The Phenomenon

[Funfinder]

Guys, what are you doing here?

Spreading information with no begining, no end, based on no hard scientifcal provable facts and "documented" by nothing saying experiments, wild speculations and wish thinking.

One major problem also is the wrong business agenda some of the LRL-interested tinkerers have. But they miss the correct time-schedule:

FIRST the stuff that they are devoloping must proven work and NEXT they can make big protected business secrets out of their inventions.

Here in this forum, and starting already by Mineoro or OKM, its the different way around! Do you wanna betray the public???


Assuming that electromagnetical ground anomalies caused by metal objects are detectable at long distance:

Wouldn't it be essentially important to check out first why such anomalies start to exists, what causes them and on what electronic "reception" principle those based?



Not to mention that LRL-detection under usual conditions is completly impracticable:

Depending on the site, ca. each 5 squaremeters at least can be found 1 metal object. And now the LRL-fanatic wants to look through 100s of such 5 square-meter areas to get the gold coin from 100m distances? Ridiculous! How he wants to filtering out all the finds inbetween? He can't, its impossible!


Such "caused.by.a.metalobject - field.anomaly.detectors" only would work in the jungle or very abandoned regions, but never at usual sites.

Some here think they have created a device that is able to detect the "phenomenon". But they have no clue what causes it. This is no basis to work or to improve things. First the causa ratio has to be known and after that you can built LRLs. Otherwise its pure esoterical crap like believing that planets would rule the fate of mankind, as astrology thinks.


If it is not possible to find the causa ratio of the phenomenon (or in other words an explanation why metal objects creates such strong field-anomalies that those are detectable even from far away) - and so far no clear thinking scientist found it - it is a pure waste of time and the whole project is doomed from the beginning.

How you wanna built a real sensitive detector if you don't know for what kind of "energy-field" it has to be sensitive for? Do you wanna hear with your eyes or see with your ears? Its the same, you can't.

And stop make a fool out of yourself by protecting "nonworking crap"! You can make a big business secret including patents and owner rights and stuff out of your fine inventors-work if the stuff that you are working on really is useful and reliable, but not before!

Protecting nonworking fantasy-detectors is like false playing with cards - the other persons should think that everything is OK, up and running and the truth, all looks fine, they spent money and think everything is correct, but the only true reason why they make big secrets and "protect" their crap is to betray other people and to hide the "evil truth"!

But we don't want or need it here in this forum!!!
Carl disassembled many of those already existing fraud LRLs and analyzed their innards to discover the "protected evil inside". Not Intel Inside, but "Evil Inside" is the true describtion for LRLs!

Thats one of the main reasons why I absolutly don't respect the behaviour of some of the "LRL-Gurus" here in this forum with their childish secret game playing nonsense and their mysterious-chandler style behaviour. They can do this after they have to offer some real working product including scientifical proven explanation but not with their lies-suggesting electronic-toys and "mix the crap up detectors". We don't wanna detect 1.5v battery sparks but real hidden finds, and if you can't prove that your tinker-boxes are really capable of this, you have absolutly no right to play the big business-secret-maker and suggest that you would have something that would be worth to protect at all!


This forum creates the impression that there would exist "secret LRL discoveries" that would be precious and worth to protect, but the truth is that there is only hot air in all those LRL-boxes!

And this is not fair against technical interested persons who are looking for good and true information here!

Start to describe and explain your so called "phenomenon" and only if this task was finished successfully you can try to built detectors based on that principles. Not vice versa.

[nelson]

Mmm i think we are all exausted reading and reading the same thing everytime and no real projects to work on.
So in my case i opted for keep my investigatios and experiments by my own and in silent until i can get a real working device. And if does´t work, i will give up.
However, my latest experiments shows that the call phenomenum really exist, but i will tell nothing until i can upload real expirencies, cause the rest is just bla bla bla.


Guys, what are you doing here?

Spreading information with no begining, no end, based on no hard scientifcal provable facts and "documented" by nothing saying experiments, wild speculations and wish thinking.

One major problem also is the wrong business agenda some of the LRL-interested tinkerers have. But they miss the correct time-schedule:

FIRST the stuff that they are devoloping must proven work and NEXT they can make big protected business secrets out of their inventions.

Here in this forum, and starting already by Mineoro or OKM, its the different way around! Do you wanna betray the public???


Assuming that electromagnetical ground anomalies caused by metal objects are detectable at long distance:

Wouldn't it be essentially important to check out first why such anomalies start to exists, what causes them and on what electronic "reception" principle those based?



Not to mention that LRL-detection under usual conditions is completly impracticable:

Depending on the site, ca. each 5 squaremeters at least can be found 1 metal object. And now the LRL-fanatic wants to look through 100s of such 5 square-meter areas to get the gold coin from 100m distances? Ridiculous! How he wants to filtering out all the finds inbetween? He can't, its impossible!


Such "caused.by.a.metalobject - field.anomaly.detectors" only would work in the jungle or very abandoned regions, but never at usual sites.

Some here think they have created a device that is able to detect the "phenomenon". But they have no clue what causes it. This is no basis to work or to improve things. First the causa ratio has to be known and after that you can built LRLs. Otherwise its pure esoterical crap like believing that planets would rule the fate of mankind, as astrology thinks.


If it is not possible to find the causa ratio of the phenomenon (or in other words an explanation why metal objects creates such strong field-anomalies that those are detectable even from far away) - and so far no clear thinking scientist found it - it is a pure waste of time and the whole project is doomed from the beginning.

How you wanna built a real sensitive detector if you don't know for what kind of "energy-field" it has to be sensitive for? Do you wanna hear with your eyes or see with your ears? Its the same, you can't.

And stop make a fool out of yourself by protecting "nonworking crap"! You can make a big business secret including patents and owner rights and stuff out of your fine inventors-work if the stuff that you are working on really is useful and reliable, but not before!

Protecting nonworking fantasy-detectors is like false playing with cards - the other persons should think that everything is OK, up and running and the truth, all looks fine, they spent money and think everything is correct, but the only true reason why they make big secrets and "protect" their crap is to betray other people and to hide the "evil truth"!

But we don't want or need it here in this forum!!!
Carl disassembled many of those already existing fraud LRLs and analyzed their innards to discover the "protected evil inside". Not Intel Inside, but "Evil Inside" is the true describtion for LRLs!

Thats one of the main reasons why I absolutly don't respect the behaviour of some of the "LRL-Gurus" here in this forum with their childish secret game playing nonsense and their mysterious-chandler style behaviour. They can do this after they have to offer some real working product including scientifical proven explanation but not with their lies-suggesting electronic-toys and "mix the crap up detectors". We don't wanna detect 1.5v battery sparks but real hidden finds, and if you can't prove that your tinker-boxes are really capable of this, you have absolutly no right to play the big business-secret-maker and suggest that you would have something that would be worth to protect at all!


This forum creates the impression that there would exist "secret LRL discoveries" that would be precious and worth to protect, but the truth is that there is only hot air in all those LRL-boxes!

And this is not fair against technical interested persons who are looking for good and true information here!

Start to describe and explain your so called "phenomenon" and only if this task was finished successfully you can try to built detectors based on that principles. Not vice versa.

[DrTech]

The phenomenon is here....8)

[Seden]

Funfinder,

I'm with you and like Nelson I am working on my own stuff and keeping quiet for the same reason. From my research I'm getting the feeling that this may be a longitudinal wave rather than the conventional Transversal wave Phenomenon and let it go at that.

Randy

[nelson]

I m not an expert about this. I just a hobbist and i have just some knows of electronics and radio has a hamradio man. So for me the call Phenomenon is produce by the mix of the metal, ground and atmospheric conditions. All this mix, creates something like a battery that depending on the weather conditions (humidity, rain, temperature, etc), produce short circuit and then a very small spark that can be detected by a reciber.
Now about placind a transmiter to stimulate the small signal comming from the buried object, i have no explenation at all, but may be in some way act like an amplifier at certain longwave.
How does the wave propagete? Well i think it goes in all directions (vertical and horizontal polarization, because the buried metal it does not have an antenna to go out from).
Does ions realy come out from metals?
I think the answer is yes, but i m not shure what is the real frequency, because i don´t know how or who has posted how to measure this free ions that cames out from metals. Today we all know that negative and positive ions detectors and generators exist on the market. Personally i have tested a ion generator used on my car and i friend of mine who smoke on his car also have this device. His car was always smelling bad because of cigarrete some. After he uses the ion generator, he eliminate the bad smoke smell.
In conclusion, i m not shure how we can measure this metals ions that has i know exist, but it will be interesting to know how to measure and what frquency they travel.

This is my modest opinion and sorry if i don´t have more knolegment about this, but i bealive that if you are interested in this topic, is nice to investigate and learn about it. THis is the reazon i m here, to learn and study with others. All people here has something to said and share and this is the reason i desagree with some members when they don´t share nothing and after that they caim to be the king of LRL.

Regards

Nelson



Funfinder,

I'm with you and like Nelson I am working on my own stuff and keeping quiet for the same reason. From my research I'm getting the feeling that this may be a longitudinal wave rather than the conventional Transversal wave Phenomenon and let it go at that.

Randy

[Seden]

Nelson,

I too am a Amatuer Radio Op. with 35 years experience in the Electronics Industry (Biomed,Aerospace and now working for the Gov't).

What I am pursuing is the work of the late German Physicist Dr. Paul E. Dobler. Like Bose he had to make his own equipment and he was detecting Longitudinal Waves using a Torsion Pendulum and mirrors to detect the frequency of gold and other materials.

Now days you can use electron gradiometer for the detector but still use the spacing of the mirrors to determine the frequency.

So there you have it funfinder,I'm showing my cards so to speak-no games. I could care less if someone reads this and beats me to a working unit. I will still make it and if it's really good sell it as this is in the public forum now.

As my co-worker says-gotta have a hobby!

Randy

[Dell Winders]

Throughout history there have always been arrogant, uninformed naysayers, pretending they are of superior intellect in their efforts to unsuccessfully debunk some of mankind's greatest discoveries.

Funfinder, appears to be a member of the Carl scientific deception team, who would have you believe he is smarter than you without ever conducting, reporting, or discussing his own experiments, field testing, or producing any scientific evidence that substantiates any credibility whatsoever to his own tyrannical rants.

There seems to be a bit of "do as I say do, not as I do hypocrisy going on here to deter the rational exchange of information among experimenters on this forum.

Funfinder, is another WEIS (When Educated Idiots Speak) example of Carl's followers and the promotion of their own scientific hypocrisy.

Anyone ever consider starting an LRL forum for the exchange of useful information, free of the detrimental bias of Carl and his cronies, or is endless arguing with an adversary more favorable than progress with your development of LRL engineering and methodology? Dell

[Qiaozhi]

Throughout history there have always been arrogant, uninformed naysayers, pretending they are of superior intellect in their efforts to unsuccessfully debunk some of mankind's greatest discoveries.

Funfinder, appears to be a member of the Carl scientific deception team, who would have you believe he is smarter than you without ever conducting, reporting, or discussing his own experiments, field testing, or producing any scientific evidence that substantiates any credibility whatsoever to his own tyrannical rants.

There seems to be a bit of "do as I say do, not as I do hypocrisy going on here to deter the rational exchange of information among experimenters on this forum.

Funfinder, is another WEIS (When Educated Idiots Speak) example of Carl's followers and the promotion of their own scientific hypocrisy.

Anyone ever consider starting an LRL forum for the exchange of useful information, free of the detrimental bias of Carl and his cronies, or is endless arguing with an adversary more favorable than progress with your development of LRL engineering and methodology? Dell
If you remove all the whinging and whining in this post, you finally end up with " ".

[Dell Winders]

That doesn't say much about the forums. Especially, when they are further instigated by some snide, or dis-respectful remark by Qiaozhi. ;) Dell

[Qiaozhi]

That doesn't say much about the forums. Especially, when they are further instigated by some snide, or dis-respectful remark by Qiaozhi. ;) Dell
So I take it that "Funfinder, is another WEIS (When Educated Idiots Speak) example of Carl's followers and the promotion of their own scientific hypocrisy." is not a snide or disrespectful remark by Dell Winders?

Not to mention these other quotes that are also not snide or disrespectful remarks:
"Funfinder, appears to be a member of the Carl scientific deception team ..."
"There seems to be a bit of "do as I say do, not as I do hypocrisy going on here ..."
"... the detrimental bias of Carl and his cronies ..."

Looks like a case of the pot calling the kettle black. :rolleyes:

As I pointed out before, remove all the whinging and whining, and what do you have left?
Answer: Absolutely NOTHING.

If this is not a true representation of your post, then please explain where the useful information is located regarding "The Phenomenon", which is the title of this thread? If it is there, I am unable to find it amongst the whinging.

[Dell Winders]

Qiaozhi, it's no surprise that Carl's puppet, would support Funfinder's mis-informed drivel and hypocrisy.

Where are his, or your hard scientific provable facts that LRL's don't work according to hard scientific provable facts. Show us your scientific field test reports that prove this? All I've seen so far are your "Beliefs". That is not Science. You can stop pretending it is. Dell


Guys, what are you doing here?

Spreading information with no begining, no end, based on no hard scientifcal provable facts and "documented" by nothing saying experiments, wild speculations and wish thinking.

One major problem also is the wrong business agenda some of the LRL-interested tinkerers have. But they miss the correct time-schedule:

FIRST the stuff that they are devoloping must proven work and NEXT they can make big protected business secrets out of their inventions.

Here in this forum, and starting already by Mineoro or OKM, its the different way around! Do you wanna betray the public???


Assuming that electromagnetical ground anomalies caused by metal objects are detectable at long distance:

Wouldn't it be essentially important to check out first why such anomalies start to exists, what causes them and on what electronic "reception" principle those based?



Not to mention that LRL-detection under usual conditions is completly impracticable:

Depending on the site, ca. each 5 squaremeters at least can be found 1 metal object. And now the LRL-fanatic wants to look through 100s of such 5 square-meter areas to get the gold coin from 100m distances? Ridiculous! How he wants to filtering out all the finds inbetween? He can't, its impossible!


Such "caused.by.a.metalobject - field.anomaly.detectors" only would work in the jungle or very abandoned regions, but never at usual sites.

Some here think they have created a device that is able to detect the "phenomenon". But they have no clue what causes it. This is no basis to work or to improve things. First the causa ratio has to be known and after that you can built LRLs. Otherwise its pure esoterical crap like believing that planets would rule the fate of mankind, as astrology thinks.


If it is not possible to find the causa ratio of the phenomenon (or in other words an explanation why metal objects creates such strong field-anomalies that those are detectable even from far away) - and so far no clear thinking scientist found it - it is a pure waste of time and the whole project is doomed from the beginning.

How you wanna built a real sensitive detector if you don't know for what kind of "energy-field" it has to be sensitive for? Do you wanna hear with your eyes or see with your ears? Its the same, you can't.

And stop make a fool out of yourself by protecting "nonworking crap"! You can make a big business secret including patents and owner rights and stuff out of your fine inventors-work if the stuff that you are working on really is useful and reliable, but not before!

Protecting nonworking fantasy-detectors is like false playing with cards - the other persons should think that everything is OK, up and running and the truth, all looks fine, they spent money and think everything is correct, but the only true reason why they make big secrets and "protect" their crap is to betray other people and to hide the "evil truth"!

But we don't want or need it here in this forum!!!
Carl disassembled many of those already existing fraud LRLs and analyzed their innards to discover the "protected evil inside". Not Intel Inside, but "Evil Inside" is the true describtion for LRLs!

Thats one of the main reasons why I absolutly don't respect the behaviour of some of the "LRL-Gurus" here in this forum with their childish secret game playing nonsense and their mysterious-chandler style behaviour. They can do this after they have to offer some real working product including scientifical proven explanation but not with their lies-suggesting electronic-toys and "mix the crap up detectors". We don't wanna detect 1.5v battery sparks but real hidden finds, and if you can't prove that your tinker-boxes are really capable of this, you have absolutly no right to play the big business-secret-maker and suggest that you would have something that would be worth to protect at all!


This forum creates the impression that there would exist "secret LRL discoveries" that would be precious and worth to protect, but the truth is that there is only hot air in all those LRL-boxes!

And this is not fair against technical interested persons who are looking for good and true information here!

Start to describe and explain your so called "phenomenon" and only if this task was finished successfully you can try to built detectors based on that principles. Not vice versa.

[Qiaozhi]

Qiaozhi, it's no surprise that Carl's puppet, would support Funfinder's mis-informed drivel and hypocrisy.
Where did I state that I was supporting Funfinder's "mis-informed drivel and hypocrisy"... as you put it?
All I can see here is lots of ducking and diving, and avoiding a direct question, plus the usual snide and disrespectful remarks.

Where are his, or your hard scientific provable facts that LRL's don't work according to hard scientific provable facts. Show us your scientific field test reports that prove this? All I've seen so far are your "Beliefs". That is not Science. You can stop pretending it is. Dell
Firstly (and you've been told this many times in the past), it is not possible to prove a negative. The extraordinary claims are coming from you, and therefore the onus is on you to provide the proof, not the other way around. Remember the tea tray analogy?

Unfortunately my friend, you are a victim of "anomalistic psychology". Back in the early 1800's, Michael Faraday carried out a series of experiments to investigate the phenomenon of table tipping, which established beyond doubt that it was the unintentional muscular movements of the sitters that caused the table to move. This was one of the first systematic studies of the ideomotor effect. Dowsing, ouija boards and table tipping are all the result of the ideomotor effect, and any amount of whinging and whining on your part will never change this fact. Trying to twist things around by using terms such as "trained ideomotor effect" is total nonsense. It may fool the technically challenged, but it doesn't fool the "educated idiots". I know you've already made up your mind on the subject, so I'm sorry if I'm confusing you with the facts. :lol:

[WM6]

......, so I'm sorry if I'm confusing you with the facts. :lol:



Probably you mean ".. with all those many facts."?

[Qiaozhi]

Probably you mean ".. with all those many facts."?
With so much wishful thinking, self-deception and selective memory going on in Dell's mind, it's very difficult for him to tell the difference between what is imaginary and what is real.
Even if he was to actually carry out a scientifically controlled double-blind test (which he has never done), he would still deny the results.
A Double-Blind Test for LRLs (http://www.geotech1.com/cgi-bin/pages/common/index.pl?page=lrl&file=/info/dbtesting.dat)

[Mike(Mont)]

Dell, as you well know the skeptics are not trying to seek the truth, they are trying to suppress it in favor of their metal detectors. It's basically a near infinite bias that blinds them of the truth, really warps their brain. So it is arrogance and ignorance. Deep inside they know. Like the Chinese proverb, "If your heart is in it you will find a thousand ways to achieve your goal. If your heart is not in it you will find a thousand excuses." Truer words were never spoken.

[Qiaozhi]

Dell, as you well know the skeptics are not trying to seek the truth, they are trying to suppress it in favor of their metal detectors. It's basically a near infinite bias that blinds them of the truth, really warps their brain. So it is arrogance and ignorance. Deep inside they know. Like the Chinese proverb, "If your heart is in it you will find a thousand ways to achieve your goal. If your heart is not in it you will find a thousand excuses." Truer words were never spoken.
Mike - are you also in denial over the results of double-blind testing?

[Dell Winders]

[QUOTE=Qiaozhi;146669]With so much wishful thinking, self-deception and selective memory going on in Dell's mind, it's very difficult for him to tell the difference between what is imaginary and what is real.
Even if he was to actually carry out a scientifically controlled double-blind test (which he has never done), he would still deny the results.
A Double-Blind Test for LRLs (http://www.geotech1.com/cgi-bin/pages/common/index.pl?page=lrl&file=/info/dbtesting.dat)[/QUOTE

WOW! another prime example of WEIS

Qiaozhi, You show unbelievable ignorance of the subjects you pretend to know.

I thought this was an LRL forum? NOT a Dowsing forum. Are you intentionally trying to throw your viewers off track, or is it possible you really are that Stupid? Don't let your beliefs, or ego get in the way of accepting common knowledge, or using common sense.

Dowsing is a recognized Mental aptitude exercised by a Mental connection of the Mind to a controlled physical Ideomotor response. A huge difference between that and the applied physics utilized in the operation of an LRL. When you try to mix the two you only create confusion and failed experiments. Or, maybe that's your intention?

No, I have never conducted any DB tests on Dowsing. That would require instruments for the measuring Brain Wave activity. I am not equipped to do so. Are you?

Yes, since 1980, I have conducted hundreds of DB, and field tests with ground truthing, and comparison tests with other types of Geophysical instruments.

I have over 30 years experience in the testing, field use, and evaluation of MFD, HID, Gamma Scan, and other so called LRL types. That provides me more knowledge and expertise on the subject than you, Carl, or Randi, could ever pretend to know.

Wake Up Qiaozhi! As you can see, Worthy Experimenters and inventors have become disgusted with wasting their time trying to share ideas and experiments on this forum with those of the same interest because of a few Punk *****, know it all, scientific pretenders, yourself included, are permitted to heckle and ridicule those who try to share useful information and make this forum possible. Dell

[Qiaozhi]

Dowsing is a recognized Mental aptitude exercised by a Mental connection of the Mind to a controlled physical Ideomotor response. A huge difference between that and the applied physics utilized in the operation of an LRL. When you try to mix the two you only create confusion and failed experiments. Or, maybe that's your intention?
Was that your intention [to create confusion] when you designed, built and sold the VR-800 to your unfortunate customers? This device is clearly mixing some [somewhat dubious] electronics with a couple of bent coathangers in order to fool the technically challenged. However, it does not require a "controlled physical ideomotor response" to operate, but does require vast quantities of wishful thinking, self-deception and selective memory.

No, I have never conducted any DB tests on Dowsing. That would require instruments for the measuring Brain Wave activity. I am not equipped to do so. Are you?
Why? Are you frightened of the results?
Also, please go away and read the double-blind test for LRLs ->
A Double-Blind Test for LRLs (http://www.geotech1.com/cgi-bin/pages/common/index.pl?page=lrl&file=/info/dbtesting.dat)
No - I mean really go away and read it, as you have no idea what a double-blind test involves.
Firstly, you will discover that it does not require instruments to measure Brain Wave Activity. :lol: Wherever did you get that idea from? Nor [just in case you also think this is the case] you are not at any time required to wear a blindfold. :cool:
Please try to get your facts right.

Yes, since 1980, I have conducted hundreds of DB, and field tests with ground truthing, and comparison tests with other types of Geophysical instruments.
I bet your method of double-blind testing bears no resemblance to a proper controlled scientific test? Because, if it did, all your comparison tests against geophysical instruments would have failed miserably.

I have over 30 years experience in the testing, field use, and evaluation of MFD, HID, Gamma Scan, and other so called LRL types. That provides me more knowledge and expertise on the subject than you, Carl, or Randi, could ever pretend to know.
Unfortunately that's 30 years of wasted time, attempting to prove something that does not exist. If you think Carl or Randi have less knowledge on this subject than you, then you are sadly mistaken. I do understand [after digging the same hole for 30 years] you're now in so deep that your belief system would suffer a catastrophic implosion if you were ever to discover it to be nothing but a trick of the mind.

Wake Up Qiaozhi! As you can see, Worthy Experimenters and inventors have become disgusted with wasting their time trying to share ideas and experiments on this forum with those of the same interest because of a few Punk *****, know it all, scientific pretenders, yourself included, are permitted to heckle and ridicule those who try to share useful information and make this forum possible. Dell
What you're really trying to say is that you want free rein [the freedom to do, and say what you want] without anyone putting their hand up and saying "With a minute Dell, you're talking nonsense". Sadly, for you, that's not the way the forum works. Both sides of the argument are allowed. The skeptics, however, have the advantage of having science on their side, and the ability to recognise tricks of the mind for what they are.

[Mike(Mont)]

While I have never been involved in an actual double blind test, I have probably done more testing than anyone. Just because someone uses the term "double blind" does not prove it is a true test of the equipment or the operator's skills. I have explained my procedure many times. I carefully toss the test target so I have no knowledge of it's location, then I search for it. I know that is not considered true double blind but I would suggest it is more accurate, more real. I've tried having someone else hide the target but this is not true long range locating, more like mental telepathy. I can't tell you how many tests I have done, but it's in the tens of thousands because I practice 300 days a year. I don't hit the target every single test. But it's a very high percentage, something above 90 percent. There are many factors, but wind is the most important, then my emotional state. I don't get out in the field all that much. I hope this changes someday. I do get out and I do find gold and silver. What I do is real, what you do is misapplied theory about something you do not understand, and that's not real. Consider yourself lucky I even made this reply. I have nothing further to say to you.

[Qiaozhi]

While I have never been involved in an actual double blind test, I have probably done more testing than anyone. Just because someone uses the term "double blind" does not prove it is a true test of the equipment or the operator's skills. I have explained my procedure many times. I carefully toss the test target so I have no knowledge of it's location, then I search for it. I know that is not considered true double blind but I would suggest it is more accurate, more real. I've tried having someone else hide the target but this is not true long range locating, more like mental telepathy. I can't tell you how many tests I have done, but it's in the tens of thousands because I practice 300 days a year. I don't hit the target every single test. But it's a very high percentage, something above 90 percent. There are many factors, but wind is the most important, then my emotional state. I don't get out in the field all that much. I hope this changes someday. I do get out and I do find gold and silver. What I do is real, what you do is misapplied theory about something you do not understand, and that's not real. Consider yourself lucky I even made this reply. I have nothing further to say to you.
What you are doing is reinforcing your belief system with non-scientific tests. Tossing a test target, and then trying to locate it, is not a blind test. And it is most certainly not "more accurate, more real" than a double-blind test. In fact, it's quite the opposite.
Like I said to Dell, go away and read the double-blind test procedure -> A Double-Blind Test for LRLs (http://www.geotech1.com/cgi-bin/pages/common/index.pl?page=lrl&file=/info/dbtesting.dat)
Ultimately (of course) I'm wasting my time, as I know for a certainty that neither you nor Dell will ever study the requirements of the test, and neither will you perform the test. It would be too shocking to discover the truth.

[Mike(Mont)]

Anybody needs a reality check it is you. You really think a rabidly biased LRL skeptic can design a double blind test to fairly test an LRL when he can't even use one? I gave you more credit than that, but it doesn't surprise me. You wonder why Dell calls you guys a cult. You're so full of self deception you really think you are a scientist. That's pathological.

[Qiaozhi]

Anybody needs a reality check it is you. You really think a rabidly biased LRL skeptic can design a double blind test to fairly test an LRL when he can't even use one? I gave you more credit than that, but it doesn't surprise me. You wonder why Dell calls you guys a cult. You're so full of self deception you really think you are a scientist. That's pathological.
I was correct then. :rolleyes:
You have no intention of either reading about or performing the double-blind test procedure, but instead prefer to remain ignorant of the horrible truth.

[Mike(Mont)]

You mean you think you were correct, but you are not. It's like you cannot comprehend what I posted. I know what double blind tests are and I've even read what Carl concocted. You cannot understand what I do is real and what you talk about is some man-made cluster &#@^ designed to make an LRL fail. You don't have a clue. Not only totally biased, but totally ignorant, totally blinded. I believe you are ignorant, but other skeptics are playing you with their deception. Sorry for being so blunt, but I seek the truth. I don't think you can understand that either.

[Dell Winders]

Was that your intention [to create confusion] when you designed, built and sold the VR-800 to your unfortunate customers? This device is clearly mixing some [somewhat dubious] electronics with a couple of bent coathangers in order to fool the technically challenged. However, it does not require a "controlled physical ideomotor response" to operate, but does require vast quantities of wishful thinking, self-deception and selective memory.


Why? Are you frightened of the results?
Also, please go away and read the double-blind test for LRLs ->
A Double-Blind Test for LRLs (http://www.geotech1.com/cgi-bin/pages/common/index.pl?page=lrl&file=/info/dbtesting.dat)
No - I mean really go away and read it, as you have no idea what a double-blind test involves.
Firstly, you will discover that it does not require instruments to measure Brain Wave Activity. :lol: Wherever did you get that idea from? Nor [just in case you also think this is the case] you are not at any time required to wear a blindfold. :cool:
Please try to get your facts right.


I bet your method of double-blind testing bears no resemblance to a proper controlled scientific test? Because, if it did, all your comparison tests against geophysical instruments would have failed miserably.


Unfortunately that's 30 years of wasted time, attempting to prove something that does not exist. If you think Carl or Randi have less knowledge on this subject than you, then you are sadly mistaken. I do understand [after digging the same hole for 30 years] you're now in so deep that your belief system would suffer a catastrophic implosion if you were ever to discover it to be nothing but a trick of the mind.


What you're really trying to say is that you want free rein [the freedom to do, and say what you want] without anyone putting their hand up and saying "With a minute Dell, you're talking nonsense". Sadly, for you, that's not the way the forum works. Both sides of the argument are allowed. The skeptics, however, have the advantage of having science on their side, and the ability to recognise tricks of the mind for what they are.

Qiaozhi, from your constant rantings and irrational suppositions it appears you are Mentally challenged. A good reason why Carl, would choose you as a Moderator of his forum.

I suppose I should be more considerate of your limited mental ability. It's not your fault you are being taken advantage of. I wish you the best. Dell

[Qiaozhi]

You mean you think you were correct, but you are not. It's like you cannot comprehend what I posted. I know what double blind tests are and I've even read what Carl concocted. You cannot understand what I do is real and what you talk about is some man-made cluster &#@^ designed to make an LRL fail. You don't have a clue. Not only totally biased, but totally ignorant, totally blinded. I believe you are ignorant, but other skeptics are playing you with their deception. Sorry for being so blunt, but I seek the truth. I don't think you can understand that either.

Qiaozhi, from your constant rantings and irrational suppositions it appears you are Mentally challenged. A good reason why Carl, would choose you as a Moderator of his forum.

I suppose I should be more considerate of your limited mental ability. It's not your fault you are being taken advantage of. I wish you the best. Dell

As usual, when you cannot think of a suitable response, you [both] resort to personal insults. :frown: I hope you don't conduct your business in such a fashion.

Double-blind testing is not something that was specifically "made up" so that an LRL cannot pass the test. In fact, double-blind testing has been around since the late 1700s. Due to your extremely limited education, I suppose I'll now have to give you a summary.

Scientists regularly use double-blind testing, especially in medical trials, because they are well aware that experimenters and participants can consciously or unconsciously bias (or skew) the results. In this way you can obtain a true record of the experimental results, and not a record tainted by your own personal expectations. Double-blind testing is something that manufacturers of LRLs, such as yourself, consistently oppose for obvious reasons. Once you have 30 years of self-deception under your belt, there's no way you want to shatter the illusion and have your beliefs exposed as a complete sham.

As for being "taken advantage of", I don't remember ever buying an LRL, so I think I'm quite safe in that department. :lol:

Anyway Mike, whatever happened to your statement: "Consider yourself lucky I even made this reply. I have nothing further to say to you."?
You've made 2 more replies since then. Or is your selective memory working overtime?

[Mike(Mont)]

Dell, thanks for the chuckle on this most sad day for me. My mother died today. I've said before how thankful I am to you for all the locating info you have shared.

[Seden]

So sorry to hear about your Mothers passing. I lost mine in 2001.

Randy

[Dell Winders]

Dell, thanks for the chuckle on this most sad day for me. My mother died today. I've said before how thankful I am to you for all the locating info you have shared.

Mike, I am sorry for your loss. Please take heart in this poem. Dell

[Qiaozhi]

Hi Mike - sorry to hear the sad news about your mother. I wish you all the best.

[Mike(Mont)]

Thanks for your kindness and support. My mother was part saint to put up with me and never raised her voice. She had a heart attack and died the next day. Lived well into her nineties.

[detectoman]

mike: our mothers are the major, but all us a day are togethers for ever, lo siento mucho, que halles paz amigo, estoy contigo en tu dolor, a embrace mike

[Mike(Mont)]

Thanks for your caring words.