Dell Winders on LRL detecting

[Elie]

Originally Posted by Qiaozhi

"Facts speak louder than eloquence." -- Chinese Proverb

Of course (if you are an LRL believer) then you may say that skeptics are "like a frog in a well shaft seeing the sky" - refering to the frog's vision as being narrow-minded and insulated.

Mind you - wells can be comfortable places for frogs to live.

Please state exactly what you are saying, to make sure that no one misinterprets your post.

[J_Player]

Qiaozhi makes a very good point.

If Dell has any intention of telling us his understanding of the principles of LRL detecting, it appears that Carl and I are both interested to hear what he has to say.

I should point out that the title of this thread is "Dell Winders on LRL detecting", not dowsing. Dell has already posted a long treatise on his views of dowsing in another thread. This thread started as a thread for LRL detecting, and I have no intrest in seeing it move to the areas of dowsing or other metaphysical instruments. The LRL detecting I am trying to learn about are detectors that rely on geophysical principles. I would like to hear what Dell has to tell us from his long years of experience. I would like to hear about what makes these LRLs work and not work. What geophysical measurements they are sensing, how they are used, and what limitatations they have. After I hear the facts from Dell I will be better able to decide whether I should add these to my tools for locating buried treasures.

[Carl-NC]

Originally Posted by Elie

What do you mean?

Please allow JP and Dell to have their conversation, uninterrupted. There have been, and will continue to be, plenty of venues for skeptics to state their views, including other threads on this very forum. I'm inclined to allow proponents to present their case. Maybe we'll learn something interesting.

Also a reminder to everyone... civility and forum ettiquette are not suggestions, they are requirements. Treat people as if you are talking face-to-face.

- Carl

[Elie]

Originally Posted by Carl-NC

Also a reminder to everyone... civility and forum ettiquette are not suggestions, they are requirements. Treat people as if you are talking face-to-face.

- Carl

I AM civil.
Except when it comes to this sort of thing...

[Dell Winders]

Qiaozhi, I like that philosophy. Actually, I like rational open minded skeptics. They make my best customers and have become my good friends.

It's the Skeptic cultist mentality with frog-in-the-well vision, whose constant croaking sounds echoed by the well who are sometimes annoying. I just try not to drink the water the poor frog pees in. Dell

[Qiaozhi]

Originally Posted by Elie

Please state exactly what you are saying, to make sure that no one misinterprets your post.

The meaning is simple - a bird stops by a well to have a drink (something Dell would like to avoid ) and there is an argument with a frog who lives in the well. The argument is about what the sky looks like. Of course, they each have a different opinion. The frog has a very narrow vision and represents the narrow-minded person.

The interpretation of the proverb is different - again based on your point of view - as to whether the frog represents the skeptic or the believer.

Comprendez?

[J_Player]

I see double wisdom in ancient Chinese proverb.

[Elie]

Originally Posted by Qiaozhi

The interpretation of the proverb is different - again based on your point of view - as to whether the frog represents the skeptic or the believer.

"It's the Skeptic cultist mentality with frog-in-the-well vision, whose constant croaking sounds echoed by the well who are sometimes annoying. I just try not to drink the water the poor frog pees in. Dell"

Open minded, huh?

[Dell Winders]

GOOD POINT! I still like the analogy. Dell

[J_Player]

The bird stops by the well to have a drink and there is an argument with a frog who lives in the well. The argument is about what the sky looks like. Of course, they each have a different opinion. A dog walks up to the well and hears the argument. He knows what the bird says about sunsets is correct, and the frog cannot prove him wrong because he has never seen the horizon. After much heated debate, the bird tells the dog: "The frog is wrong. Come with me and learn the secrets of the sky". The dog runs along and follows the bird as he flies faster and faster. After running many miles behind the bird he finds he has learned nothing new about the sky. Still running along behind the bird, he asks the bird: "Show me how to learn the secrets of the sky!" At that moment the bird flies high into the sky out of sight.

Moral of story:
1. A dog on the ground has a better view of the sky than a frog in a well.
2. Don't expect a bird to teach a dog to fly.

[Elie]

The frog's only mistake was wasting an incredible amount of time trying to get the dog to LOOK UP instead of following the dishonest bird.
There is NO SUCH THING as a sunset. A "sunset" looks nice, but the sun basically stays stays where it is, and a "sunset" is an illusion.
Frogs in wells see much more than you give them credit for seeing.

[J_Player]

Was the bird dishonest? He only did what the dog asked. He showed him the method to learn the secrets of the sky.

It may be true there is no such thing as a sunset, but only the bird and the dog can see the pretty colors of the sunset, not the frog.

[J_Player]

Since it appears that Dell has no intention of answering my questions in this thread, I will now focus on the discussion of the fable of the frog, the bird and the dog....

Since the appearance of the fable of the frog, the dog, and the bird, we hear these commentaries:

"The frog's only mistake was wasting an incredible amount of time trying to get the dog to LOOK UP"
In the fable, the dog can see up, down and all directions to the side. He can also move about the ground to change his point of view. The frog truly does waste his time trying to get the dog to look up. For the dog looks up any time something of intrest can be seen above.

"the dishonest bird"? What dishonest thing did the bird do in this fable? The dog did not learn the secrets of the sky. But this is not because the bird did not show him how. It is because the dog had no means to go high into the sky as the bird showed him.

"There is NO SUCH THING as a sunset." Oh really? There is no such thing? Here is a web page with links to 18 authoratative sources that define a sunset. None of them say there is NO SUCH THING as a sunset. They all tell what a sunset is.

A "sunset" looks nice, but the sun basically stays stays where it is, and a "sunset" is an illusion.
Now we finally arrive at the point of the fable. Where the sun "stays" depends on the frame of reference of the observer. For a person who lives in a flying saucer traveling so he remains in a fixed position in relation to the sun, it would be true that the sun stays where it is. But in the fable, the dog and the bird are not space beings. The dog and the bird both agree that the sun moves from the sunrise position to the sunset position. This is because their frame of reference is a small area at or above the surface of the earth. But the frog in the well argues that there is no sunset because the sides of the wellshaft prevent him from seeing the sun. He has only seen the sky become bright blue and turn dark, accompanied by clouds and stars. The frog has never been able to offer a convincing proof to the dog or the bird that the sun does not exist, much less sunsets.

"Frogs in wells see much more than you give them credit for seeing" You are right. While the fable is only concerned with the secrets of the sky, the frog sees many things at the bottom of the well which the bird and dog will never know about.

[Qiaozhi]

The "Frog and the Sky" is a Chinese proverb.
You are simply embroidering this ancient story by adding legs to the snake.

[J_Player]

Sorry, Qiaozhi.

There is no offence intedned toward the ancient Chinese proverb. The chinese proverbs are some of my favorites because they contain the wisdom of more than 5000 years of learning things that many in the western world too often forget. I created the fable based on this proverb only to illustrate that there are indeed other points of view besides those of the bird and the frog. It was not intended to take away from eloquence of the ancient wisdom in the original proverb. The part about space beings had nothing to do with the proverb or the fable I created. It was part of a rebuttal to an argument made by another poster who said the sunset does not exist.

Fables are often told in western literature to illustrate points of logic and philosophy. I will be careful not to interleave them with the Chinese proverbs, as I did not realize it was offensive. You have my apologies.

[Qiaozhi]

No offence taken.