Ultra Science For Detection

[J_Player]

Originally Posted by Dell Winders

And if it were a comparison test between my LRL and your PI on finding a 1 oz Gold bar buried 2 meters deep you wouldn't stand a chance of winning.

As I said, Carl has made rules to his challenge that winning will only be by a wild stroke of luck. It proves nothing. It's a gimmick designed to promote Carl, and you are falling for it. Good luck! You will need it with your PI comparison rationale. Dell

Hi Dell,
Again, you are confused. Carl's test does not require that you bury the 10 ounce bar 2 meters deep. You only need to tell which one of 10 paper cups it is hidden under. So this is basically an air test to see if any detector can determine which of the ten cups the gold bar is hidden under from at least 10 feet away.

A good PI detector will find the gold bar every time from 1 meter distance, but most won't from 10 feet. Can a LRL find the gold bar from 10 feet even 7 out of 10 times? That's all you need to do to pass the test and get your check for $25,000.

Your arguments claiming the test is not fair lead me to believe you are not capable of locating the 10 ounce gold bar 7 out of 10 times from 10 feet. Therefore you want Carl to change his test to something different that you think a LRL can do. But wait, "LRL" stands for "long range locator". Doesn't this mean it should locate something at long range?

Carl's test rules seem pretty simple to me. Can you tell us which of Carl's rules prevents a LRL from locating the 10 ounce gold bar hidden under a paper cup 10 feet away so finding it "will only be by a wild stroke of luck"?

Best wishes,
J_P