Bye
 

:( "Tesla was a genius ahead of his time and his many conceptions like the
earth acting as a capacitor and inventions like wireless electrical
transmission and many others were superb and were abandoned only because
of small capitalist interests... Yet he was charged as a 'crackpot'.."

Abandoned ...!? Never! Only you do not know about it.
Not only you are trying to teach me(us) about your funny ideas(lrl,dowsing...etc)but
now you would like to teach me about Nikola Tesla !!! Tesla was Serbian,born in
Croatia, lived in USA.About his work...it would take a pages and pages for me to
write to you about it, that's why I said that any concerned may find all on the
.net . Since I am Serbian and We here growing a tradition to rescpect and learn
about our great compatriots through history,it was one of earliest educatioanl
obligation for me to learn and know everything about Him,His life and His work!!!
You may say, that I had to graduate on that matters. So please do not talk about
Nikola Tesla to me.
This 2006.year is a year of Nikola Tesla, worldwide, that's way I mentioned
Him in last post. It would do a good for you and the other dowsers(with mineoro
or without) to study a little more about His work and than to understand some
basic principles in ions,emf...etc.

"It's so funny now seeing skeptics citing Tesla.. Oh well..."

You really don't know nothing about Him !!???
Tesla,himself, was a great skeptic about everything!
No skeptics - no knowledge! Beleivers better go to temple and chant.


"Maybe it was for you, but not for Mineoro. Upon 50 years of gathering
knowledge they are up to something"

Upon 50 wasted years(sorry, but it has to be wasted if those latest products
are the top of their success) they trying to compensate lost time to get
rich by selling nonsence devices to naive and beleivers by hot prices!
No, really....collect all materiall to build mineoro, it will cost you a
$30-$40...not a $8000 !!!!!!If you do not know how, than I'll build it for
you for some $100 extra.

"My personal opinion of the skeptics is that they did not suceed in building
a working LRL and for that reason they keep bashing LRL builders who are
sucessful. But the true hidden reason is to try to reverse engineering them..
he,he. 'Why he did and I couldn't?' sort of things...
It's like the dowsing subject. They can't dowse and then what's left? Let's
bash who can.
There might be other working LRLs around .. But I know Mineoro is one of then
for sure."

Maybe is that case with somebody else.But sorry, not with me.As i said, a long
time ago i was interested in many things (maybe you was not born yet).
Tried almost everything. I do have a some expirience which is enough to
distinguish between right and wrong way to go further.
Bashing !? Well, if that so...I am very sorry..and I am not gonna
bash you any more. Since this is forum, I tried to say my real opinion. Maybe
I chosed a "sharp" way to do it. But that's Me! Sometimes people get resentfull
by somebody's attitude. If that so, than I am sorry. Any way I was thinking
not to waste my time here any more. There are a very nice threads here to
visit and learn more about real stuff.But a label "Remote sensing" attract me
in good hope that I am gonna read something about serious and real remote
detecting,sensing or what ever you like.Since it is not the case,I guess this
is my last visit here.
Regards to all....
Special regards to my brother in arms Quiaozhi.
You put it right. I could'nt done better!!!
Quiaozhi meet me on the other threads, we can exchange knowledge and schematics.

After reading this thread it appears to me that this topic is going nowhere. There is a group who says long range locaters are total bunk, and another group who says they work by sensing ions or electrostatic fields of a target that is located a long distance. Here are my thoughts:

1. If the LRLs work, then why aren't their owners rich from all the treasure they found? Why aren't the manufacturers rich from all the treasure they found?

2. Why has not a single manufacturer of a LRL come to claim the $25,000 prize? Why has not a single owner of a LRL come to claim the $25,000 prize?

4. I cannot imagine any known principle that allows an electronic device to locate a buried target at a long distance by sensing ions or the electrostatic field of a buried object. But there may be such a principle which is little known and does work, as has been demonstrated by past inventors who developed new technologies. For example, Nicola Tesla developed quite a few new technologies, including AC electricity and its generators and transmission systems. After awhile, all his detractors including Edison gave up on their cherished beliefs in DC electricity to power the world simply because his improved method worked better. After Tesla left his partnership with Westinghouse, he started his own venture to transmit electricity without wires, using his high voltage and high power Tesla coils. He demonstrated how wireless power transmission works by lighting up fluorescent light bulbs 20 miles away without any wire linked from his transmitter to the light bulbs. He turned on the remote lights on demand, and turned them off on demand.

5. The proponents of LRLs talk a lot about ion and electrostatic field detection theories as an explanation of how their LRLs work. They also claim to have developed a little-known technology which most of the scientific community is unaware. However, I have never seen any demonstration that they can cause this technology to work for finding a buried target. I would like to see anyone use a LRL to detect a buried target that they did not bury, and thus end all the controversy about whether the theories are correct. Here is an easy way to compare the performance of a LRL to any conventional metal detector:

1. Go to a remote area that has very little traffic, like a dry lake bed, or a remote desert area and mark out a strip of land 4-feet wide by 500 feet long. Use whatever means you have at hand to insure there is nothing buried in a detectable range inside this strip.

2. Bury a target 6 inches deep somewhere inside the area. Take measurements so you know where the target is buried.

3. Then rake over the top surface so there is no evidence where the target is buried. Let the area weather for awhile if necessary to remove any evidence of where the target is buried.

Let the people who want to demonstrate their locators find the target within the area. This method can be repeated at several dissimilar sites in order to rule out any interference from underground geological anomalies or mineralization.

If the LRL works as the proponents say, the LRL should be able to easily find the target much faster than a conventional detector, because of it's directional abilities which will simply point out the way. The conventional detectors will have to scan every foot of the strip until they finally come to where the target is buried.

Can anyone with a LRL show a demonstration like this?
Can anyone with a conventional metal detecdtor show me a demonstration like this?

First, thank you all for keeping this discussion civil. Second, anyone know what the Mineoro models cost? How much did a PDC210 cost? How much are the new models?

Are we now claiming that gold ions are emitted by undersea treasure, they float to the surface, and are detectable by a Mineoro?

- Carl

ION Detector
 

Hey IVCONIC,
Those ion schematics are the ones I tested many years ago. Now you go and publish and I can't get anyone to send me 1 OZ gold coins to make an them an ion detector since they can do it for $20 worth of parts. DARN!

Oh well, now I just have to go back to selling that land in Florida some more (hahahaha).

Seriously though, I would like to know if anyone has ever proven whether there is any kind of field around gold buried over a long period of time??? I can't afford to bury any gold coins in my backyard for 20 years to find out.

Goldfinder (not Goldfinger - he was 007s nemisis on one of the early 007 movies).

The Donkey and the Cart
 

Hi Estaban,

I think you may not have understood.http://thunting.com/geotech/forums/i...es/redface.gif I was not saying that you are a donkey. I was asking if the donkey in the picture belongs to you? You do not have to assume any "donkeyism". http://thunting.com/geotech/forums/i...es/biggrin.gif

Keep up the polite discussion.

Don't give up.
 

Hi Ivconic,

Don't give up yet.

The problem with this thread is that we have reached a stalemate situation.
This "yes it can", "no it can't", "yes it can", "no it can't" type of discussion is getting nowhere very fast. The critics are being accused of having closed minds, but sometimes an open mind can be so open that you fall inside and cannot see the real world anymore.http://thunting.com/geotech/forums/i...lies/smile.gif

It is difficult to always be objective, and this is the reason for double-blind, randomized and repeatable tests. We may not like to admit it, but human beings are very good at finding new ways of self-deception.
I'm afraid that the onus is on the believers to prove their case, and to demonstrate a foolproof method of long-range location. Wouldn't it be wonderful if a small handheld device could really detect the presence of gold or precious metals from extreme distances? Unfortunately the basic laws of physics (according to our current understanding) do not have a mechanism whereby this can be achieved. We are waiting to be proved wrong, and my hat is standing by to be eaten.http://thunting.com/geotech/forums/i...lies/smile.gif

Finally, there is no point is displaying pictures of the many treasures that have been found with LRLs. This is what I mean by subjective data. To turn this into objective data, you would also need to include all the other targets that did not result in treasure being found. Even then, it is easy to unconsciously filter the data to get a positive skew in the final results.

Let's get down to some real objective testing. Some of the posters on this forum have clearly built their own LRLs, with differing results. If we can ignore dowsing in this discussion, then things can be kept simple, as dowsing is something else altogether (IMHO) so let's not go there.

If you have any circuits, then please post them. This will give us all something objective to test. We have already seen the Baby Mineoro, which is essentially an electrostatic meter. If the Mineoro's are an extension of this principle, then let's try it. This way the believers can prove their case, or alternatively the skeptics can say "I told you so". Of course, some people may say that the commercial LRLs cannot be duplicated because they are based on some new scientific principle that no-one but the inventer is able to understand. This is nonsense. Any type of metal detector that really works can be back-engineered.

To the believers - please help us skeptics to understand the error of our ways. We are standing by...

Qiaozhi.

http://www.mineoro.com.br/portugues/...ages/celi2.jpg

Does it look like a 'pathologica subject experience' to you? So now we have the ablity of materialize this subjectiveness, don't we?
This is a picture of my friend Celi with one of the 32 colonial era gold coins he found with the old PDC 205. Yeah, the one which Carl disassembled and said it does not work. On the same day he found nuggets of 144g per ton.
Unfortunately the picture is out of focus, but this is a 1816 gold coin. They were spread close together in an area, only 20 cm deep.

As for Carl's challenging... Too much confusion and work to worth it.. This does not excite me at all. I don't need it. Besides, if it was for real, the agreement about the 'treasure-tracker' challenge would have to be accepted imediately by him. At first he agreed and then backed out trying to modify the rules... The true test I have already done. I find gold with my detector. What else is left? Show off to the world? Nahh....

Well, for the next days I'll be on the field researching another site. I think I'm finished about this thread. I'll probably come back next, posting a report of the FG78.1. Till then.

Be my guest. Try it. For my part Iknow you will not get anywhere. But for Mineoro's part, there might be legal consequences. I can't speak for them tough.

Sure we do. We are all brothers and want always help eeach other. But why simply not accept the fact that the detector is for real and better yet, it can be aquired? Do you think it's fair to 'steal' someone's sucess device? Why not get one and simply put it to work for you?
And then we have to hear all of the same BS talking from US to Brazil... How we need to prevent piracy if not, comercial consequences might arise... The same blah, blah, blah.. And they are first ones to not respect that.

wwell said hung,Bravo

Gold Coin
 

Nobody is denying the fact that you have found some very nice treasure, and you can "prove" this with a photo. Neither is there any accusations of fraud. We (the skeptics) are just trying to understand how this is possible with a device that Carl has disassembled and found to contain circuitry that (as far as we can ascertain) cannot possibly work as a metal detector. It just defies common sense and known physical laws. I know there has been some discussion of back-engineering, but this is only to try and understand what is being presented as fact, not to steal other people's ideas. I would be the first to admit that there are many things in the world that we do understand, and we are just trying to make sense of these claims. Simply asking us to accept this find as a proof that LRLs actually work is not acceptable. That's not how we (the skeptics) do things.

I would be very interested in your FG78.1 report when you return.

THE ANSWERS ARE THE SAME: If metal detectors work, then why aren't their owners rich from all the treasure they found? Why aren't the metal detector manufacturers rich fromall the treasure they found?


Would you like to add another $100,000 to Carl's Challenge to provide an incentive for folks to take a test designed for Losers? Statistics show that of the hundreds that have taken this type of test, there has never been a winner in over 20 years. Your money is safe. Carl's, so called challenge is nothing more than a copy cat, self promoting, publicity gimmick. Carl, is the only winner.

I was using fully electronic TR /LRL back as far as 1978. I 've been priveledged to use and field test numerous models for several private inventors since that time. I've used and tested these devices from aircraft, boats and in all types of geological conditions on land for more than 25 years. I have probably been the strongest most vocal proponnent of this concept. (not the bogus advertising claims) I have never, ever promoted any ION or ELECTROSTATIC field detection theories.

Earth Scientist, that I have conferred with are very well aware of the physics involved and how they might be incorporated into different applications that I have used, or tested.

I am also an avid Dowser, and with 35 years of Professional treasure hunting and salvage experience, I certainly know the difference between an application of physics, and meta-physics.

Folks, Please know what you are talking about before you attempt to speak for others with first hand field experience that might be viewing these forums.

"WHAT HAS BEEN DONE, CAN BE DONE" Dell

Hi Dell,

I am a little curious about your comment to "Please know what you are talking about before you attempt to speak for others with first hand field experience..." and your statement "I have never, ever promoted any ION or ELECTROSTATIC field detection theories".
I should point out that I was not referring to you as a person who advanced ION or ELECTROSTATIC field detection theories. I was referring to the more vocal proponents like esteban, hung, and (according to Carl) JPF Damásio. However, the Mineoro detector which this forum thread is about is specified as a device that uses a detection system of "Ionic directional classifier. Ionic and electrostatic fields". This is exactly what it says on the Mineoro product page: http://knouzm.com/display/text/11217...38097859-0154/

What I am talking about is the things that people are talking about in this forum thread, and the brand of detector that the thread is about. I am talking about how the thread will go nowhere until somebody demonstrates some utility from one of these machines.

I have no doubt that you have used and tested these devices for many years, and are aware of the difference between physics and metaphysics. I am not convinced that these machines cannot work. This is why I would like to see a demonstration of the machine working in a believable manner that shows it is a useful tool for a treasure hunter.

I don't understand how it is a losing proposition to demonstrate the machine to claim the $25,000 prize money. If you fail to find the target then you dont have to pay any fee, but if you demonstrate that the machine works, you get $25,000. Only Carl is putting his cash at stake, not you. But let's say that his test is unfair for some reason that I can't percieve, and should be avoided.

Why not just demonstrate the machine working for no prize money. Most companies that sell metal detectors will gladly demonstrate their detectors locating targets if you ask them. They will show you how the machine works, and even adjust it for you, then let you find some hidden targets before you part with your money. It is good business because they want to make sure you got the right model that works the best for you.

Why not demonstrate these machines like any conventional metal detector manufacturer does, and let the prospective buyer see how well it works before buying? Is that too much to ask?

I Agree
 

That's it in a nutshell!
Come on guys, we're not asking for the crown jewels here, just a simple demonstration. Nobody's credibility is at stake, and certainly nobody's money (except Carl's, that is).
The money is on the table. Just come and get it...

If you will notice, I started this thread and I had read the MINERO webpage before I started it. I mentioned nothing about the theory in which it may, or may not work.

So, what's the problem getting a demonstration? Just go to the factory, or a dealer and get a demonstration just like you would do to buy any product. I know a couple of folks that have traveled to California for a Mineoro demonstration. The customer that purchased the Mineoro, I tested bought it direct from the manufacturer as a result of their advertising, without a demonstration, or consulting

There have been hundreds people from all parts of the world that have come to Haines City, Florida USA during the past 25 years to learn the best method to use, and correctly interpret the reactions of rods with Remote Sensing Dscriminators without electronic receivers. There has never been a charge, or obligation for my time in sharing my field experience with these products.

"WHAT HAS BEEN DONE, CAN BE DONE" Dell

Searching for answers
 

Hi Dell,

This is your quote from this very forum I believe, refering to a Mineoro detector.
Are we not all simply searching for the same answer?

It must clear by now that this whole LRL discussion has reached a stalemate, with neither side able to make progress. Does anyone have a suggestion that would break the deadlock - perhaps someone without a strong opinion either way??

Right! I am skeptical of what I have not experienced for myself. Not of how it works, but if it works. Now I know.

Sides? Is that what you want this discussion to be about?

The truth doesn't take sides. I said that The Minero I tested does work in the field, but not necessarily as advertised. That's the truth proven out by the fact that it did work. I will not take sides by denying the truth regardless of my personal opinion of the Mineoro, or the Skeptic cult.

Stalemate? Not unless you think you already know everything there is to know about the subject. Every one here is free to learn from their own experience with this product, or any, the same as I do. So, what is the problem with you getting a MINEORO demonstration and learn for yourself from personal experience and be able to speak intelligently from first hand knowledge, instead of relying on assumption or hearsay?

"WHAT HAS BEEN DONE, CAN BE DONE" Dell

Yes... I have an opportunity to purchase a PDC210. I asked earlier what this model originally cost, and how much Mineoro is charging for the new models. Apparently no one knows. I'd still like to know the original cost of the PDC210 before I agree to a price.

Also, I'm concerned about getting "the right" PDC210. That is, when I posted my results of the PDC205, I was told that I had a "1-knob" PDC205 instead of the "2-knob" PDC205. I guess the 1-knob model was bogus, but the 2-knob model was the Real Deal. Anyway, I'd like to know if there is a particular PDC210 model that Really Works, or, conversely, is there a PDC210 model to avoid.

- Carl

I don't remember for sure but a figure between $6000 - $8000 comes to mind. Having had field experience with other electronic LRLs, and knowing the limitations, I am not impressed with the high price of MINEORO technology. Dell

Do you know if that's for the new models, or the old ones?

Hi Carl,
I'm looking at the Mineoro page that shows a 4-knob plus meter model called the Model DC2006: http://www.mineoro.com/tesouros/dc2006.htm
When you click for more information and prices, you are taken to a page that asks you to fill in a form with your name and address and telephone/email etc, but you are not told the price.

This page also lists quite a few other new models, some with up to 10 times more range of distance detection than the models they replace. At the bottom of the page thay list both the PDC205 and PDC210 among the discontinued models.
Mineoro has another page that shows their all-new model FG78.1 for sensing fresh gold: http://www.mineoro.com/tesouros/fg781.htm The price link also leads to a form to fill out without telling prices.

I spent almost an hour googling for a price on any Mineoro machine, and found nothing except links to the manufacturer's site, which linked to several distributor sites that had similar forms to fill in rather than telling the price. (I wonder if there is a fixed price for this machine, or do they adjust the price when a buyer calls in)? I did find this pricing % breakdown chart on another of the Mineoro factory pages: http://www.mineoro.com.br/novosite/english/politica.htm
The USA rep is in New York, whose page lists the PDC205PH and the PDC210 as their only products, and they are both sold out: http://www.gnld.ws/id1.html But there is a downloadable user guide at the bottom of this page from the USA rep: http://www.gnld.ws/index.html Apparently only the factory site carries a complete line and stocks the newest products.

Hope that helped

Yes, I've also hit a brick wall in trying to get pricing. Mineoro blacklisted my email address, so my emails to them simply bounce back.

- Carl

I have to agree with Dell. There is no need to develop sides, because we are all just trying to find out the facts about the Mineoro LRLs. It may have an appearance of taking sides because of the long drawn out technical debates about the operating principles early in the thread. But what we all overlooked is that Dell started the thread, and he seems to have more knowledge and experience than the rest of us in how these devices work. And he is also right, that all we need to do is find a dealer to demonstrate the machine. However, I can't find anyone on the net who has these available in this country except the factory rep in New York. And I am nowhere near New York. Is there a list of dealers who sell these machines un the USA? I am planning to buy a metal detector in the near future and I don't want to miss out on a Looking at some LRLs when I choose my next machine. And Dell, can you recommend some models that I should be looking at which are reasonably priced for their performance?

Thank you

One time I filled out the price form. After 2 days received e-mail
from mineoro. as I remember the suggested price for both models GDP 538 and
DC 2006 was about 4000$. I have the file in my PC archive but I am now
at my work place. I am so eager to know the latest test results of their products.

price
 

I asked mineoro about the price, here is the reply:

Dear Sirs,


Thank you for your enquiry about our vanguardist detectors.

In 2006 Mineoro proudly launched to the market model DC2006, in three
versions.
Read all about them on www.mineoro.com/tesouros/dc2006.htm

At the moment we are running a very special Introductory Offer
40% off. Do not miss it!

DC2006 100% USD$ 8,100.00 40% off.......USD 4.860.-
DC2006 80% USD$ 7,290.00 40% off......USD 4.374.-
DC2006 60% USD$ 6,561.00 40% off......USD 3.936,60

FREIGHT AND INSURANCE VIA PRIVATE COURIER INCLUDED!

Bank data and instructions about how to place your order in attachment.

Graphic comparing the performance of models in test field on
http://www.mineoro.com/tesouros/tabeladc.htm

We also produce Ionic Detectors:

- DIAS2005 All Substances...USD1,990 (one thousand nine hundred and
ninety
dollars)+ FREIGHT

- IGD2005 Only Gold.........USD 1,400 (one thousand four hundred
dollars) +
FREIGHT

Excellent post Michael. Thanks for the info.

Can you email me here? I have a non-forum questoin I would like to ask...

J_Player59@hotmail.com