not the most adequate and it has flaws, but it works. I know for a fact of some persons who suceeded with them finding treasures and gold in mines. This is a fact.
So I respect them. You should also do this and not come here saying that 'it's laughable' just because you think it is.

Respect is a good virtue. Take good care of it.

Qiaozhi

12-15-2008, 11:25 AM

And worst, thinking there's nothing to be learned anymore. Their egos would never allow them to stand correct if necessary.
This contradicts all scientific lines of thought when they pre judge as fact what they don't compreehend. Dign of the middle ages.
It is statements like this that expose your total lack of understanding. The Geotech forums demonstrate very well that its members have a thirst for knowledge, and certainly do not believe there is nothing left to learn

Also, the 'brilliant engineers' here could not make the PD to work.
I wonder why? :razz:
Could it be that "what doesn't work, cannot be made to work!".

There's nothing secret on this as all technology is already available.
You people here think that long range detection is like a time machine top secret technology. You people are completely lost on it.
Simplicity is the beauty of nature.
:lol: That's funny!

You dissected them and still were not able to comprehend what it was all about.
On the contrary, it is immediately obvious "what is was all about". A combination of self-delusion, selective memory, and often blatant fraud.

Regarding the RT, the way it's presently built is not the most adequate and it has flaws, but it works. I know for a fact of some persons who suceeded with them finding treasures and gold in mines. This is a fact.
This is exactly why your credibility is close to absolute zero.

Theseus

12-15-2008, 01:35 PM

...Regarding the RT, the way it's presently built is not the most adequate and it has flaws....

Flawed? Certainly it's overpriced, but it actually does exactly what any dowsing rod is designed to do. IT REACTS PERFECTLY TO AN OPERATOR IDEOMOTOR RESPONSE AND THE PULL OF GRAVITY! What else was it supposed to do?

Oh......... did you think the stick-on calculator was doing something beneficial towards locating targets? Sorry to inform you, but the calculator merely adds weight to the swinging mass atop the swivel handle.

In truth, the RT Examiner will find just as many gold mines as an L-shaped bent piece of wire. Remember, if you dig enough holes, eventually one of them will yield what the operator can imagine is a viable target. :lol::lol::lol:

J_Player

12-15-2008, 01:59 PM

...But if you carefully analyze your sentence against me, you will find that it can be very well applied to your 'brilliant engineers' here who are the ones who really pose as 'know it all' typos thinking they are sure about issues which they simply don't understand.
And worst, thinking there's nothing to be learned anymore. Their egos would never allow them to stand correct if necessary.

There's nothing secret on this as all technology is already available.
You people here think that long range detection is like a time machine top secret technology. You people are completely lost on it.Oh really?
Isn't this the secret LRL that you made after modifying a Ranger Tell, and then told us that you cannot divulge what changes you made? Isn't it the same secret LRL that you said would never be allowed to be used by anyone except your "Team"? As I recall it was your secret invention that was inspired by the Ranger Tell.

So we simply don't understand the working of a Ranger Tell? If a Ranger Tell does not work by fooling idiots into believing that a calculator stuck to an antenna finds treasure, then I guess I don't understand, and I think there's nothing to be learned any more from the Ranger Tell. But I have already learned what the LRL proponent's answer is to how the Ranger tell works by reading the posts of someone who believes the Ranger Tell finds treasure, and is so valuable that any modified versions must be kept a secret....

From:
http://thunting.com/geotech/forums/showpost.php?p=63150&postcount=48
http://thunting.com/geotech/forums/showpost.php?p=63151&postcount=49
http://thunting.com/geotech/forums/showpost.php?p=63263&postcount=81
Although I cannot divulge what I changed in the examiner original circuit, I must say that the original version should work ok.

My LRL system has nothing to do with the examiner itself. When I said it ‘was the basis’ of my system, I meant that upon seing the mod I did working, I came to know that the principle was correct to a more compllex aproach which now we are materializing. It’s a complex electronic system/device. As an analogy, it’s like a pocket radio and radar. The principle is the same, but they are totally different animals.

...First and most important.

If you don't have any knowledge in the ECE theory and metaphysics, as you show you don't, then there's not what discuss. It will be like discussing quantum physics using using obsolete models or discussing the general theory of relativity from a static perspective.

You understand what I'm saying Carl?
First of all the static magnetic field is just the field that it's not dependent of time. Electricity and magnetism are independent phenomena as long as charges and current are static, but not that it behaves as the classical static magnetic field.

The B(3) spin field is the magnetic flux density generated by the spin
connection of a space-time with torsion. It signals the fact that
electrodynamics is a sector of a generally covariant unified field theory.
This magnetic flux density is defined by:
F = d ^ A + omega ^ A

... In Maxwell Heaviside field theory:

F = d ^ A

Omega is missing , so this is not consistent part of general relativity because it does not define a B(3) field and is Lorentz covariant only, not geneally covariant. In ECE theory the B(3) field is part of the omega ^ A term and is observed experimenetally in many ways, because the electromagnetic phase is defined by B(3). This is also observed in the magnetization of matter by an electromagnetic field (the inverse Faraday effect).

Without the B(3) field there can be no generally covariant unified field theory as required by the fundamental philosophy of relativity.

This is an example how some aspects cannot be viewed through the standard model. And also blocks the complete understanding of what the examiner concept might be dealing with. Now, I'm not stating the examiner is a complex device, etc. Far from that. I even seriously doubt its inventor had all of this in mind when he developed.
The examiner is not a finished project in my view but it deals with a great concept which has a long road ahead.

....Although the mod I did to the examiner works, it does not make use of all the functions the calculator is able to produce according to RT, such as estimates on depth, shape, etc.
Well, actually my mod version only works on gold and I cannot use the functions above. But it works fine. Totally electronic without me having to worry to not move my wrist wrong anymore.

I believe that according to the concept envisioned by the inventor, the functions claimed for the calculator, might be quite possible and logical, although I still have not come to an explanation on how this happens.

In my view, the calculator produces two magnetic fields, a static one, since it employs a dc battery and a dynamic (AC), due to its oscilator, which interact. Both in its turn, interact with the user charges that produce the HEF (human electromagnetic field) and this result use the own earth's field as a carrier.

I believe (this is a personal view) our own magnetic field acts as a resonance amplifier for the field generated by both calculator and antenna circuit. It's inteteresting to see diodes present I think in all versions.

I am fascinated by things I can't comprehend and I pursue the explanation until I can find it. It's not always I'm sucessful, but the examiner's case is a teasing one. Although our system was based on its ideas and concepts, specially after my mod working fine, apart from that, it has nothing else similar to the examiner itself as our system is a much more complex and sensitive all electronic apparatus.

Anyway, I will talk about the examiner with Myron Evans and see what he thinks and how ECE can explain the interaction of all those fields. I'm sure it does when it explains the true role of the static field, getting away from the standard Maxwell-Heaviside model which omits the spin resonance.
But what about interaction of the others? At what level does this happen? What about the math to back it up?
And this I've learned from our physicist when first starting our project. He used to say: 'if there was no math to back it up, I would not even bother to stand from my couch. Now that I confirmed this mathematically, give me a hand to stand up and let's go to the lab'.
Funny guy...

Now lemme see... The Ranger Tell sends out a static magnetic field because it has a DC battery, and a dynamic magnetic field from it's oscillator. But wait, it doesn't have an oscillator! ...Ooops I forgot the clock inside the calculator... The magnetic field it produces in addition to the magnetic field produced by the battery makes it a treasure machine!

So there is my choice... To believe all that with no substantial proof it ever found treasure, or believe it doesn't work. So what should I believe? Doh. :rolleyes:

Best wishes,
J_P

Clondike Clad

12-15-2008, 04:13 PM

OK this is what I know about LRL crap on this fourm.
1 SCAM
2 SNAKE OIL will do the same.
3 Can find a fool and take his or her money.
4 Carl's money is very safe.
5 Snake oil men are still with us.
6 Carl did a good thing having this forum to show scammer,the lies and etc.
7Carl thanks for showing us the scammer and snake oil men tricks.
8 Open your eyes and see.:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D
9 Oh I forgot please show proof and we must be able to work the thingie and make it detect gold or silver at 10 feet.

Carl-NC

12-15-2008, 04:28 PM

You dissected them and still were not able to comprehend what it was all about.

Oh, I understand LRLs extremely well. I know exactly why they are designed they way they are.

Fact 1: Many people can't make a particular LRL to work and bash it.But then there's the funny part... every time I ask an LRL expert to demonstrate one, they fail. Every time! Quickly followed by an alibi, every single time! Seems they only work when I'm not looking.

But then there's fact 2: Also many people DO MAKE this particular LRL work and are happy and busy in the field. A few of them come to a forum once in a while to release their experience.Oh, I have no doubt that people who use LRLs occasionally find things. Statistics alone predict that, and the additional use of other instruments guarantees it.

Regarding the RT, the way it's presently built is not the most adequate and it has flaws, but it works.I would not say that the RT Examiner has flaws. It is designed to be such an obvious joke that only the most self-deluded person would ever keep it past the money-back deadline. Blanes is laughing his *** off every time he sells one. As a money-making machine for Blanes and a source of entertainment for us all, yes, it works!

- Carl

Fred

12-15-2008, 04:33 PM

Regarding the RT, the way it's presently built is not the most adequate and it has flaws, but it works. I know for a fact of some persons who suceeded with them finding treasures and gold in mines. This is a fact.
That is funny! able to find gold in a gold mine :shocked: :lol:
Is that true that your "team" is working on a secret project of a device able to find water in the sea?

humhum

12-15-2008, 06:32 PM

LRL is true(real) fact.

Clondike Clad

12-15-2008, 07:57 PM

LRL is true(real) fact.

Ok give proof.
Anyone can say Santa is real and that a deer can fly.

I'm a hunter and NEVER seen a deer fly.
Oh yes I did see one fly,after I shot it.

Proof is needed on thr LRL thingie.:shocked:

humhum

12-15-2008, 08:31 PM

Hi, I use LRL as(like) Mineoro and I received a gold signal from 500 meter.
(on each side).
It is a fact for me.

Regards.

Morgan

12-15-2008, 09:15 PM

Hi, I use LRL as(like) Mineoro and I received a gold signal from 500 meter.
(on each side).
It is a fact for me.

Regards.
Some people from this forum contact with me and said they found treasures with LRL ionic/electrostatic devices. But i cant say nothing about this,anyway i believe in some of them including Humhum...

Morgan

12-15-2008, 10:05 PM

Some people from this forum contact with me and said they found treasures with LRL ionic/electrostatic devices. But i cant say nothing about this,anyway i believe in some of them including Humhum...
Other important clue :

All of them claim to have found big quantities of gold and silver,and never coin size objects,using Mineoro LRL ...
I think this devices not work with little objects,and big treasures are dificult to find,so there is a lot of clients not satisfied with LRL,becouse it needs BIG emanations of energy to be detected.

humhum

12-15-2008, 10:10 PM

No,this my not big treasure, this is old buried coins (cooper,silver).

Esteban

12-15-2008, 10:25 PM

Is very ease detect big objects (treasure) with simple electronic method.

What causes great increases of voltage in circuit by this mass of good conductive objects? Maybe an effect like battery wich distort the coil or antenna.

In this way, if treaure is very closed on iron container will mask the "emission" or battery effect or electrical field. So, is according to a common shielding method used in electronic. Also iron targets near conductive small items nulls or "stolen" the detection.

What causes this electricity around good conductive targets buried for many years? Chemist process and migration?

putrechigi

12-15-2008, 10:36 PM

Hi, I use LRL as(like) Mineoro and I received a gold signal from 500 meter.
(on each side).
It is a fact for me.

Regards.
i cry:frown::frown::frown::frown::frown::frown::frow n::frown::frown::frown:

hung

12-15-2008, 11:07 PM

Esteban

12-15-2008, 11:59 PM

Esteban,
We know what we can do.
That's enough.

Morgan, you taught the 'brilliant engineers' here how to build a PD right.
This is unforgettable.:lol:
Also in your emails to me I see how you've grown regarding the technical aspects of LRLs. Congratulations. You've learned so many things in a year... Much faster then it has taken to many here in this forum in 5 years... of even in a lifetime.

Some believe that the only one that can cross big distances is Santa Claus and his reindeers. A pistol detector does not go so far away as Santa Claus, but they do not believe it possibly.

Qiaozhi

12-16-2008, 12:05 AM

Esteban,
We know what we can do.
That's enough.
Oops! Time to rally the troops...
Maybe it's getting a bit hot in here?

Morgan, you taught the 'brilliant engineers' here how to build a PD right.
This is unforgettable.:lol:
It's strange how you have such a twisted perception of the world. It was the engineers of this forum that helped Morgan to back-engineer and clone the PD. I do not recall anyone being "taught" anything, and I'm certain others will agree. In fact, it was very much the other way around. Of course, in your case, it simply went in one ear and out the other. So no change there then. :razz:

Also in your emails to me I see how you've grown regarding the technical aspects of LRLs. Congratulations. You've learned so many things in a year... Much faster then it has taken to many here in this forum in 5 years... of even in a lifetime.
:lol: :lol: Another funny one! You're such a wit!

J_Player

12-16-2008, 09:52 AM

But why is hung posting here when he ends up looking like a general idiot every time he comes around? He has nothing to sell (for money). So what does he want us to buy? Could it be he wants us to buy into the idea that he is a very knowledgeable expert who knows even more than the brilliant engineers who post in this forum?

...It sure seems to me that hung is posting here to try to convince someone in this world that he is and important accomplished builder of treasure equipment, and his ideas are very important. This makes me wonder if nobody listens to him in his home town. Oh well, I never paid much attention to his theories, except for their humor value.

Originally Posted by hung
I regret to inform that you are completely mistaken on this. If I for some reason, led you or others to believe that my knowledge is superior than anyone else's here, I deeply excuse myself. This was never my intention....

Originally Posted by hung
...Morgan, you taught the 'brilliant engineers' here how to build a PD right.
This is unforgettable.:lol:
Also in your emails to me I see how you've grown regarding the technical aspects of LRLs. Congratulations. You've learned so many things in a year... Much faster then it has taken to many here in this forum in 5 years... of even in a lifetime.

Originally Posted by hung
upon seing the mod I did working, I came to know that the principle was correct to a more compllex aproach which now we are materializing. It’s a complex electronic system/device.... If you don't have any knowledge in the ECE theory and metaphysics, as you show you don't, then there's not what discuss.
...You understand what I'm saying Carl?
First of all the static magnetic field is just the field that it's not dependent of time.... Bla, bla, bla, (from a post above)...Hmmmm.... Was I right? Does hung post here only to try to show that he is a knowledgeable expert who knows even more than the brilliant engineers who post in this forum?

After reading the "hung treatise on how electromagnetism really works per the ECE theory", directed at Carl-NC (another post shown above), I no longer wonder who he is trying to prove he is smarter than. With hung's brilliant theory about the new magnetism, he has proved the DC battery in the Ranger Tell produces a static magnetic field amidst the AC magnetic field produced by the calculator clock. And these two magnetic fields emanating from the battery and calculator clock, in conjunction with the proper tapping of calculator buttons are able to locate treasure from long range, (as well as other functions, such as indicating distance, depth, etc.)
... And this is all backed up by his recitation to Carl-NC of the science of the ECE theory, not by a demonstration of the Ranger Tell finding treasure at long range like he claims.

So is this hung's real motive here? ... to prove he is more knowledgeable than Carl-NC about magnetic fields, induction circuits, and methods to locate treasure at long distance? Is he trying to fool people into thinking he has some extraordinary knowledge of batteries and calculators producing magnetic fields that relates treasure hunting, without any physical proof to demonstrate that any of this BS could work?

Could it be that hung has deluded himself when he says "you are completely mistaken on this. If I for some reason, led you or others to believe that my knowledge is superior than anyone else's here, I deeply excuse myself".

...Isn't this exactly hung's purpose for posting in this forum? .... to prove he is smarter than Carl-NC with empty words that cannot be demonstrated?

How hung's Science works:

hung

12-16-2008, 10:17 AM

J_Player

12-16-2008, 10:30 AM

:lol::lol::lol:

If you only could use this creativity to conduct a serious research...

Merry Xmas to you JP.
See you next year.

PS. If you think Carl's data on magnetic fields is only what you got, you still might be here 'trying to find your way home' 10 years from now...
Good luck. Merry Christmas and happy new year to you and your family too hung.

PS. I don't have only Carl's data on magnetic fields, I also have thousands of reputable physicists who agree with Carl on how magnetic fields work, and a 0.00% score of Ranger Tell passing any double blind test.

Bst wishes,
J_P

Fred

12-16-2008, 12:13 PM

Esteban,We know what we can do. That's enough.

Esteban, the boss is back.Go home.

Hung, do you remember when you were making tests with your ferrite coil, and trying to make the PD work with burned transistors?
Are you not supposed to be a brilliant engineer too, who have learned a lot ?
still, i can´t see any major avance in your "researchs"...:rolleyes:

hung

12-16-2008, 12:27 PM

Esteban, the boss is back.Go home.

Please Fred, don't talk like that.
I'm no boss of anybody's!

Esteban is a brilliant engineer, experimenter and deserves all rewards for his hard work.

Hung, do you remember when you were making tests with your ferrite coil, and trying to make the PD work with burned transistors?
Are you not supposed to be a brilliant engineer too, who have learned a lot ?
still, i can´t see any major avance in your "researchs"...:rolleyes:

Correction: I had one burned transistor for a short period of time. This was repaired as soon as it was detected.

My new PD works fine and new implementations are coming up.

Again, I'm not an EE. I'm an audio engineer. But I do have some fortes and brilliant engineers in my team.

Merry Xmas Fred, to you and your family.
Hope Good Will and peace bless the world in 2009.:thumb:

Morgan

12-16-2008, 01:09 PM

Esteban, the boss is back.Go home.

Hung, do you remember when you were making tests with your ferrite coil, and trying to make the PD work with burned transistors?
Are you not supposed to be a brilliant engineer too, who have learned a lot ?
still, i can´t see any major avance in your "researchs"...:rolleyes:
If the people here think the LRL Pistoldetektor is something from the past,to forget... :nono:I say thanks to Esteban,Hung and a few other people who clone sucessful the Alonso PD,I say thanks for all upgrades in schematic and better (device) behavior !!!

Happy Christmas

Morgan

12-16-2008, 01:15 PM

i cry:frown::frown::frown::frown::frown::frown::frow n::frown::frown::frown:
Yes,Humhum get this signal,and it was with device he make based on my BFO LRL Ionic/electrostatic ;)

Merry Christmas Humhum

Morgan

12-16-2008, 01:21 PM

Esteban,
We know what we can do.
That's enough.

Morgan, you taught the 'brilliant engineers' here how to build a PD right.
This is unforgettable.:lol:
Also in your emails to me I see how you've grown regarding the technical aspects of LRLs. Congratulations. You've learned so many things in a year... Much faster then it has taken to many here in this forum in 5 years... of even in a lifetime.
Thanks hung

Sometimes the practice is better than the theory,and i know most of this E.E from forum,not have time to try PD in the field,so they think device not work...But i always get time to try PD,and sucessfuly :D

Morgan

12-16-2008, 01:27 PM

Oops! Time to rally the troops...
Maybe it's getting a bit hot in here?

It's strange how you have such a twisted perception of the world. It was the engineers of this forum that helped Morgan to back-engineer and clone the PD. I do not recall anyone being "taught" anything, and I'm certain others will agree. In fact, it was very much the other way around. Of course, in your case, it simply went in one ear and out the other. So no change there then. :razz:

:lol: :lol: Another funny one! You're such a wit!
Yes,thats true,thanks a lot for your help,and also thanks for the others Max,Fred,J_P,Andreas etc,etc Hope all of them ,one of this days get good results with Pistoldetektor,and not think i´m crazy or lunatic.

Merry Christmas to all

Qiaozhi

12-16-2008, 02:06 PM

Yes,thats true,thanks a lot for your help,and also thanks for the others Max,Fred,J_P,Andreas etc,etc Hope all of them ,one of this days get good results with Pistoldetektor,and not think i´m crazy or lunatic.

Merry Christmas to all
Merry Christmas and Happy New Year to all - both skeptics and proponents of LRLs.

Fred

12-16-2008, 02:41 PM

Please Fred, don't talk like that.
I'm no boss of anybody's!
Esteban is a brilliant engineer, experimenter and deserves all rewards for his hard work.
A brilliant experimenter for sure.But i talk like that because you often come here to refrain him from sharing his entusiasm :p

Correction: I had one burned transistor for a short period of time. This was repaired as soon as it was detected.
Of course! what i mean if that you were,just like others,building a PD from info posted by Morgan and reverse engineered by us.
Merry Xmas Fred, to you and your family.
Thank Hung, and the same to you. Saúde !

Sometimes the practice is better than the theory,and i know most of this E.E from forum,not have time to try PD in the field,...
I agree with that Morgan.

Merry Christmas and Happy New Year to all - both skeptics and proponents of LRLs.

Merry Christmas to all , and thanks to the LRLs proponents for giving us this matter of discution. Just like good and bad weather, it is always interesting...:D
And good luck in your searchs.
Best regards,
Fred.

Clondike Clad

12-16-2008, 02:49 PM

I wish all well for 2009;)
:):):):):):):):):):):)

rajesh

01-15-2009, 05:06 PM

[quote=Carl-NC;82942]Technically, a magnetometer does not detect iron, rather it detects the magnetic field distortion caused by an iron target. And a metal detector does not detect metal, rather it detects the magnetic field distortions caused by the eddy currents that are induced by a primary magnetic field.

That said...

I can tell you exactly how a magnetometer or a metal detector works, down to the very physics involved.
I can use a magnetometer or a metal detector in a randomized double-blind test to objectively prove they work as I claim they will work.
I can tell you exactly how to build a magnetometer or a metal detector, that you can build for yourself, that you can test for yourself, and that you can use to independently verify everything I tell you about how they work.
I can provide examples of people who have used magnetometers and metal detectors to locate and retrieve all sorts of valuable objects, from individual items to caches to massive hoards of treasure. And lots of it, too.

i dont know why not built a t/r locator as a similer freuency like 5khz or 59 khz or other related to gold .............

humhum

01-15-2009, 09:36 PM

Hi Rajest , how use the radio as a treasure receiver(what happens) , and what frequency. Did you test it.

Dell Winders

01-16-2009, 04:41 AM

Fact: Whites Electronics sold a Metal detector,specifically for detecting Gold, that used 5.0 Khz. I wonder why? Dell :)

humhum

01-16-2009, 10:12 AM

I ask particularly for the detection of gold with the Radio receiver (MW-LW,SW ..etc.)

Theseus

01-16-2009, 03:04 PM

Fact: Whites Electronics sold a Metal detector,specifically for detecting Gold, that used 5.0 Khz. I wonder why? Dell :)

Since you have told us repeatedly that you have no idea how anything electronic actually works, and you've bragged about ending your formal education in the 5th or 6th grade; how could you hope to understand the answer to your question, even if someone took the time to tell you? :shocked::shocked:

Clondike Clad

01-16-2009, 05:08 PM

Fact: Whites Electronics sold a Metal detector,specifically for detecting Gold, that used 5.0 Khz. I wonder why? Dell :)
The Answer is that detector was a TR and the crystal use for that unit was a common .IN OTHER WORDS IT WAS EAZY TO GET.Dell some of use really knows ELECTRONICS

Morgan

01-17-2009, 10:57 AM

The Answer is that detector was a TR and the crystal use for that unit was a common .IN OTHER WORDS IT WAS EAZY TO GET.Dell some of use really knows ELECTRONICS
Signal from Gold

People who buy the Mineoro devices,complains that Mineoro sometimes not detect the gold,that they find lather with normal metal detectors,and they are rigth.
Mineoro make the same error in all devices. Uses 24K gold in the resonating frequency chamber. They claim this chamber its to produce the DNA of gold,but in reality if the gold is alloyed with silver or copper, the frequency change, the gold DNA will not be the 24K anymore but 22k,18k or 12k.
The solution for this problem seams to me very easy to solve using diferent gold alloys inside the resonating chamber...
Why Mineoro find silver or copper sometimes,its becouse inside the resonating chamber also this metals are present

Morgan

01-17-2009, 11:08 AM

Signal from Gold

People who buy the Mineoro devices,complains that Mineoro sometimes not detect the gold,that they find lather with normal metal detectors,and they are rigth.
Mineoro make the same error in all devices. Uses 24K gold in the resonating frequency chamber. They claim this chamber its to produce the DNA of gold,but in reality if the gold is alloyed with silver or copper, the frequency change, the gold DNA will not be the 24K anymore but 22k,18k or 12k.
The solution for this problem seams to me very easy to solve using diferent gold alloys inside the resonating chamber...
Why Mineoro find silver or copper sometimes,its becouse inside the resonating chamber also this metals are present
Me and other people from this forum,this include also EE,are studing the phenomenon of the radiation created by buried metals. Not happens only with me when use PD to have cuted signals over the spot(when big). Strong radiation coming from buried metal,overload the device when very near,and target very big...
All Frequencies of Gold and Silver produced underground i hoppe to be discovered very soon.

Esteban

01-18-2009, 01:23 PM

Me and other people from this forum,this include also EE,are studing the phenomenon of the radiation created by buried metals. Not happens only with me when use PD to have cuted signals over the spot(when big). Strong radiation coming from buried metal,overload the device when very near,and target very big...
All Frequencies of Gold and Silver produced underground i hoppe to be discovered very soon.

Was discovered decades ago! :razz:

Of course, you'll doctorate for to claim the success! :lol:

Fred

01-18-2009, 02:52 PM

Was discovered decades ago! :razz:
Of course, you'll doctorate for to claim the success! :lol:

Esteban, you must have noticed the effect that the PD stops beeping when pointing up, do you know where this effect come from, and how to detect it the simplest way ? does it works the same with a small coil ?
i am interested by this if it is still detectable at higher altitude ...

Morgan

01-18-2009, 06:33 PM

Was discovered decades ago! :razz:

Of course, you'll doctorate for to claim the success! :lol:
One friend from this forum get the same cuted signals(like i have over the silver coins) over one spot. He was using Mineoro ionic electrostatic model. The spot consist in several Kg of gold not very deep...
I even dont want to mention the distance he get the first beeps,realy great distance.
But in other ocasions his Mineoro faills to get other gold spots...
Maybe to much humidity,damp soil,not 24K gold ,GOLD NOT IN CONTACT WITH SOIL,or other reasons,we dont know yet but try to understand.

putrechigi

01-18-2009, 07:06 PM

Signal from Gold

People who buy the Mineoro devices,complains that Mineoro sometimes not detect the gold,that they find lather with normal metal detectors,and they are rigth.
Mineoro make the same error in all devices. Uses 24K gold in the resonating frequency chamber. They claim this chamber its to produce the DNA of gold,but in reality if the gold is alloyed with silver or copper, the frequency change, the gold DNA will not be the 24K anymore but 22k,18k or 12k.
The solution for this problem seams to me very easy to solve using diferent gold alloys inside the resonating chamber...
Why Mineoro find silver or copper sometimes,its becouse inside the resonating chamber also this metals are present

hola morgan
Just put the old gold in the chamber board and find old objects buried?

Esteban

01-19-2009, 12:43 AM

Esteban, you must have noticed the effect that the PD stops beeping when pointing up, do you know where this effect come from, and how to detect it the simplest way ? does it works the same with a small coil ?
i am interested by this if it is still detectable at higher altitude ...

I had a pistol based on GD-48, but don't suffer this effect, never, no up, no down. Maybe the problem is in the ferrite circuit section. Never I build the pistol posted by Morgan...

The pistol based on GD-48 has FM radio, but no ferrite section.

Sometimes, pistols based on "X" systems suffer this effect. In this case I adjust sensibility control the best I can for no to beeping up or down. When I obtain the stable point, I start search with it. In most ocassions this reveals not sensitive, due you must to adjust for not to beeping random in up or down position.

hung

01-19-2009, 09:07 AM

There's no such thing as 'pointing the PD up to stop beepings'...
This is folklore. :lol:
If this happens, it's due to one lead of the RX coil being bad positioned and acting as an antenna. It can also cause the opposite effect, beeping when pointing up and quitting when pointing down.

Fred

01-19-2009, 02:33 PM

I had a pistol based on GD-48, but don't suffer this effect, never, no up, no down. Maybe the problem is in the ferrite circuit section. Never I build the pistol posted by Morgan...
Thanks for your answer Esteban, i need this effect to make a kind of stabiliser for a RC airplane, so would like to know when it is the stronger.
And also i need it with a smallest coil as possible.:)
This is not the ferrite, but the coil itself making this, we tried to flip the coil only and it still worked.

There's no such thing as 'pointing the PD up to stop beepings'...
If this happens, it's due to one lead of the RX coil being bad positioned
So, there is no such thing but you know how and why it happens ? :shocked:

Esteban

01-19-2009, 05:54 PM

See the drawing.

Clondike Clad

01-19-2009, 08:23 PM

So from some of the input circuits for LRL
How can a radio am or fm input circuit(540hkz to 1605khz) pick up emf over 200ghz?? The input transistor can't osc or switch even CLOSE TO THAT.
What am I missing?

Esteban

01-19-2009, 08:51 PM

Fred

01-19-2009, 09:26 PM

See the drawing.
Hi Esteban
So what you are saying is that this effect is nothing more than Earth capacitance effect?

Clondike Clad

01-19-2009, 11:44 PM

A magnetic and electric field is another thing.
What are you telling me???????????????????????????????????????????????

Esteban

01-20-2009, 10:03 PM

Hi Esteban
So what you are saying is that this effect is nothing more than Earth capacitance effect?

Occurs on the workbench. But if the capacitive effect acts in this way on the workbench, I select the part (down) with shows capacitance effect near the soil when I use as metal detector.

For example, I rebuild the coil type O-O. 17 cm diam. each. But transmitter is different turns: 13-6-4-13 turns for transmitter wire 0.18 mm.

Receiver: 30+30 turns 0.28 mm.

You note here reduction of capacitance effect with gross wire in rec.

But here, you don't use omega coil, just O-O.

Esteban

01-20-2009, 10:07 PM

What are you telling me???????????????????????????????????????????????

If the magnetic and electric field near good conductive metals buried for long time is detectable at some distance, so you can consider as a kind of "emission".

Qiaozhi

01-20-2009, 11:17 PM

Occurs on the workbench. But if the capacitive effect acts in this way on the workbench, I select the part (down) with shows capacitance effect near the soil when I use as metal detector.

For example, I rebuild the coil type O-O. 17 cm diam. each. But transmitter is different turns: 13-6-4-13 turns for transmitter wire 0.18 mm.

Receiver: 30+30 turns 0.28 mm.

You note here reduction of capacitance effect with gross wire in rec.

But here, you don't use omega coil, just O-O.
This looks like the windings required for a GD-48, but what do you mean by "gross wire in rec"?
Please explain.

Esteban

01-20-2009, 11:57 PM

This looks like the windings required for a GD-48, but what do you mean by "gross wire in rec"?
Please explain.

GD-48 uses thickness wire in tr. coil and thin wire in rec. coil. For example, a coil with 30 cm diam. in general uses wire 0.45 mm and rec. coil 0.22 mm. Here is contrary: the rec. coil uses thickness wire (0.28 mm) and the tr. coil is made with 0.18 mm wire.

With this model capacitance effect is reduced.

Fred

01-21-2009, 12:07 AM

Esteban

01-21-2009, 07:22 PM

Esteban, tell me if i am bothering you,

But what capacitance effect is that? How can you explain that by just turning the coil upside down 6 meters above ground i notice a difference ?
Also, if you get close to a wall (with soil behind) there is no effect from the wall.
You can be in a hole, even i a metallic container this effect this still there.

WHAT IS THIS ?? :shocked:
Regards,
Fred.

Why not... Some bombs explode above ground 6-7 feets, other 120 feets, based on capacitive effect, in water or ground. This reacts at 50-100 feets (27 m to 54 m). Antenna is the nose of the fuse of the aviation bomb. Was published in electronic circuits book by J. Markus. There are more circuits like this...

Fred

01-21-2009, 10:47 PM

Why not... Some bombs explode above ground 6-7 feets, other 120 feets, based on capacitive effect, in water or ground. This reacts at 50-100 feets (27 m to 54 m). Antenna is the nose of the fuse of the aviation bomb. Was published in electronic circuits book by J. Markus. There are more circuits like this...
Thank you Esteban, that is interesting and i will try to find more about those systems.
Regards,
Fred.

Esteban

01-21-2009, 11:38 PM

Thank you Esteban, that is interesting and i will try to find more about those systems.
Regards,
Fred.

All I have like this is based on tubes... Let me know if you want these.

Fred

01-22-2009, 03:14 PM

All I have like this is based on tubes... Let me know if you want these.
Ok Esteban, thanks, i would like to know at what maximum height such a system could work.
But i will search,if i cannot find i will ask you.
Regards,
Fred.