Anticipated Solar activity

[Dell Winders]

Science, as usual, is a bit late in their notification, but here you go Carl.

Anticipated Solar activity will probably affect LRL operation depending what part of the earth is facing the Sun at the time Earth is bombarded with charged particles. Dell

http://www.nbcnews.com/science/sunspot-goes-wild-x-class-solar-flare-blasts-our-direction-2D11875714

http://www.dellomnitron.com

[Mike(Mont)]

It was rough yesterday. Couldn't get anything to work most of the day. late afternoon conditions improved. This morning things are pretty much back to normal with a little off and on. Yesterday it was what I call "fuzzy". Just hard to get a lock-on and the signal line seemed to spread out wide and weak.

[Mike(Mont)]

I was out practicing about fifteen or twenty minutes ago and conditions went downhill. Looks like the shock wave has hit. Or maybe just the first part of it.

[Qiaozhi]

Anticipated Solar activity will probably affect LRL operation depending what part of the earth is facing the Sun at the time Earth is bombarded with charged particles. Dell
The list of excuses just gets longer. ;)

[Fred]

Maybe scepticism is invading their mind, and self deception is not working as well any more :rolleyes:

[Mike(Mont)]

Dell has been talking about solar magnetic interference since I've known him and his brochures discussed it since the 1980's.

As a side note, when I was out this morning the electronic receiver was louder than usual. No, I hadn't charged the batteries and I don't wear a hearing aid. I can tell by how close I have to stand from the transmitter and I was nearly fifty percent further away than usual.

I was outside this evening and it was nice working in the moonlight on the snow. Conditions are still good. I don't' know what happened this afternoon, the proton count skyrocketed but it didn't last very long. I went out about forty-five minutes later and thing were back to normal. It is my understanding that some of the particles travel faster than others. Don't know much about it, could have been from a previous flare. But it was like yesterday where the signal line was not on. It was there but not in line with the target. Today it actually went dead for a while a few times, and weak and "fuzzy" at other times.

[Dell Winders]

The list of excuses just gets longer. ;)

If my goal was to sell LRL's, I certainly wouldn't be informing consumers to learn about LRL limitations, before they decide buy.

I see the forum know it all idiot, is still seeking attention to his scientific pretense.

No one has to take my word about the effects of Magnetic interference on LRL's. Two of the Scientifically accepted tools I use for LRL DB comparison tests are a proton Magnetometer, and a Tri-Field meter.

Unlike some here, I don't ignore the facts, or pretend I am Scientific. Anyone here with a bit of intelligence has the same option of conducting their LRL DB comparison tests with the tools I mentioned and learn the truth for themselves. No excuses for the results are needed.They are what they are. Dell

[Dell Winders]

Mike , as you already know from your own field experience, a fluctuating "Strength of field", affects the LRL Signal causing it to lose detection of the target's SOF, and drift off target.

In my experience, the time it takes for sufficient operational "strength of field" to return to the target, can be measured in seconds,minutes, hours, or days. I know of no way to predict the longevity of the SMI affect on an LRL operation.

However, under the "What has already been done, can be done" category, the overriding SOF of SMI surrounding a target field can be blocked electronically, and the Target field can continuously be detected with the LRL without signal drift, or loss of signal during periods of SMI interference.

Several dozen DB tests has shown this electronic device to be effective. It is not for sale, or intended for sale. Dell

http://www.dellomnitron.com

[Mike(Mont)]

Dell, what model Tri-Field meter do you use?

[Dell Winders]

Natural EM meter, on Magnetic setting.

It's not very sensitive and only measures increases in SMI on the low end pof the scale. For me, below "1" the Rods will work. Above 1.5 the rods will not react.

If you contact them, I'm sure they can build you a more sensitive Magnetic meter.

Many years ago Bill Floto, built one for me that worked great and easy to use.

So again, what has already been done, can be done. Dell

[Mike(Mont)]

Thanks Dell. My meter is bouncing around mostly around "1" but now and then it hits "2". Does your meter usually bounce around?

[Mike(Mont)]

It didn't seem to last. I just checked and the meter was barely moving. However, it did make one jolt and I actually felt it like being on a target just for an instant.

[Dell Winders]

lMike, If you are using the meter indoors it may be too close the electrical alternating current. Try moving the meter to another location stand it on end. Don't hold the meter in your hand or change directions.

But yes, a fluctuating strength of field caused from SMI will cause the meter to bounce and an intermittent signal loss. This can happen from one second to the next.

You need at least 15 minutes of consistent operating Signal strength to correctly evaluate a target with an LRL. When the signal strength fades in and out you might as well walk away and try again later. Very frustrating and expensive when you travel long distances and have Magnetic Interference. This is why I gave up doing aerial surveys with electronic LRL's in 1989. The cost of renting an aircraft in advance and then loose reception before, or during flight as a result of SMI was too expensive and non productive.

With Electronic LRL's, a fluctuating strength of field caused by Magnetic Interference can be recognized when you have to constantly re-tune the device and can't get a consistent target recognition beep for more than a minute or so.

Experimenters of Electronic LRL's, on this forum have for years been rewiring and tweaking their circuits, and changing antennas, because their device worked sometimes and not at others, without realizing that their design may not be the problem, but that ever changing operating conditions are.

If you want electronic LRL's to work consistently under changing Magnetic conditions, then it will be necessary for the LRL to electronically meter the changing conditions in real time and add automatic tuning (power) to compensate for these changes in Strength of field.

When the Meter moves above 1, you are getting interference. Compare the L-Rods reaction with the changes in the meter reading. The lower the meter reads, the stronger the L-Rods react.

Good Luck! Dell

[Dell Winders]

The Rods usually react to the Magnetic conditions a couple of seconds before the meter reacts. As I mentioned, a more sensitive meter would be much better. Dell

[Mike(Mont)]

Thanks Dell. I see they sell an external magnifier (10X) coil for $65. The model I have does not have a coil input. I guess you just place the coil near the meter.

[Qiaozhi]

Mike , as you already know from your own field experience, a fluctuating "Strength of field", affects the LRL Signal causing it to lose detection of the target's SOF, and drift off target.

In my experience, the time it takes for sufficient operational "strength of field" to return to the target, can be measured in seconds,minutes, hours, or days. I know of no way to predict the longevity of the SMI affect on an LRL operation.

However, under the "What has already been done, can be done" category, the overriding SOF of SMI surrounding a target field can be blocked electronically, and the Target field can continuously be detected with the LRL without signal drift, or loss of signal during periods of SMI interference.

Several dozen DB tests has shown this electronic device to be effective. It is not for sale, or intended for sale. Dell

http://www.dellomnitron.com
Dell - you wouldn't recognise a double-blind test if you fell over it.

Both you (and Mike) are classic victims of the Dowsing Delusion.
http://ade651gt200scamfraud.blogspot.co.uk/2013/05/dowsing-illusion-and-delusion.html

[Dell Winders]

Qiaozhi, It's a good thing no intelligent person takes your rants seriously, especially when you use someones stupid personal grudge blog to try to give yourself credibility. My name,or products are not mentioned so it doesn't apply.

The DB tests I've conducted are repeatable. All you have to do is conduct your own and learn the truth for your self, or forever wallow in your own ignorance. It's your choice.

I'm sorry you dislike having valid, tested & confirmed information posted on this forum. Dell

[Dell Winders]

Thanks Dell. I see they sell an external magnifier (10X) coil for $65. The model I have does not have a coil input. I guess you just place the coil near the meter.

I have no idea. I haven't been to his site since I purchased a Magnetometer from him two years ago. Dell

[Qiaozhi]

Qiaozhi, It's a good thing no intelligent person takes your rants seriously, especially when you use someones stupid personal grudge blog to try to give yourself credibility. My name,or products are not mentioned so it doesn't apply.

The DB tests I've conducted are repeatable. All you have to do is conduct your own and learn the truth for your self, or forever wallow in your own ignorance. It's your choice.

I'm sorry you dislike having valid, tested & confirmed information posted on this forum. Dell
No-one said your products were listed on that site, but you clearly don't want to hear true statements like this one:
"As we have tried to point out before, dowsing has been tested under controlled conditions again and again and again. Guess what? It never works as claimed! NEVER! Bit like homeopathy or those other cons, the self proclaimed psychics. It has been thoroughly explained as the Ideomotor effect (feel free to google that if you do not know what it is)."

However many times you claim to have performed double-blind testing, it doesn't alter the fact that your version of DB testing bears no resemblance to any known properly controlled scientific test.

"Science can put a man on the moon (and bring him back), yet science just can't quite catch anyone dowsing under controlled conditions. We are talking about a power that could change the very course of human events, but this power is very shy and never appears when scientists are watching."

If the effect doesn't show up during DB testing, then it's simply a trick of the mind. Enjoy wallowing in your continued delusion. :razz:

[Dell Winders]

Qiaozhi, Tell us about all the DB tests you have conducted as an authority on the subject, and show us your scientific credentials that support your claims so that you have some credibility other than showing off as the forum clown? Dell

[Mike(Mont)]

I will not argue with Q about dowsing. It is not reliable and usually inaccurate.

Now don't confuse dowsing with the MFD or HID (Harmonic Induction Discrimination). These are not dowsing although they are similar and most people do not know the difference because they cannot do either. I've said it before many people claim to be dowsers or even MFD users and they are not. Anyone can get on the internet and put a mark on a map or photo and claim they are an expert. The internet is full of imposters. I won't name names this time.

And then there is the fact that none of the techniques work all the time. Or even if they do, the person using them falters. No one is perfect although some pskeptics think they are.

And don't forget the double-blind tests are al designed by skeptics with the intentions of proving it can't possibly work. If you think the skeptic doublr-blind tests are a true test, you are delusional.

[Qiaozhi]

I will not argue with Q about dowsing. It is not reliable and usually inaccurate.
The fact is it's totally unreliable and always inaccurate ... or at least, with the same accuracy as guessing.

Anyone can get on the internet and put a mark on a map or photo and claim they are an expert. The internet is full of imposters. I won't name names this time.
Now the self-proclaimed map dowsers are all wondering who you're referring to. :lol:

And don't forget the double-blind tests are al designed by skeptics with the intentions of proving it can't possibly work.
Wrong. Double-blind testing was designed by scientists to eliminate both conscious and unconscious bias, and which is the reason why dowsing always fails the test. It has nothing to do with having been designed by skeptics intent on proving it cannot possibly work.

Dowsers (like Dell) who have been tested under double-blind conditions and failed, will always rubbish this type of testing. It's better to live in ignorance than to discover the truth.

[Qiaozhi]

Qiaozhi, Tell us about all the DB tests you have conducted as an authority on the subject, and show us your scientific credentials that support your claims so that you have some credibility other than showing off as the forum clown? Dell
Oh dear - name calling yet again. :frown:

You are well aware (or should be, after being told numerous times) that it is not possible to prove a negative. It is up to the teller of the fantastic tale to supply the evidence, and (in this case) the evidence is sorely lacking. When you can pass a properly controlled scientific double-blind test, then perhaps others will stand up and take notice. Results that are no better than guessing, or fail at the slightest excuse (the latest being increased solar activity) are basically worse than useless.

[Dell Winders]

Qiaozhi, you continue to be the most self disillusioned person on this forum.

Please,by all means tell us your Scientific back ground, and about any kind of DB tests you have ever conducted? Stop dodging the question.

Dowsers (like Dell) who have been tested under double-blind conditions and failed, will always rubbish this type of testing. It's better to live in ignorance than to discover the truth

I see you are still perpetrating lies and false information. If you are referring to the DB tests I claimed to have been conducted by Randi, that was on an MFD, not my Dowsing ability.

Randi, publicly denied that he never ever conducted any such test at any time, or at any place on this earth. So according to him there never was a test.

So Qiaozhi, exactly what DB Mental Dowsing test are you claiming I failed? Were you there? Are you intentionally telling lies about me, or are you delusional? Dell

[Mike(Mont)]

Dell, Randi must have been shaking in his shorts when you hit the target so many times. "More testing is necessary." means he knew damned well you were nowhere near random chance. By further testing he hoped he could lower your score. He wasn't worried about the money because the lawyers had a catch-all phrase in there--"The final decision to award the prize will be decided by the panel of experts." In other words they NEVER had to pay for any reason. The test was to prove the supernatural. Well, if you did it then it ain't supernatural. Just totally phony coming and going.

[Dell Winders]

Oh dear - name calling yet again. :frown:

You are well aware (or should be, after being told numerous times) that it is not possible to prove a negative. It is up to the teller of the fantastic tale to supply the evidence, and (in this case) the evidence is sorely lacking. When you can pass a properly controlled scientific double-blind test, then perhaps others will stand up and take notice. Results that are no better than guessing, or fail at the slightest excuse (the latest being increased solar activity) are basically worse than useless.

Why are you dodging the question? No one is expecting you to prove a negative. Just tell us about your Scientific background, and about the DB tests you have conducted on anything?

According to you, only Scientist are qualified to create and conduct DB tests, so inform us of your qualifications? Dell

[Qiaozhi]

I see you are still perpetrating lies and false information. If you are referring to the DB tests I claimed to have been conducted by Randi, that was on an MFD, not my Dowsing ability.

Randi, publicly denied that he never ever conducted any such test at any time, or at any place on this earth. So according to him there never was a test.From the JREF forums:
"In 1987, Randi tested a Mr. Dell Winders of Haines City, FL for dowsing ability. According to Mr. Winders, he correctly dowsed 8 of 12 times, which was statistically very significant for that particular test protocol."

Except for one very important point ..... there is no evidence to support this claim. How convenient.

Also, as it must have slipped your mind, an MFD consists of a signal transmitter and a pair of "receiver" L-rods. In case you're still slightly confused, L-rods are another term used to describe dowsing rods.

[Qiaozhi]

Why are you dodging the question?
Which part of "you cannot prove a negative" did you not understand? :shrug:

By the way, I'm not the one making fantastic claims, so I don't have to prove anything.

I noticed that your selective memory conveniently eliminates the parts you don't want to see, or you purposely misread posts to fit your own agenda, You do not have to be a scientist to carry out a double-blind test. Anyone can do it. The test however must be done using a proper scientifically controlled protocol. Maybe that's why you're having problems.

Of course, it's much easier to simply make up a new excuse, such as increased solar activity.

[Mike(Mont)]

Q, you read too much skepticpedia. You eat that crap with a spoon.

[Dell Winders]

Which part of "you cannot prove a negative" did you not understand? :shrug:

By the way, I'm not the one making fantastic claims, so I don't have to prove anything.

I noticed that your selective memory conveniently eliminates the parts you don't want to see, or you purposely misread posts to fit your own agenda, You do not have to be a scientist to carry out a double-blind test. Anyone can do it. The test however must be done using a proper scientifically controlled protocol. Maybe that's why you're having problems.

Of course, it's much easier to simply make up a new excuse, such as increased solar activity.

What Excuse? Solar activity cycles are a Scientific fact. Randi stated there was no Solar activity at that time. Scientist reported there was. One of them was lieing.

What agenda? What problems? I don't know of any. Are you hearing voices in your head telling you this?

Again,you are NOT asked to prove a negative. Just answers about any kind of DB tests you have ever conducted, and what is your Scientific back ground? Is this what you regard as a negative that can't be proved?

Why are you evading the questions? Dell

[Qiaozhi]

What Excuse? Solar activity cycles are a Scientific fact. Randi stated there was no Solar activity at that time. Scientist reported there was. One of them was lieing.
I agree that solar activity cycles are a scientific (with a lower-case "s") fact. However, their claimed interference with anyone's so-called dowsing abilities is complete hogwash, since (of course) dowsing has been scientifically proven to also be complete hogwash.

My scientific background, and ability or otherwise to carry out double-blind testing, has absolutely nothing to do with your fantasy belief system or the topic of this thread. But you can rest assured that the amount of double-blind testing that's been performed here far exceeds anything double-blind testing done at your end. Especially since you still need to understand that the DB protocol does not require you to where a blindfold, and involves more than one very biased person doing their own tests to "confirm" something they've already decided is a "fact". Which is why you will always fail Randi's test, and will never achieve a result better than guessing. :lol:

[Fred]

What Excuse? Solar activity cycles are a Scientific fact.

Dell, why are you giving so much importance to a scientific fact, (and to the fact that it is scientific), if it affects something totally "un-scientific" and that nobody ever could scientifically demonstrate?

[Mike(Mont)]

Dell, you gotta know that guy is trying to push the phony skeptic propaganda. He knows but he's hiding from the truth. There's a lot of suckers out there who eat that crap.

[Dell Winders]

What Excuse? Solar activity cycles are a Scientific fact. Randi stated there was no Solar activity at that time. Scientist reported there was. One of them was lieing.

What agenda? What problems? I don't know of any. Are you hearing voices in your head telling you this?

Again,you are NOT asked to prove a negative. Just answers about any kind of DB tests you have ever conducted, and what is your Scientific back ground? Is this what you regard as a negative that can't be proved?

Why are you evading the questions? Dell

Qiaozhi, you are still evading two simple questions. Also, you conveniently forgot to add that Randi, did not make the posts you referenced until after I made public the video footage proving that Randi, was lieing about the test. Rather than apologize for his attempted Con, he tried to cover up his lies by adding more lies and publicly calling me the liar to distract attention from himself. A common Skeptic ploy, and a probable, although immoral strategy, given that Randi, had money, attorneys, national recognition and a support group and I am a hillbilly nobody with none of those assets

Of course, Any one with enough interest to know the truth can research the time line. Apparently Qiaozhi, has no interest in truth, or facts, that do not support his illusions of scientific pretense, or mis-guided loyalty to a habitual Liar and the Skeptic agenda.

I don't hear anything from Randi, anymore since he got busted. Yep, you guessed it, he was caught lieing and trying to deceive the US Government.

Carl Morland, and the once loyal hard core Skeptic supporters of Randi, appear to have deserted and quickly backed tracked away from the Randi Con game and save their own skins. The Domino effect is in motion and Carl's, fall from grace is imminent if he continues to follow, and try to cover up his part in the Skeptic agenda Con game.

Justice is sweet. Dell

[Dell Winders]

I agree that solar activity cycles are a scientific (with a lower-case "s") fact. However, their claimed interference with anyone's so-called dowsing abilities is complete hogwash, since (of course) dowsing has been scientifically proven to also be complete hogwash.

My scientific background, and ability or otherwise to carry out double-blind testing, has absolutely nothing to do with your fantasy belief system or the topic of this thread. But you can rest assured that the amount of double-blind testing that's been performed here far exceeds anything double-blind testing done at your end. Especially since you still need to understand that the DB protocol does not require you to where a blindfold, and involves more than one very biased person doing their own tests to "confirm" something they've already decided is a "fact". Which is why you will always fail Randi's test, and will never achieve a result better than guessing. :lol:

Qiaozhi, Your background has everything to do with your knowledge and ability to truthfully and factually question, criticize, or comment on what others are doing that you don't know anything about. Because you maliciously claim others are not using Scientific protocol, you need establish your own credibility by actually having scientific credentials to support your knowledge of what you say to us, otherwise you may be pretending you are scientist which would support your need to lie about others to Carl's forum viewers.

The logic you insist on mis-applying to me, and this subject, is born out of your ignorance and a total lack of Scientific scrutiny. Your delusions are a reality only in your own mind.

There are many applications in which an L- shaped Rod can be used which are NOT Dowsing. Do you agree?

Regarding the Randi test, I was asked by the producer to demonstrate the MFD, which I did, and the difference between it and Dowsing was acknowledged. Randi, was the one that changed the demonstration in to a test. Not me. Although I never asked for the results of Randi's tests, they were voluntarily given to me by the producer with Randi, standing right beside us. Randi, acknowledged the results and stated " more tests would have to be done before any conclusion could be made". The producer is a witness to that fact.

Dowsing is an entirely different subject, and a different application and different interpretation. One is physics, the other is meta-physics. There is a physical distinction in the two applications.

I've acknowledge all along that Randi's million dollar challenge cannot be won with any of the LRL products I have used, or make. In fact, no one has ever won his challenge, because no one has ever passed his preliminary tests to taker his challenge in the past 23 years. The only way I can see any one could win his challenge would be through dumb luck chance guessing, Yet, in spite of my acknowledgement, Randi, and his supporters have pursued me for years trying to beg, badger, threaten, calling names and challenge me to take Randi's test again. Why, for what reason? I am an uneducated nobody from the hills of Kentucky, so why would a wealthy, well known TV personality with with an entire organization of supporters, single me out attack, saying they are going to "ruin" and discredit me for being honest? What harm have I done to them that brings out the vengeful wrath and public ridicule, and slanderous lies from Randi's hard core Skeptics? Dell

[Dell Winders]

I agree that solar activity cycles are a scientific (with a lower-case "s") fact. However, their claimed interference with anyone's so-called dowsing abilities is complete hogwash, since (of course) dowsing has been scientifically proven to also be complete hogwash.

My scientific background, and ability or otherwise to carry out double-blind testing, has absolutely nothing to do with your fantasy belief system or the topic of this thread. But you can rest assured that the amount of double-blind testing that's been performed here far exceeds anything double-blind testing done at your end. Especially since you still need to understand that the DB protocol does not require you to where a blindfold, and involves more than one very biased person doing their own tests to "confirm" something they've already decided is a "fact". Which is why you will always fail Randi's test, and will never achieve a result better than guessing. :lol:

I honestly acknowledged the fact that I could never pass Randi, or Carl's tests, years ago. Why do you bring it up?

Maybe you should be the one writing Randi's tests. At least you acknowledge that Solar activity is present and has effects on earth. Randi, denied the existence

If your background and ability to conduct double blind testing using Scientific Protocol is irrelevant to this thread, then so is mine. Why bring it up?

That's funny! I don't know if Blindfolds were ever used in Scientific DB tests, but I imagine it could be possible. If the objective is to conceal a test prop from the view of the participant, or observers a blindfold, or blind might serve that purpose.

In the field, or on a map your guessing vs. my dowsing wouldn't stand a chance. In fact, I'll post a follow up and give you a test example. Dell

[Qiaozhi]

Also, you conveniently forgot to add that Randi, did not make the posts you referenced until after I made public the video footage proving that Randi, was lieing about the test.
From this statement it sounds like you are claiming you actually passed Randi's test?

There are many applications in which an L- shaped Rod can be used which are NOT Dowsing. Do you agree?
???
If I bend the L-shaped rod back into a coat hanger, then I can hang my coat up. Or I could use it to poke something out of a hole. Is that what you mean?

Randi, acknowledged the results and stated " more tests would have to be done before any conclusion could be made". The producer is a witness to that fact.
And your point is?

Dowsing is an entirely different subject, and a different application and different interpretation. One is physics, the other is meta-physics. There is a physical distinction in the two applications.
They are exactly the same. Both involve the use of L-shaped rods, and they both involve the ideomotor effect, which is essentially a trick of the mind.

I've acknowledge all along that Randi's million dollar challenge cannot be won with any of the LRL products I have used, or make.
At least that part of your rant is true.

Randi, and his supporters have pursued me for years trying to beg, badger, threaten, calling names and challenge me to take Randi's test again.
That's because they want to see you fail miserably, and then see you claim that you actually passed the test, or (if that's not possible) that Randi performed some dirty tricks to make you fail ... or one of a hundred other excuses, the latest being increased solar activity.

I am an uneducated nobody from the hills of Kentucky.
Yes, we already know that. You've told us many times before. Do you think that's important, or is it just a "get out" in case everything goes horribly wrong. "Sorry your honor, I'm a poor uneducated hillbilly that didn't know any better." :lol:

I honestly acknowledged the fact that I could never pass Randi, or Carl's tests, years ago.
Aha! There's the answer to my first question. But we knew that all along.

Maybe you should be the one writing Randi's tests. At least you acknowledge that Solar activity is present and has effects on earth. Randi, denied the existence
But it has no effect whatsoever on dowsing, unless you believe that it does.

That's funny! I don't know if Blindfolds were ever used in Scientific DB tests, but I imagine it could be possible. If the objective is to conceal a test prop from the view of the participant, or observers a blindfold, or blind might serve that purpose.
Thus proving that you have absolutely no idea what is involved in a double-blind test, and utterly refuse to find out. So your claims of having performed numerous double-blind tests in the past is total nonsense.

In the field, or on a map your guessing vs. my dowsing wouldn't stand a chance.
Yeh, right! :rolleyes:

Actually that last quote is quite funny if it's read using your punctuation.
Especially the last bit, where its says "my dowsing wouldn't stand a chance". :lol:

"What doesn't work, cannot be made to work!".

[Dell Winders]

Qiaozhi, Sitting at my desk in Florida, dowsing from a Google Earth photo of a 110 acre farm, that I had never seen, or ever been to, hundreds of miles from me,

I dowsed the location a stone marker, and it's description which I E-mailed to the property owner whom I had never met. Although the property had been in the family for 70 years, they had never seen it and didn't know it existed. They found the stone marker covered with leaves at the Dowsed location I had made from Florida, and had witnesses and documented the event.

Can you guess what is the nearest town to the dowsed location? O.K. I'll give you a hint. It's in the State of Kentucky. Now, you know more about it than when I dowsed for an unknown. Dell

http://images.yuku.com/image/pjpeg/b3f25f9d36e5e1db0a75f09c83577282858b768.jpg

[Qiaozhi]

Qiaozhi, Sitting at my desk in Florida, dowsing from a Google Earth photo of a 110 acre farm, that I had never seen, or ever been to, hundreds of miles from me,
This is classic anecdotal evidence. Because of the extremely small sample size (in this case, one) it cannot be treated as reliable evidence. Like a magical illusion, it's not what you see that counts, but what you don't see. This could be a single instance of hundreds of map dowsing tests, where the "dowsed" object matched something at the location for this particular test, but all the others were failures. There would need to be many such tests, which must then be statistically analyzed to determine whether the results exceed those obtained by chance.

I already know what the answer would be. Do you?

[TH'r]

Qiaozhi, Sitting at my desk in Florida, dowsing from a Google Earth photo of a 110 acre farm, that I had never seen, or ever been to, hundreds of miles from me,

I dowsed the location a stone marker, and it's description which I E-mailed to the property owner whom I had never met. Although the property had been in the family for 70 years, they had never seen it and didn't know it existed. They found the stone marker covered with leaves at the Dowsed location I had made from Florida, and had witnesses and documented the event.

Can you guess what is the nearest town to the dowsed location? O.K. I'll give you a hint. It's in the State of Kentucky. Now, you know more about it than when I dowsed for an unknown. Dell

http://images.yuku.com/image/pjpeg/b3f25f9d36e5e1db0a75f09c83577282858b768.jpg
This is obiviously an old property marker. I can look at the google photo of my own farm and see the old fence rows and where an old stagecoach road was. Anyone can see these features and surmize where the corners of my property and lines might be. The land owner could have done this himself if he was skilled in the art of map and satellite photo reading, which I am sure that you are. This is no big deal!

[Fred]

This is obiviously an old property marker. I can look at the google photo of my own farm and see the old fence rows and where an old stagecoach road was. Anyone can see these features and surmize where the corners of my property and lines might be. The land owner could have done this himself if he was skilled in the art of map and satellite photo reading, which I am sure that you are. This is no big deal!

And even if not done on purpose, this could have been done unconsciously.
Just like dowsers may find underground water by seeing imperceptible depressions on the ground or greener vegetation, but not being aware of that...

[Mike(Mont)]

Thanks Dell for sharing your info on the EM Meter. I was monitoring the solar activity last evening (Kp index in the yellow) and did find when it went up about double that the signal line moved off the target several degrees. The meter was moving around quite a bit. I never realized how much fluctuation can occur although it shouldn't take much imagination when looking at the Northern Lights how they dance across the sky. I've learned a lot already. I know you've talked about this for years, but seeing it sure makes things a lot clearer.

[Qiaozhi]

Thanks Dell for sharing your info on the EM Meter. I was monitoring the solar activity last evening (Kp index in the yellow) and did find when it went up about double that the signal line moved off the target several degrees. The meter was moving around quite a bit. I never realized how much fluctuation can occur although it shouldn't take much imagination when looking at the Northern Lights how they dance across the sky. I've learned a lot already. I know you've talked about this for years, but seeing it sure makes things a lot clearer.
Interestingly, if Dell had stated that increased solar activity actually enhanced the signal line, you would have found the opposite. It's marvellous how one person's suggestion can influence self-deception in another. :D

[Mike(Mont)]

Well Q, I guess Miss Cleo better start looking for a new career since you have taken over her mind reading job. On second thought she has absolutely nothing to worry about because you failed again. But keep trying. Even a broken clock tells the accurate time now and then. I guess you can't comprehend what I mean when I say I seek the truth. What do you think that means? You think I want to deceive myself? You must be just pulling this crap to get a response. That's why you skeptics can never learn to use L-rods because you know so well you are the deceiver and you try to project it on LRL users. That's why you can't comprehend that some people know how to use the rods. Like I said it is the negativity that blinds you skeptics from the truth. You know they say pride is the worst sin. There is a thin line between righteousness and self-righteousness.

[Qiaozhi]

Well Q, I guess Miss Cleo better start looking for a new career since you have taken over her mind reading job. On second thought she has absolutely nothing to worry about because you failed again. But keep trying. Even a broken clock tells the accurate time now and then. I guess you can't comprehend what I mean when I say I seek the truth. What do you think that means? You think I want to deceive myself? You must be just pulling this crap to get a response. That's why you skeptics can never learn to use L-rods because you know so well you are the deceiver and you try to project it on LRL users. That's why you can't comprehend that some people know how to use the rods. Like I said it is the negativity that blinds you skeptics from the truth. You know they say pride is the worst sin. There is a thin line between righteousness and self-righteousness.
http://magnificentbull****.com/category/dowsing/
Read it carefully ... don't just skim through superficially ... actually read it.
Then read it again.

P.S. Our efficient censor software removed one word from the link.
Hint: It begins with an "s" and ends in "t", with a short greeting in between. :lol:

"If it's real, prove it."

[Mike(Mont)]

Sorry, don't care to read skeptic negativity. I just saw a woman from Billings is back in town giving a seminar on negativity. She was voted all sorts of national honors. Think her name is Egnew. I almost feel like spending the money to go see her and find out why people give so much of their power away to doubt and negativity.

For the last time, I don't do dowsing. It is unreliable and inaccurate. And I'm not saying it can't possibly work. I know it can work but I do the MFD and HID.

[Mike(Mont)]

She was voted Psychic of the Year 2012 by UFO magazine.

[Dell Winders]

This is obiviously an old property marker. I can look at the google photo of my own farm and see the old fence rows and where an old stagecoach road was. Anyone can see these features and surmize where the corners of my property and lines might be. The land owner could have done this himself if he was skilled in the art of map and satellite photo reading, which I am sure that you are. This is no big deal!.

Good for you!

Here is a Google Earth photo of the type terrain I was looking at when I made the location. It was also covered with leaves.

http://images.yuku.com/image/jpeg/78b35feedbe1ea68166c04aa51804fe0d3b6435.jpg


Can you spot the Marker? Qiaozhi, did you guess what town it is near?

Shall I continue to post locations I have dowsed so you can continue to show me how good your chance guessing or eyeballing a photo of an unknown location is? So far, you have guessed "0". This is fun watching you make Fools of your selves. Let's keep it up? Dell

[WM6]

You change to Google Earth dowsing? Great improvement in applied remote technology.
This way you can even use pendulum for pinpointing - no more regular metal detector.

[Dave J.]

She was voted Psychic of the Year 2012 by UFO magazine.

Yep, "qualifying the mark" doesn't get much better than that.

[Nicolas]

If my goal was to sell LRL's, I certainly wouldn't be informing consumers to learn about LRL limitations, before they decide buy.

I see the forum know it all idiot, is still seeking attention to his scientific pretense.

No one has to take my word about the effects of Magnetic interference on LRL's. Two of the Scientifically accepted tools I use for LRL DB comparison tests are a proton Magnetometer, and a Tri-Field meter.

Unlike some here, I don't ignore the facts, or pretend I am Scientific. Anyone here with a bit of intelligence has the same option of conducting their LRL DB comparison tests with the tools I mentioned and learn the truth for themselves. No excuses for the results are needed.They are what they are. Dell


Yes maybe

http://www.northcountryradio.com/Kitpages/pelfrcvr.htm

http://www.qsl.net/va3iul/Homebrew_RF_Circuit_Design_Ideas/Homebrew_RF_Circuit_Design_Ideas.htm

http://www.qsl.net/va3iul/Homebrew_RF_Circuit_Design_Ideas/Homebrew_RF_Circuit_Design_Ideas.htm

[Dell Winders]

http://www.trifield.com/content/trifield-meter/


Nicolas, this guy knows his stuff. This is the Meter that I have. Although it is sensitive, more sensitivity is needed for our purpose of better metering the above the surface Earth Magnetic Field in real time. It would be worth talking to him about the Magnification Antenna, or a customized unit. It allows you to know when your LRL is experiencing Magnetic Interference and if it's strong enough to render your LRL inoperable.

I think you understand, but many here are not aware of is, that LRL's are detecting a concentration of the Earths Magnetic Field surrounding the target, not the target itself. I've detected these same concentrated Target fields flying in an aircraft at altitudes up to 3,000 feet, and from a distance of 350 miles using an electronic LRL called a Gamma Scan, and radioactive charged conductors.

A major problem is that when a stronger magnetic Filed is generated on, or above the Earth's surface it overrides the concentrated Earth's Magnetic "field" that surrounds the target, weakening, or nullifying the target's SOF rendering it undetectable by the LRL. For this reason, none of the LRL's Ive tested will not work in close proximity of Electric power plants, sub-stations, or within the areas of a strong residual concentration of charged particles resulting from Solar Magnetic interference. Dell

[Nicolas]

http://www.trifield.com/content/trifield-meter/


Nicolas, this guy knows his stuff. This is the Meter that I have. Although it is sensitive, more sensitivity is needed for our purpose of better metering the above the surface Earth Magnetic Field in real time. It would be worth talking to him about the Magnification Antenna, or a customized unit. It allows you to know when your LRL is experiencing Magnetic Interference and if it's strong enough to render your LRL inoperable.

I think you understand, but many here are not aware of is, that LRL's are detecting a concentration of the Earths Magnetic Field surrounding the target, not the target itself. I've detected these same concentrated Target fields flying in an aircraft at altitudes up to 3,000 feet, and from a distance of 350 miles using an electronic LRL called a Gamma Scan, and radioactive charged conductors.

A major problem is that when a stronger magnetic Filed is generated on, or above the Earth's surface it overrides the concentrated Earth's Magnetic "field" that surrounds the target, weakening, or nullifying the target's SOF rendering it undetectable by the LRL. For this reason, none of the LRL's Ive tested will not work in close proximity of Electric power plants, sub-stations, or within the areas of a strong residual concentration of charged particles resulting from Solar Magnetic interference. Dell


Hi dear Dell
I agree with what you say, my dear friend.
I am a researcher in this field for almost 20 years and I have a good idea to understand this phenomenon and I am sure my.
So I can say that I know anything yet. although I succeeded in building a good LRL that finally works well with a well determined frequency band with a little modification in some countries of the world.

But I'm looking to improve my invention to automatically works anywhere in the world place.

I can only confirm it and put into consideration if someone succeeded to build a good LRL or a PD or a PDK is not happy because his machine works in his country even if it's evidence.

'Cause I sure do not work :nono: on another field different from their country of evidence. must be an automatic mode or calibration to detect this phenomenon.

[elhit29]

Hi Dell,

A friend of mine has a German geophysical machine called EMFAD (ELECTROMAGNETIC FIELD ANOMALY DETECTION) - see http://www.detector-scout.de/english/emfad---ug12-pro.html
... my question: does it get affected also by the solar conditions since it mechanism depends on the magnetic field values??? if yes, can we use the trifield meter also the same we using it for LRL?? i.e. will it work properly if the meter indicates a reading less than 1.5???

Thanks a lot

[Dell Winders]

Hi Dell,

A friend of mine has a German geophysical machine called EMFAD (ELECTROMAGNETIC FIELD ANOMALY DETECTION) - see http://www.detector-scout.de/english/emfad---ug12-pro.html
... my question: does it get affected also by the solar conditions since it mechanism depends on the magnetic field values??? if yes, can we use the trifield meter also the same we using it for LRL?? i.e. will it work properly if the meter indicates a reading less than 1.5???

Thanks a lot

I can only speak honestly about products I have tested, or used in the field and my personal experience. I have not used the EMFAD.

Because electrically charged particles from the Sun can generate such a strong Magnetic field as to affect Radio, TV, and Satellite reception , explode Electrical Transformers, strongly affect Magnetometer use, and affect the depth penetration of Metal detectors, it might be reasonably assumed that SMI could have some effect on the normal detection ability, or accuracy of EMFAD. Repeated tests over a period of time on a test target might reveal if there is a problem, or one you can circumvent.

I'm sorry I can't be more specific. Dell

[Dell Winders]

Hi dear Dell
I agree with what you say, my dear friend.
I am a researcher in this field for almost 20 years and I have a good idea to understand this phenomenon and I am sure my.
So I can say that I know anything yet. although I succeeded in building a good LRL that finally works well with a well determined frequency band with a little modification in some countries of the world.

But I'm looking to improve my invention to automatically works anywhere in the world place.

I can only confirm it and put into consideration if someone succeeded to build a good LRL or a PD or a PDK is not happy because his machine works in his country even if it's evidence.

'Cause I sure do not work :nono: on another field different from their country of evidence. must be an automatic mode or calibration to detect this phenomenon.


Nicholas, what I do know about the residual effects of SMI, on LRL's is that you cannot predict the time, or place where you will, or will not have workable LRL reception.

Although the correct Frequency is important for accurate Target Discrimination, The loss of reception caused by Magnetic Interference has nothing to do with the LRL Frequency being used to discriminate. If the Frequency discriminates the target in one country, it will also discriminate in another country providing you are using the same electronic circuit & configuration.

It is not logical to my thinking, and I can not explain the reason, but what I have discovered is that the same broadcast Frequency that works well in one electronic circuit configuration, may not work at all in another circuit configuration. Something to consider whenyou are comparing notes.

Residual SMI moves and collects in areas at the whims of the weather. A localized loss of reception can begin as early as 2 days before a front moves in. LRL Reception can be good where you are working, but at the same time 10 miles away, the LRL won't work because reception is blocked because of Magnetic Interference, and vice versa. My Local TV & Radio reception is affected the same way. Dell

[Nicolas]

Yes may be you have good and long experience of research in this area!! I see you mention all. supper if someone such ideas he is able to fly even on the cloud and be creative with it only as the will and a good brain.

I admire you expert commentary. so do not be upset if someone does not understand what you say :nono: We are all here to learn and benefit from each other.
It is said that know or knew something.
He did not learn and do not know the things that was absent;)

[elhit29]

Thanks Dell for clarification regarding EMFAD.

I'm a Physical Dowser, this morning I went dowsing and this is almost the first time I experience serious jamming of my L-rods for more than two hours.. they literally were not responding at all for more than 2 hours!!! the signal line of a known buried treasure has changed for the first time since months.. also the zero spot changed 2-3 meters from original zero spot.. the signal line was freaking out.. it was very weak and comes and goes... nothing was working right as usual.. as I went home I saw the space weather warnings website, there was a TYPE II RADIO EMISSION occuring exactly the same time I was out dowsing.. my question: is this type II Radio Emission also considered sort of magnetic interference?? I placed an order for Trifield Meter and supposed to receive it after 10 days.. will the trifield meter show such interference that happened today??

Thanks and regards

[Mike(Mont)]

I was in surgery abouty six hours yesterday. Only got out in the yard twice with my equipment. Did not notice anything unusual but did not have my EM Meter. Which website do you use to find the radio disturbance warning?

[elhit29]

Wish you the best of health Mike. this is the website: http://www.swpc.noaa.gov/SWN/index.html

there is an alert on top left of that page.

What website you go to for alerts before you go out dowsing?? can it give you an alert 24 hours in advance??

[Dell Winders]

Wish you the best of health Mike. this is the website: http://www.swpc.noaa.gov/SWN/index.html

there is an alert on top left of that page.

What website you go to for alerts before you go out dowsing?? can it give you an alert 24 hours in advance??

NOAA provides a "one size fits all" general coverage that does not account for local conditions which can change from one minute to the next.

As I mentioned, operating conditions can be good at your location, and a few miles away at the same time operating conditions can be very bad.

There is no reliable website that provides local magnetic conditions. If you spend money travelling to another area, you take your chances on getting reception. Dell

[Qiaozhi]

If you spend money travelling to another area, you take your chances on getting reception. Dell
Dowsing is all about taking chances, following non-existent signal lines, and then conveniently forgetting when you dig an empty hole

[Dell Winders]

WEIS. I see you only speak for yourself. Are you ready to compare your claim of being able to accurately guess a location as well as I can accurately Dowse a location, again? You failed the last time. I'm ready to go again when you are. Dell

[Rudy]

...
It is not logical to my thinking, ....

I couldn't have said it better myself.

[Qiaozhi]

I couldn't have said it better myself.
Again ... this is far too subtle for Dell. :lol:

[Mike(Mont)]

I got my EM Meter back today with the new 10X Magnification coil. Didn't spend much time with it but it sure is sensitive. Maybe too much so. Just waved my hand and it deflected the needle several numbers. Even from ten feet away if I move it responds. I'll have to work with it in some interference and see how it goes. One thing for sure you have to keep very still to use it.

[Dell Winders]

Does the antenna connect directly to the EM Meter? Dell

[Mike(Mont)]

There is a cord maybe four feet long that plugs into the meter. The antenna is about four inches long and one inch diameter. I had to send the meter back to them to get the external port installed. It was $65 plus $10 return shipping for everything. It still works as original when the ext. antenna is not plugged in. As I said, it is very sensitive. It is hard to adjust the tone alarm because when you get near it with your hand it sounds off pretty much full scale needle deflection. So you have to adjust it a little then get away from it and let it settle down.

[Dell Winders]

How far up the scale does the meter normally register using the antenna with a port connection? Thanks! Dell

[Mike(Mont)]

I haven't worked with it much. As long as I wasn't moving it was bumping up to "2" but mostly it stayed near "0". I really need more time with it to know more about it. I didn't compare it without the antenna.

[Dell Winders]

When Magnetic interference is strong I get as much as 2 1/2 on the meter. Are you set on Magnetic? Battery test O.k? Are the rods working well at 0? Dell

[Mike(Mont)]

A lot of variables here. I haven't been using two rods or the old Weight Chek--the silver one with red dot on the dial. I did get them out yesterday and was able to hit the target with the rods crossing about half way or a bit more. I was using the Eliminator e-120 as a transmitter and it is more powerful than some other frequency generator. I can null out two gold rings to 1 1/2 ounces on the dial and still get the rods to close a little past the tips. Anyway at the time I was not experiencing much interference, the meter was pretty much stable. i expect it will take me some time to figure out how much meter deflection before I get too much interference. I don't know, but I suspect the rapid needle movement is also an indicator of interference. Yes, I had it set on magnetic. I waved a magnet and the meter made a large deflection. I even wondered about it, too. Maybe I have a magnetic personality? LOL

[Mike(Mont)]

I went out this morning and the meter was moving around more. Didn't watch it for very long, but it did hit "3". The weather was not cooperative, snow, wind, and cold. I was able to find the signal line but it was not easy. So I don't really have any results that are usable yet.

[Dell Winders]

There is no need for me to suggest this to you Mike, but for those who feel it is necessary to hold the Rod(s) level to get the rod(s) to react, this is the wrong approach for measuring the target, or Signal line Strength of Field.

The tips of the hand held Rods have to be angled down towards the ground with enough Gravity resistance to prevent the Rods from crossing on a weak signal, but allow crossing at least half way on a strong signal.

Using a test target to compare the Rod's reaction at different intervals allows the operator to measure and compare the target's SOF at any time during a survey, without the expense of an Electronic meter.

Mike, Based on what you have described, your body may be emitting a stronger Magnetic field than many of us, which if true would be a factor that is partially overriding and weakening the target SOF. If that is the case then the tips of the rods would have to be held closer to level with less Gravity resistance to make them more sensitive to a weakened target SOF? Stay away from the electrolyte drinks. Dell

[Mike(Mont)]

Yeah, I could have a strong field. I usually hold the rods so the tips are between one inch and two inches below level. I can feel it better that way.

I don't know about the 10X Magnifier antenna. The info says humans have a very weak magnetic field. It also says most people can be detected from five to ten feet away when set to the electric. It almost seems the opposite for me. I wondered if they wired it wrong or something, so I waved a magnet when it was set to electric and it did not respond. I can just wave my hand when it is set on magnetic and the meter will make a big swing. I don't know, they said some people do not carry an electric charge. And it could be the external antenna is not set to detect the electric field, I don't know. At this point I think it is more trouble than it is worth. It just seems too sensitive.

[Mike(Mont)]

I went back to the Alphalabs website to read the instructions and noticed they are now charging $20 to install the antenna output jack. At this point, I don't think it's worth it.