Strong signal from Ferrite

[Theseus]

Originally Posted by Tim Williams

A university that would test random people 1000 or more a study for responses using rods. There I answered your question.

(other nonsense clipped)
Tim

I'm sorry but I'm having a little problem with your sentence structure. Perhaps if you weren't so taken with accusing me of someone I'm not, you could concentrate a little more on what the important issue is here.

"A university that would test random people.... 1000 or more.... a study for responses using rods."

Sorry, but you seem to have run several thoughts together. Do you want a 1000 universities to run some sort of test, or one university to run a test on 1000 random individuals???? What is a "study for responses using rods"?
Are the only people "qualified" to comment on your Ring Theory, those who can get responses from dowsing rods? Carl can get a dowsing response from a dowsing rod. I can get a dowsing response from a dowsing rod. I'll bet J_Player can get a response from a dowsing rod. Are we qualified?

From everything you are indicating here, apparently you don't actually have ANY data yourself, to validate your Ring Theory. Else you would provide it right here. That being the case, how is it that you can advertise the Ring Theory here or on your website, or explain it to prospective customers ---if in fact you can't actually provide tangible validated evidence to support your "theory"????

Incidentally, when you answer the questions above, would you mind leaving out all the rhetoric about some list of characters (real or fictional) that you are carrying a vendetta for? That adds nothing to the issue we are discussing. Thank you.

[Tim Williams]

Look this is your agenda, your ego to keep this BS going on. I would have thought you could understand what I posted, but again you could not keep from saying something against me in the process of posting! Amazing! You sir are a study.

Answer my questions. If you cannot that's ok say so. Please don't dance around and change the subject. By the way "A university" means one. Just helping you to understand. I will let you figure out the rest.

Tim

[Theseus]

Originally Posted by Tim Williams

Look this is your agenda, your ego to keep this BS going on. I would have thought you could understand what I posted, but again you could not keep from saying something against me in the process of posting! Amazing! You sir are a study.

Answer my questions. If you cannot that's ok say so. Please don't dance around and change the subject. By the way "A university" means one. Just helping you to understand. I will let you figure out the rest.

Tim

My agenda? I don't have an agenda per se.

Was it not you that made the following posting?

"If you want to learn about rings look on my site.
http://lrlman.com/yabb/YaBB.pl?num=1290604542

The frequency you are using if off causing the ring to shift to the right or left."

I thought this was a discussion forum, and after you said we could all "learn" about "these rings", I looked but did not find any data to support your "ring theory".

You still refuse to place any data here to support these "so-called" rings you make reference to, or point to where it is located.

Without data or third-party sources to substantiate these "rings" you talk about, the only conclusion anyone could arrive at is that it's just a lot of pseudo-science mumbo-jumbo.

Thus, my statement that the ring theory is bogus, is true and accurate. End of story.

[Dell Winders]

Theseus, I don't see you posting any scientific data that supports your personal allegation that the ring theory, or Frequency discrimination, is bogus. Let's hear what credible Science you base your allegations against Tim, committing fraud? Surely, you can prove your allegations in a court of law? Dell

[Tim Williams]

Well Sam you have to convince everyone that has experienced rings not me. What would you say to the person that posted about the ring and many others that email me? As before you have not answered my questions and you never will.

I have on my site if anyone wants to ask my customers about the LRL500 email me for references. Over and over I have people thanking me for my theory. I know that means nothing to you. But it's them you have to convince not me.

I just want to say that I count Carl as a friend. He has posted his views without belittling any dowser and I respect him for that. We have talked about meeting one day at a treasure show.

Sense this is going in circles I will not answer any more of your rambling post. Many people have died so I can have free speech. I am thankful. Use free speech wisely.

Sam have a nice day.

Tim

[Theseus]

Originally Posted by Dell Winders

Theseus, I don't see you posting any scientific data that supports your personal allegation that the ring theory, or Frequency discrimination, is bogus. Let's hear what credible Science you base your allegations against Tim, committing fraud? Surely, you can prove your allegations in a court of law? Dell

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof. Try to remember Dell, it is always the responsibility of those making the "claims"; to actually provide the proof for those claims, not the other way around.

My proof for making the statements I have, not only about the bogus ring theory, but also your bogus MFD/LRL theories is based on very sound principles. I will iterate them for you here, and I hope you will understand.

Once a device or phenomenon has developed around poor theories, it essentially halts all useful progress by its practitioners until the idea is reintegrated with the larger scientific community. The institutionalization of theories and devices in an uncritical atmosphere and away from the larger scientific community almost guarantees that there will be a continuing sequence of "positive" results, sometimes for centuries, even though the phenomena remain slippery, understanding remains vague, and discovery of new knowledge is left to the rest of science. In short, a duck is born. Quack, quack.

In regards to your own advertisements and those of a similar ilk; I would simply remind you of the following:

DEFENSIVENESS. It is a common human tendency to take criticism of one's work personally and respond defensively. True science must constantly be aware of this tendency and suppress it, because unchecked defensiveness is the death of scientific inquiry. When a manufacturer/dealer consistently interprets criticism of his or her theories, hypotheses, or data as personal insults, they become suspect, and rightly so.

How appropriate, and predictable, that one LRL salesman would come running to the aid of another. Why don't you get Claude Cochran or Richard Thomas to join in your little dogpile.

[Theseus]

Originally Posted by Tim Williams

Well Sam you have to convince everyone that has experienced rings not me.

Tim

Sorry, once again you must have me confused with someone else.

But regardless, the chore of convincing the gullible and technically-challenged is not mine. I'll leave that up to you LRL salesmen. If you can do what you do, advertise what you do, sell what you do --and still sleep at night, you've got a whole different set of scruples than I do. Good luck.

[Dell Winders]

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof. Try to remember Dell, it is always the responsibility of those making the "claims"; to actually provide the proof for those claims, not the other way around

Sorry, that tired old rationale you use doesn't apply

In a court of law, the burden of proof is required to be shown by the person publicly making false, or libelous accusations against another. SHOW PROVE PROOFYOUR ALLEGATIONS.

Dell Winders & Tim Williams, publicly display their names, phone numbers, and addresses, without nothing to hide.

You, on the other hand go to great lengths to deceptively hide from the authorities behind a list of aliases, and IP's addresses.

So, come on Sam, show the folks here who you really are. Give them your true name, and address, where certain authorities have access to your whereabouts. Apparently, they are not aware of recent internet activities, and the same old tricks. Dell

[Geo]

Originally Posted by Esteban

Can be some different inject frequency via rods in soil than uses oscillator as detector. By the way 59.5 is near 62 Khz (used by Alonso) and 6.2 Khz is harmonic of 62 Khz (1/10). So, your point is between 5.6 Khz to 6.2-6.4 Khz and in other way 56 Khz to 62-64 Khz. Can be variations fo the type of gold mixing with others metals and in different proportion.

For oscillator "high frequency" as 300 Khz means you'll detect aluminium foil of cigarettes, chiclets, etc.

No, if it is harmonic of the frequency that excite the target
Regards

[Geo]

The problem is very simple.
Everyone can say what he think !!!!!!
I found the Ring phenomenon a lot of times, so i dont hear what everyone says. Also, all people that i know who work rods with generator, the have the same problem with ring. Who is he, who work with rods and dont have ring problem????
I told a lot of times. At me the LRL works, with and without generator, so i dont know what the universities teach but how the rods are moving.
If anyone will come for holidays to Greece i can teach him
All the other , for me are words only for write......
My regards

[Theseus]

Originally Posted by Dell Winders

Sorry, that tired old rationale you use doesn't apply

In a court of law, the burden of proof is required to be shown by the person publicly making false, or libelous accusations against another. SHOW PROVE PROOFYOUR ALLEGATIONS. Dell

Yes, the rationale I stated does apply, but of course pure pseudoscience will never fit into real science and physics, so there is no point in real scientific investigators wasting their time pointing out the obvious. Especially since your mind is CLOSED to real science in the first place.

By the way, since all of the statements I've published about you, your cohorts or your LRL/MFD are true, there is NO Libel; hence no accusations. Merely facts and truth.

The only possible way you could make a case for libel is if you could prove LRL/MFD actually worked better than Chance guessing. And, you can't (or won't) do that, so..... case closed, end of story.

[Fred]

Originally Posted by Geo

The problem is very simple.
Everyone can say what he think !!!!!!

Yes! but i think some are selling their ideas very expensive...

[Theseus]

Originally Posted by Geo

The problem is very simple.
Everyone can say what he think !!!!!!
I found the Ring phenomenon a lot of times, so i dont hear what everyone says. Also, all people that i know who work rods with generator, the have the same problem with ring. Who is he, who work with rods and dont have ring problem????
I told a lot of times. At me the LRL works, with and without generator, so i dont know what the universities teach but how the rods are moving.
If anyone will come for holidays to Greece i can teach him
All the other , for me are words only for write......
My regards

Call it whatever you want, Ring phenomenon, Ring Theory, Ghosting, Magnetic Images or whatever. It all equates to the Empty Hole Syndrome, or in simple terms; a hole that was dug after the dowsing (LRL/MFD) was finished, and nothing was found resembling a sought after target.

Don't take my word for it; Carl has written an excellent article on the subject, so there is no sense in me repeating the facts here.
http://geotech.thunting.com/cgi-bin/...oles/index.dat

Also, please remember, if enough holes are dug in search of something that could be construed as a viable target, you WILL be successful some of time. It's called the Law of Averages.

[Geo]

Originally Posted by Fred

Yes! but i think some are selling their ideas very expensive...

Hi Fred.
Again the things are simple!!!
If some selling their ideas expensive........ don't Buy
Regards

[Geo]

Originally Posted by Theseus

Call it whatever you want, Ring phenomenon, Ring Theory, Ghosting, Magnetic Images or whatever. It all equates to the Empty Hole Syndrome, or in simple terms; a hole that was dug after the dowsing (LRL/MFD) was finished, and nothing was found resembling a sought after target.

Don't take my word for it; Carl has written an excellent article on the subject, so there is no sense in me repeating the facts here.
http://geotech.thunting.com/cgi-bin/...oles/index.dat

Also, please remember, if enough holes are dug in search of something that could be construed as a viable target, you WILL be successful some of time. It's called the Law of Averages.

Hi.
I Regard Carl..... BUT
What about a lot of coins (hundrends) that i found with LRL or LRL and generator ?????? What about bigger objects that i found ????
What says Carl ????
Carl speak about his experiments and i believe him. But i speak about my experiment and the results are different from Carl.
So i write about me and not what i read!!!!
Regards

[Esteban]

Originally Posted by Geo

No, if it is harmonic of the frequency that excite the target
Regards

With an oscillator I made, at 300 Khz tends to detect aliminium foil, but a lowest frequency no.

[Theseus]

Originally Posted by Geo

Hi.
I Regard Carl..... BUT
What about a lot of coins (hundrends) that i found with LRL or LRL and generator ?????? What about bigger objects that i found ????
What says Carl ????
Carl speak about his experiments and i believe him. But i speak about my experiment and the results are different from Carl.
So i write about me and not what i read!!!!
Regards

If an LRL actually works, would it not have to be operator independent? I would certainly think so. Similar to an ohmmeter. If several different individuals were asked to measure the same 100 ohm resistor with the same ohmmeter, we would expect all the readings to be very very close to one another.

If I understand you correctly, if both you and Carl tested (experimented) with exactly the same LRL, you are saying it would work for you but not for Carl.

Why do you suppose that would be?

[Dell Winders]

In normal service, since when is an ohmmeter considered totally operator Independent? Get real.

If I understand you correctly, if both you and Carl tested (experimented) with exactly the same LRL, you are saying it would work for you but not for Carl.

Not if one operated with a dead battery, or one was being untruthful serving the Skeptic agenda, or one was an idiot. Dell

[Theseus]

Originally Posted by Dell Winders

In normal service, since when is an ohmmeter considered totally operator Independent? Get real.

Sorry, I forgot to take into account your relative intelligence level, and that of a sack of rocks. You are right; if you were operating the ohmmeter it might not be operator independent.

Not if one operated with a dead battery, or one was being untruthful serving the Skeptic agenda, or one was an idiot. Dell

(See above.........) Are you inferring that when Carl tests an LRL, he uses a dead battery in the device, or has a bias towards making it look like the LRL didn't work, when actually it did????

[Dell Winders]

The only possible way you could make a case for libel is if you could prove LRL/MFD actually worked better than Chance guessing. And, you can't (or won't) do that, so..... case closed, end of story

Theseus (Sam), You can express personal opinions about products all you want, if stated as such, however you cross the legal line when you make false, accusations of fraud against Tim Williams, & Dell Winders.

When you cowardly hide behind a continuance of aliases and random Isp, and spread malicious lies, with a venomous tongue it is you who is guilty of fraud, deception, and libel.

Come out from hiding from authorities, be a man, SHOW PROOF THAT BACK YOUR STUPID LIBELOUS ALLEGATIONS. And remember, Carl, is legally responsible for the content of this forum, and your libelous allegations.

The internet, is better policed, and it's harder for you hide under false pretenses. Sam, (Theseus) your vindictive days of seeking egotistical revenge against Dell Winders & Tim Williams, are over.

SHOW PROOF OF YOUR ALLEGATIONS AGAINST TIM WILLIAMS, & DELL WINDERS, or go back into hiding and start yourself a new life. Dell

[Theseus]

Originally Posted by Dell Winders

Theseus (Sam), You can express personal opinions about products all you want....
(other nonsense clipped)
Dell

Sorry, I don't have a clue what you are talking about, and I'm guessing neither do you. I'm not your long lost buddy. You and Tim apparently have some long-standing problem (or vendetta) against someone in your past. I certainly hope you can resolve your differences. You both seem to be quite worked up about something.

As for me, I will continue to make input here as I see fit, or until I'm requested to do otherwise by an administrator, certainly not at your request.

[Fred]

Originally Posted by Dell Winders

In normal service, since when is an ohmmeter considered totally operator Independent? Get real.

Looks like Hung´s measurements
Now i have to retest all my resitors several times and average the readings to get a almost-real value...

[Dell Winders]

As for me, I will continue to make input here as I see fit, or until I'm requested to do otherwise by an administrator, certainly not at your request

Apparently, you don't see fit to demonstrate any credibility behind your accusations. It's all BS.

SHOW PROOF OF YOUR ALLEGATIONS OF FRAUD AGAINST TIM WILLIAMS, & DELL WINDERS.

I'm sure viewers here would be interested. Dell

[Theseus]

Originally Posted by Dell Winders

Apparently, you don't see fit to demonstrate any credibility behind your accusations. It's all BS.

SHOW PROOF OF YOUR ALLEGATIONS OF FRAUD AGAINST TIM WILLIAMS, & DELL WINDERS.

I'm sure viewers here would be interested. Dell

Coming from The King of BS, I find your remarks most laughable!

You have provided all the proof I could ever come up with. Don't forget it is you that is attempting to sell the over-priced paint roller handle; and trying to convince the gullible that it will point to treasure. I guess that's why you are The King of BS, and I'm just a lowly contributor to the forum.

[Dell Winders]

Theseus, SHOW PROOF OF YOUR ALLEGATIONS OF FRAUD AGAINST TIM WILLIAMS, & DELL WINDERS.