Large Gold Hoard Found

[Carl-NC]

Originally Posted by Geo

Carl, do you know the model???

Eagle Spectrum.

Originally Posted by Max

Then the british laws suit the scenario with wonderful and reasonable rules that make all win.

Yes, the UK have the best treasure laws I know of.

Originally Posted by Esteban

All OK, but what are doing this thread in remote sensing if the ancient treasure was found with regular MD?

I think mostly to point out that, even though Britain has many dowsers, ordinary metal detectorists are making all the great finds. Dowsers aren't finding anything, unless you count ley lines.

- Carl

[putrechigi]

LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOK
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1212031/10-000-Roman-coins-unearthed-amateur-metal-detector-enthusiast--treasure-hunt.html

[putrechigi]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1212031/10-000-Roman-coins-unearthed-amateur-metal-detector-enthusiast--treasure-hunt.html

[J_Player]

Hmmm... And he didn't use dowsing rods....

A massive haul of more than 10,000 Roman coins has been unearthed by an amateur metal detecting enthusiast - on his first ever treasure hunt. The finder, Nick Davies, bought his first metal detector a month ago and this is his first find made with it. The silver and bronze 'nummi' coins, dating from between 240AD and 320AD, late in the reign of Constantine I, were discovered in a farmer's field near Shrewsbury, in Shropshire, last month. In total the coins and the pot weigh more than 70lb. Finder Nick Davies, 30, was on his first treasure hunt when he discovered the coins, mostly crammed inside a buried 70lb clay pot buried in the ground about 1,700 years ago..

Ok, maybe Esteban is right. So let's see all the newspaper articles about the large hoards found by dowsers.

Best wishes,
J_P

[michael]

Hi.
one lucky find nothing more, as you all know no professional work.
just luck (god providence) and again demonstration of British beautiful fair laws for THing and THers, shame on other countries governments.

Originally Posted by J_Player

..... Does anybody know if dowsing is illegal in countries where treasure hunting is illegal?

Dear J-P, here they will confiscate every tool that is suspect to use in THing. even a pair of L-rods.

[Esteban]

In Islamic countries seems is illegal, but maybe only for archaeologists investigations.

[Esteban]

Originally Posted by Carl-NC

Yes, the UK have the best treasure laws I know of.


- Carl

In UK, if you found a coin valuated, for example, US$ 150,000, the museum pay the price. They exhibit this coin in special and tourism and local stores wins.

[putrechigi]

Originally Posted by Esteban

In UK, if you found a coin valuated, for example, US$ 150,000, the museum pay the price. They exhibit this coin in special and tourism and local stores wins.

hi esteban for italian people is dream:roll eyes:

[Mike(Mont)]

Of course "pure" metal detectors are going to have more finds. I mean look at T-net--There are tens of thousands of MD'ers and about ten dowsers (if that many). I put "pure" in quotes because this is an unknown. When five percent of the people find ninety-five percent of the treasure, it's a whole lot more than dumb luck. What it is exactly is up for conjecture, but there is definitely a positive attitude among them as well as dowsers, in stark contrast to any skeptic.

[Theseus]

Originally Posted by Mike(Mont)

Of course "pure" metal detectors are going to have more finds. I mean look at T-net--There are tens of thousands of MD'ers and about ten dowsers (if that many). I put "pure" in quotes because this is an unknown. When five percent of the people find ninety-five percent of the treasure, it's a whole lot more than dumb luck. What it is exactly is up for conjecture, but there is definitely a positive attitude among them as well as dowsers, in stark contrast to any skeptic.

Your inference is that all skeptics lack a positive attitude. Do you have actual data to support that statement, or are you just making comments at random.

I fail to see the association between being skeptical about something and a person's attitude; be it positive or negative.

If we view your basic comments posted here, one might think that all dowsers suffer from extreme paranoia, are suspicious by nature and completely abhor rational science. But it would be erroneous to make such a silly association, because there are probably a lot of dowsers that are not paranoid, are not suspicious and fully accept the axioms of rational science.

Perhaps you do have data to support your inference. It would interesting to see it.

[Mike(Mont)]

I watched an old movie on Loius Pasteur and it was ominous how similar the skeptics were--almost as if the ones around here use that movie as a template/script for their ranting. Just a bunch of arrogant @*&%$#@ claiming they know it all when they know nothing. I guess "nothing is new under the sun".

[Max]

It's not the Sun.

you have such powerful senses and don't see it's not the Sun !?

It's a thermonuclear device >50megaton dropped by the former soviet union.

It's the kind of stuff they planned to drop in areas like new york in the 60's , using a strategic bomber, tupolev brand.

Sakharov team developed and assembled it in 3 months and then the bomb was tested in the Artic, Nova Zemlja islands area.

But I see you can't figure it out...

As with other stuff!

Kind regards,
Max

[Fred]

Originally Posted by Mike(Mont)

I watched an old movie on Loius Pasteur and it was ominous how similar the skeptics were--almost as if the ones around here use that movie as a template/script for their ranting. Just a bunch of arrogant @*&%$#@ claiming they know it all when they know nothing. I guess "nothing is new under the sun".

Do as he did: prove them wrong...

[Theseus]

Originally Posted by Mike(Mont)

I watched an old movie on Loius Pasteur and it was ominous how similar the skeptics were--almost as if the ones around here use that movie as a template/script for their ranting. Just a bunch of arrogant @*&%$#@ claiming they know it all when they know nothing. I guess "nothing is new under the sun".

Seems when pressed for evidence to back up your claims, your only response is to get antagonistic and arrogant.

Why do you hang around here if you feel that threatened? 'Course with Tnet being as dead as yesterday's newspaper, I suppose you are not left with that many choices where you can insert your book reviews and other baseless musings about dowsing (and the nonexistent signal lines).

[WM6]

Originally Posted by Mike(Mont)

I watched an old movie on Loius Pasteur and it was ominous how similar the skeptics were--almost as if the ones around here use that movie as a template/script for their ranting. Just a bunch of arrogant @*&%$#@ claiming they know it all when they know nothing. I guess "nothing is new under the sun".
.

Another view on your "they know nothing":

"......... UNESCO proclaimed 1995 as "The Year of Pasteur." Just prior to that, Pasteur’s family proudly released his notes and research. Gerald Geison, a science historian, was among the first people to thoroughly review those notes. In 1995, The Year of Pasteur, Geison wrote an article in the New York Times proclaiming that Pasteur had lied about his research on vaccines and germs and that most of his ideas had been plagiarized from his contemporaries. His article, "Pasteur’s Deception" claimed that Pasteur was, in the end, a fraud.


Now this is a terrible proclamation to make over anyone, especially one so highly revered in modern medicine. The French erected statues and built an institute dedicated to this great man. What on earth would make anyone wish to believe he was a fraud?


What is truth and what is fiction must be determined by the facts.



And as "Deep Throat" of Watergate fame said, "Follow the money."


In researching medicine, following the money has always led to the truth. The money, in Pasteur’s case, has led to unnecessary and mandatory vaccination programs. Wouldn’t we all like to own a company that gets support from a government that will enact laws to make the purchase of our product mandatory?
Where to begin? Well, let’s begin with the Germ Theory.


As discussed in The Lost History of Medicine, the Terrain is more important than the Germ.
Pasteur described germs as non-changeable. We know today, from the use of Darkfield Microscopes that microorganisms are pleomorphic, that they can change and often do. A virus can become a bacterium which can mutate into a yeast or fungus. Modern medicine has yet to acknowledge this because it would turn the pharmaceutical interests on their backs like a helpless tortoise. Again, we follow the money.


Medical tests take your blood and then fix it with a dye. They freeze the blood in a fixed state. The germs therein are frozen in time. This is not real life. Germs change, blood moves; life is a process, not a fixed state.
It was Bechamp who discovered the pleomorphic nature of germs, and later on Bernard described the "milieu" or environment that affected/caused those changes. Bernard is the one responsible for our theories today on pH and how the nature of the microorganisms change as the body moves from an alkaline pH to an acidic pH. (This is covered in depth in our article The Lost History of Medicine.)


On his deathbed, Pasteur recanted, saying that Bernard was right; the Terrain is everything, the Germ is nothing.


However, since the Germ is so profitable, the medical world has written off his final statements as the madness of a dying man. We should all be so mad.
Another problem with the Germ Theory of medicine is discovered when we look at Koch’s Postulates as they apply to Pasteur's experiments (my comments: need to be adapted to LRL test too):

• The bacteria must be present in every case of the disease.
• The bacteria must be isolated from the host with the disease and grown in pure culture.
• The specific disease must be reproduced when a pure culture of the bacteria is inoculated into a healthy susceptible host.
• The bacteria must be recoverable from the experimentally infected host.

Pasteur never quite fulfilled all the rules. He was not able to find the germ in all cases of a disease, and this is where his research became fraudulent (like LRL research). Additionally, many so-called pathogenic germs are often found in healthy people.



One of the first books published that took a serious look at the work of Pasteur in an unfavorable light was Bechamp or Pasteur, written by Ethel Douglas in 1923. It has since then been reprinted under the heading, Pasteur Exposed, a more dramatic title that would guarantee more sales.
Douglas’s book describes Pasteur as an ambitious self-promoter. She shows how Pasteur plagiarized Bechamp's work in unraveling the mysteries of fermentation and the causes of disease in silkworms. But Pasteur wasn’t as bright as Bechamp and made some very serious mistakes in both his interpretation of Bechamp’s work and subsequent theories and practices which he later espoused.
Joseph Lister, the young surgeon who developed antiseptic surgery methods wrote to Pasteur thanking him for his research in sepsis. We know this to be true since many of Lister’s early surgeries, using carbolic acid at the strengths advised by Pasteur, ended successfully, though the patient died.



Bechamp was the first person to experiment with carbolic acid, and he warned against its toxicity. Pasteur poo-pooed this fear and presented his own theories to the world that Lister had picked up on. It took Joseph Lister a few more years of refining his techniques and using less and less carbolic acid to finally produce an antiseptic surgery in which the patient survived.


While Bechamp spent years proving that germs were the consequence of disease and not the cause, Pasteur’s theory was much simpler and highly profitable. It made economic sense. It made money.


Another book that came out on this subject is The Dream and The Lie of Louis Pasteur, and can be found on the web in a few locations. Here is just one: http://www.sumeria.net/dream/7.html. If you are interested in learning more about the fraudulent research of Pasteur, this is where to start.


Pasteur instructed his family never to release his lab notes. After his grandson died in 1975, they were finally released. This was when Professor Gerald Geison got a hold of them and presented his findings in 1993 to the American Association for the Advancement of Science. The New York Times, seeing how UNESCO had named 1995 the Year of Pasteur, felt that this would be the proper time to release Gerald Geison’s research. Don’t you just love a good drama?


The Myth of Pasteurization

One more thing before we go. Our second reference above makes this statement: "Pasteur developed ‘pasteurization’, a process by which harmful microbes in perishable food products are destroyed using heat, without destroying the food."
This is not entirely true. Pasteurization does NOT kill ALL harmful microbes in milk and it DOES harm the milk.
In her book, The Medical Mafia, Dr Lanctôt debunks pasteurization with a one-two punch:

1. The temperature is not high enough.
2. The temperature is too high.

First off, Dr Lanctôt points out that germs that bring us typhoid, coli bacillus, and tuberculosis are not killed by the temperatures used, and there have been a good number of salmonella epidemics traced to pasteurized milk. ............."


More here:
http://www.mnwelldir.org/docs/histor...is_pasteur.htm

[Mike(Mont)]

You are pathetic. Worse than I thought. Don't you know extreme skepticism is a psychological disorder? Get some professional help. I can't help you. A priest once told me people will swear that black is white. In other words they "rationalize". "Prostitute the intellect to defend the ego."

[WM6]

Originally Posted by Mike(Mont)

You are pathetic. Worse than I thought. Don't you know extreme skepticism is a psychological disorder? Get some professional help. I can't help you. A priest once told me people will swear that black is white. In other words they "rationalize". "Prostitute the intellect to defend the ego."

What for LRL you use for this findings, must be real remote sensing yourselfdetector?

[joecoin]

Originally Posted by Mike(Mont)

You are pathetic. Worse than I thought. Don't you know extreme skepticism is a psychological disorder? Get some professional help. I can't help you. A priest once told me people will swear that black is white. In other words they "rationalize". "Prostitute the intellect to defend the ego."

Mike,

A priest once told me I was going to hell . I don't hold much stock in what priests say.

[WesP]

More wacky crap that only morons place any credence in.

Originally Posted by WM6

Another view on your "they know nothing":

"......... UNESCO proclaimed 1995 as "The Year of Pasteur." Just prior to that, Pasteur’s family proudly released his notes and research. Gerald Geison, a science historian, was among the first people to thoroughly review those notes. In 1995, The Year of Pasteur, Geison wrote an article in the New York Times proclaiming that Pasteur had lied about his research on vaccines and germs and that most of his ideas had been plagiarized from his contemporaries. His article, "Pasteur’s Deception" claimed that Pasteur was, in the end, a fraud.


Now this is a terrible proclamation to make over anyone, especially one so highly revered in modern medicine. The French erected statues and built an institute dedicated to this great man. What on earth would make anyone wish to believe he was a fraud?


What is truth and what is fiction must be determined by the facts.



And as "Deep Throat" of Watergate fame said, "Follow the money."


In researching medicine, following the money has always led to the truth. The money, in Pasteur’s case, has led to unnecessary and mandatory vaccination programs. Wouldn’t we all like to own a company that gets support from a government that will enact laws to make the purchase of our product mandatory?
Where to begin? Well, let’s begin with the Germ Theory.


As discussed in The Lost History of Medicine, the Terrain is more important than the Germ.
Pasteur described germs as non-changeable. We know today, from the use of Darkfield Microscopes that microorganisms are pleomorphic, that they can change and often do. A virus can become a bacterium which can mutate into a yeast or fungus. Modern medicine has yet to acknowledge this because it would turn the pharmaceutical interests on their backs like a helpless tortoise. Again, we follow the money.


Medical tests take your blood and then fix it with a dye. They freeze the blood in a fixed state. The germs therein are frozen in time. This is not real life. Germs change, blood moves; life is a process, not a fixed state.
It was Bechamp who discovered the pleomorphic nature of germs, and later on Bernard described the "milieu" or environment that affected/caused those changes. Bernard is the one responsible for our theories today on pH and how the nature of the microorganisms change as the body moves from an alkaline pH to an acidic pH. (This is covered in depth in our article The Lost History of Medicine.)


On his deathbed, Pasteur recanted, saying that Bernard was right; the Terrain is everything, the Germ is nothing.


However, since the Germ is so profitable, the medical world has written off his final statements as the madness of a dying man. We should all be so mad.
Another problem with the Germ Theory of medicine is discovered when we look at Koch’s Postulates as they apply to Pasteur's experiments (my comments: need to be adapted to LRL test too):

• The bacteria must be present in every case of the disease.
• The bacteria must be isolated from the host with the disease and grown in pure culture.
• The specific disease must be reproduced when a pure culture of the bacteria is inoculated into a healthy susceptible host.
• The bacteria must be recoverable from the experimentally infected host.

Pasteur never quite fulfilled all the rules. He was not able to find the germ in all cases of a disease, and this is where his research became fraudulent (like LRL research). Additionally, many so-called pathogenic germs are often found in healthy people.



One of the first books published that took a serious look at the work of Pasteur in an unfavorable light was Bechamp or Pasteur, written by Ethel Douglas in 1923. It has since then been reprinted under the heading, Pasteur Exposed, a more dramatic title that would guarantee more sales.
Douglas’s book describes Pasteur as an ambitious self-promoter. She shows how Pasteur plagiarized Bechamp's work in unraveling the mysteries of fermentation and the causes of disease in silkworms. But Pasteur wasn’t as bright as Bechamp and made some very serious mistakes in both his interpretation of Bechamp’s work and subsequent theories and practices which he later espoused.
Joseph Lister, the young surgeon who developed antiseptic surgery methods wrote to Pasteur thanking him for his research in sepsis. We know this to be true since many of Lister’s early surgeries, using carbolic acid at the strengths advised by Pasteur, ended successfully, though the patient died.



Bechamp was the first person to experiment with carbolic acid, and he warned against its toxicity. Pasteur poo-pooed this fear and presented his own theories to the world that Lister had picked up on. It took Joseph Lister a few more years of refining his techniques and using less and less carbolic acid to finally produce an antiseptic surgery in which the patient survived.


While Bechamp spent years proving that germs were the consequence of disease and not the cause, Pasteur’s theory was much simpler and highly profitable. It made economic sense. It made money.


Another book that came out on this subject is The Dream and The Lie of Louis Pasteur, and can be found on the web in a few locations. Here is just one: http://www.sumeria.net/dream/7.html. If you are interested in learning more about the fraudulent research of Pasteur, this is where to start.


Pasteur instructed his family never to release his lab notes. After his grandson died in 1975, they were finally released. This was when Professor Gerald Geison got a hold of them and presented his findings in 1993 to the American Association for the Advancement of Science. The New York Times, seeing how UNESCO had named 1995 the Year of Pasteur, felt that this would be the proper time to release Gerald Geison’s research. Don’t you just love a good drama?


The Myth of Pasteurization

One more thing before we go. Our second reference above makes this statement: "Pasteur developed ‘pasteurization’, a process by which harmful microbes in perishable food products are destroyed using heat, without destroying the food."
This is not entirely true. Pasteurization does NOT kill ALL harmful microbes in milk and it DOES harm the milk.
In her book, The Medical Mafia, Dr Lanctôt debunks pasteurization with a one-two punch:

1. The temperature is not high enough.
2. The temperature is too high.

First off, Dr Lanctôt points out that germs that bring us typhoid, coli bacillus, and tuberculosis are not killed by the temperatures used, and there have been a good number of salmonella epidemics traced to pasteurized milk. ............."


More here:
http://www.mnwelldir.org/docs/histor...is_pasteur.htm

[WM6]

Originally Posted by WesP

More wacky crap that only morons place any credence in.

And what you decided, to be crap or moron?

[putrechigi]

looooooooooooooooooooooooooooook

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...ior-queen.html