rangertell examiner field trials

[J_Player]

Originally Posted by Theseus

Maybe the attribute I have in mind is simply an "inferred" one rather than a specific one that is written out anywhere.

From all the advertising I've seen (and read) and from what I've seen on eBay, I think it is at least "inferred" if not said in so many words; that the Examiner will pull towards or otherwise indicate a gold target at some distance away.

That is the attribute my test would be looking to validate.

Let's say there are 5 possible locations where a single target might be located.

The target could be any piece of gold or gold bearing object (nugget, coin, etc.) that would be deemed a logical target by R-T, and would have an appropriate Number to be plugged into the calculator.

Five different locations or hiding places would be spread out probably in a semi-circle.

Distance from the target locations to the operator should probably be at least 10 feet and maybe less than 30 feet. That gives you a good range, if need be.

The method of hiding could be inverted cups, under paper plates or any other method that insures the operator has no clue as to what might be under the hiding method, or not.

There will be 5 trials, during the DB portion of the test.

Whatever the method is for concealing the target, ALL 5 of the positions and the method for hiding MUST be disturbed prior to each of the 5 trials.

Standard DB protocol is assumed, and is described on Carl's DB testing page, if you are not familiar with who is involved in the hiding and recording of the results parts of the test.

Remember of course there is a Pre-test and a Post-test, both done on a target that is EITHER in plain sight of the operator OR the operator can SEE where the target was placed.

During the DB portion of the test, the specific hiding location should be determined by drawing a single number out of a hat (containing the numbers 1 to 5).

To be convincing, although not necessarily a Final Conclusion, I believe of the 5 trials, the Examiner should successfully locate the Gold target a minimum of 4 times and 5 would be even better.

Correctly locating the Gold target 4 times comes with a Odds of Occurring By Chance Alone of 1 in 156 times.

Correctly locating the Gold target 5 times comes with a Odds of Occurring By Chance Alone of 1 in 3125 times.

Let me know if there is anything else you need from me.

Hi Theseus,
What you posted looks to be a good description of the test you want to see performed. Your idea that the the Examiner characteristics are inferred is true for some of the claims, but many of them are made as actual statements. Regardless of the source of what you want to test, I can perform the test you request with the help of WesP since you have specified the exact protocol you want to see, and have even included some leeway to allow various conditions that will show the data you are looking for.

I will summarize your double blind test protocol so there is no confusion of what test will be performed:
1. The basic attribute of the Examiner that you want to see tested is it's tendency to "pull towards" or otherwise indicate a gold target at some distance away. This is well documented in the claims of Rangertell, as well as for other target materials. This seems like a good attribute to test.

2. For your test protocol, you want to designate five different locations that are separated from each other in a semicircle by at least 10 feet, but less than 30 feet distance from each other. The target sample will be hidden in one of these five locations during the double blind portion of the test. (I am assuming that the semicircle you requested is a half circle of 180 degrees, and having a radius of at least 10 feet and less than 30 feet, with possible target locations at any of the five equally spaced paper cups set at least 10 feet apart from each other, or up to 30 feet apart if a 30 foot radius is used).

3. The method for hiding the gold sample will to be to put it under a paper cup, or a paper plate, or any other convenient way that conceals the location from the operator of the Examiner. The acceptable substitute methods of concealing the location of the target may be used in place of the cups described in the protocol (2 above).

4. The double blind portion of the test will include exactly five trials.

5. There will be shown a trial before and after the five double blind tests. The trial before and after will be done when the operator of the Examiner can see the target in plain sight, or knows where it is located.

6. A hat will be used for drawing a number from 1 to 5 to determine which hiding location is used for the next trial in the five double blind trials.

7. There is one of your specifications that I don't understand completely:
"Whatever the method is for concealing the target, ALL 5 of the positions and the method for hiding MUST be disturbed prior to each of the 5 trials".
Does this mean that the target sample must be moved to a different one of the five locations after each of the trials? Or does it mean that it must be moved to a location that may be different, or may be the same? Or does it mean that some physical disturbance must be applied to all the possible target locations? Or does it mean something different than what I am asking?

For your information, there is no standard double blind test protocol. There are thousands of different double blind protocols. The protocol suggested on Carl's test to win his prize is only one suggestion, which he states he will modify to suit both him and the person applying for the challenge. The purpose for his test is not the same as yours, and his protocol is adjusted to assure he will see evidence to convince him he is getting his money's worth of a demonstration. In your case, you have no money at stake, or any monetary investment in your test as Carl does. I think even Carl will agree that there is no standard protocol for double blind testing. It is simply a methodology that can use any double blind protocol that a person decides to apply.

Thank you for actually stating what you want to see in this test, If you clarify the final point about disturbing the hiding method, I will have what we need to proceed as soon as WesP is ready for some testing.

Best wishes,
J_P