Frequencies secret treasure metal

[reza vir]

Originally Posted by hamze2000

Hello to all. Dear teachers Does anyone know the frequency you are using confidential metals in lrl. Would help me so I could have the frequencies for the test. Thanks

20 hz to 50 khz

[Qiaozhi]

Originally Posted by kaligula

So. I thing this lrl will work best in combination with some good deep seeking metal detektor, or with true documents and maps

Unless you use only the LRL to detect and pinpoint the treasure, then you can never be sure if it was the metal detector that did all the work, and the long distance detection was only an illusion.

[kaligula]

metal detector is for place 5m x 5m max. where dowsing rod will show. You ll seek that place with deep seeking metal detector which not respond to small objects and you ll not have to dig empty holes if is nothing there. For me thats the best way, normaly if the rods are reacting at gold. If that is working after that if i can bealiive to my lrl then i ll not have to use metal detector at all.
There are dowsers here in my place who with dowsing rod are finding water, can tell you how deep is the water and how much water is down there, the princip is the same, details are little different for locating gold

[hamze2000]

Thank you all friends. Grave I need to find my tooth frequency., I could not find the clock. Are Friends Information about the metal teeth and cavity frequency is close to that?

[Qiaozhi]

Originally Posted by kaligula

There are dowsers here in my place who with dowsing rod are finding water, can tell you how deep is the water and how much water is down there, the princip is the same, details are little different for locating gold

Water dowsing only "works" because ground water is contained in underground aquifers, and does not flow in narrow streams. You could drill almost anywhere in the area and still find water.

Looking for gold is somewhat different, as you need to use a real metal detector to find the target. After "locating" several 5m x 5m areas, you may eventually find something, and hey presto your LRL "works". Of course, you have to forget the many false alarms you had earlier, or simply dismiss them as being out of range of the metal detector.

LRLs only "work" if you know where the target is in the first place, or if you employ the principles of wishful thinking, selective memory and self-delusion. OR, you are an LRL manufacturer; in which case it actually does locate treasure, but only at the point of sale (in the buyer's wallet).

[Geo]

Originally Posted by Qiaozhi

Water dowsing only "works" because ground water is contained in underground aquifers, and does not flow in narrow streams. You could drill almost anywhere in the area and still find water .

Hi.
I saw rigs to stop on rocks at depth 140m without being able to beat the water, and with suggestion of dowser to find water some meters away (40 ... 50 meters) and at depth of only 20 meters. Maybe you should review some views you.

[Dave J.]

Geo, that's a major difference between dowsing and LRL's, isn't it?

--Dave J.

[Geo]

Sure.. there are differences between dowsing and electronic LRLs.
But i saw both methods to work (not always but under some conditions...)
Also before time you wrote that the USA army has lrl devices for distance near to 50m but it is very expensive. So there is the technology.

Regards

[Dave J.]

You're missing the point.

A year or two ago I posted that the military has radar type stuff under development that can locate stuff of interest to them at considerable distance. I have "inside dope" on this project, but not very much. Of course we're talking about real stuff that no LRL proponent could possibly be interested in, because it is based on real physics with real abilities and real limitations-- not on fairy tale fancies like LRL toys are.

You completely ignored what you yourself inadvertently pointed out: that people who locate water by dowsing don't use LRL's. That is because LRL's don't work.

Now, can you explain why it is that water can be located by ordinary dowsing methods that can't be located with an LRL, even if it's equipped with L-rods?

I can explain it, but I offer you first shot at it.

--Dave J.

[hamze2000]

Thank all friends.
The exact frequency and frequency of dental metals that cost me as I need. Following the completion of the project you want it to be.

[kaligula]

Originally Posted by Dave J.

You're missing the point.

A year or two ago I posted that the military has radar type stuff under development that can locate stuff of interest to them at considerable distance. I have "inside dope" on this project, but not very much. Of course we're talking about real stuff that no LRL proponent could possibly be interested in, because it is based on real physics with real abilities and real limitations-- not on fairy tale fancies like LRL toys are.

You completely ignored what you yourself inadvertently pointed out: that people who locate water by dowsing don't use LRL's. That is because LRL's don't work.

Now, can you explain why it is that water can be located by ordinary dowsing methods that can't be located with an LRL, even if it's equipped with L-rods?

I can explain it, but I offer you first shot at it.
--Dave J.

I think you can find water and with LRL, there is no difference, but the point is that dowsing rods withaut any other equipment are natturally tuned at water frequency, and lrl not. So the ordinary dowser is using his mind to change that frequency if he want to seek for something else, what for me is not so sigure metod, but im not saying that is not working.
With lrl i suppouse you can seek anything you want, but if you have true data for that you are looking for.

[kaligula]

THE PRINCIP IS THE SAME, MONEY YOU HAVE TO PAY ARE DIFFERENT

[Geo]

Originally Posted by Dave J.

You're missing the point.

A year or two ago I posted that the military has radar type stuff under development that can locate stuff of interest to them at considerable distance. I have "inside dope" on this project, but not very much. Of course we're talking about real stuff that no LRL proponent could possibly be interested in, because it is based on real physics with real abilities and real limitations-- not on fairy tale fancies like LRL toys are.

You completely ignored what you yourself inadvertently pointed out: that people who locate water by dowsing don't use LRL's. That is because LRL's don't work.

Now, can you explain why it is that water can be located by ordinary dowsing methods that can't be located with an LRL, even if it's equipped with L-rods?

I can explain it, but I offer you first shot at it.

--Dave J.

All are so simple. LRLs locates the "phenomenon" or megnetic or EM fields. Nobody knows what the dowsing locate or who is the principle of dowsing. Do you know it???, please tell it to us!!!. If science can't explain how works the dowsing don't mean that the dowsing don't work. Maybe next century the science find the working principle....
Now about """why it is that water can be located by ordinary dowsing methods that can't be located with an LRL""" make the question to the electronic engineers of Elektor who designed the Zahori to locate water. Maybe they made a fraud project.

[Qiaozhi]

Originally Posted by Geo

Nobody knows what the dowsing locate or who is the principle of dowsing. Do you know it???, please tell it to us!!!.

If the first statement is correct, then the following question is superfluous .... unless, of course, that person is "nobody".

It's also like me asking you, "When did you stop beating your wife?".
The question makes an assumption. In this latter example, it assumes you have beaten your wife in the past.

In the question concerning dowsing, it assumes that dowsing can actually be used to locate something, rather than being a figment of the imagination.

Basically, your question is unanswerable in its current form.

[Geo]

Wrong answer from wrong person

[Qiaozhi]

Originally Posted by Geo

Wrong answer from wrong person

Yes, wrong person, but not the wrong answer.

Anyway, what are you going to say when Dave J asks you, ""When did you stop beating your wife?".

[Dave J.]

I don't doubt that there are successful water dowsers. They don't do blinded dowsing and they learn from experience. The dowsing rods themselves do not detect water, they are ideomotor response devices. Just a convenience. No funny fizzicks, no majick, although the dowser him/her self may not understand the ideomotor nature of how dowsing works.

In many areas there is underground water everywhere, but in many other areas this is not the case. If a driller has drilled a dry hole, the best next obvious place to drill is "someplace else". The driller already guessed wrong, which tilts the odds in favor of someone more knowledgeable about the aquifer geology of the area-- whether that knowledge be acquired through formal science-based education, informal experience and insight leading to similar skill with or without dowsing, or even a combination of all that.

No funny fizzicks, no majick.


Never heard of a water dowser using an LRL. Water dowsers usually don't get paid unless the well actually produces water. Where actual results are essential, an LRL just makes the whole thing look ridiculous. After all, LRL's are obvious frauds.

--Dave J.

[EDIT] Now notice the contrast to LRL'ers. If they never find a damn thing, they're still happy as clams pretending to find stuff. Their stories are in this very forum. And, when they do find stuff, the story is almost always:

"I got my metal detector out, swung the area until I got a beep, and dug a rusty nail. Treasure!" Detectorists without LRL's usually do better because they're not wasting their time with an LRL, they're using their brains.

The story is NEVER like that of a water dowser: "Owner of the site spent $20,000 drilling where I pointed, and we got water out of the thing, I earned my $1K fee fair and square, the money was well spent!" Would you or anyone else spend tens of thousands of dollars on excavation for no reason other than that an LRL'er insisted that there was something really, really valuable buried there? No, you would not! Because we all know the same thing about LRL's-- they're toys for pretending to find treasure, they do not work for actually finding real treasure.

[Geo]

Originally Posted by Qiaozhi

Yes, wrong person, but not the wrong answer.

Anyway, what are you going to say when Dave J asks you, ""When did you stop beating your wife?".

I think that we speak serious

[Geo]

Originally Posted by Dave J.

I don't doubt that there are successful water dowsers. They don't do blinded dowsing and they learn from experience. The dowsing rods themselves do not detect water, they are ideomotor response devices. Just a convenience. No funny fizzicks, no majick, although the dowser him/her self may not understand the ideomotor nature of how dowsing works.

In many areas there is underground water everywhere, but in many other areas this is not the case. If a driller has drilled a dry hole, the best next obvious place to drill is "someplace else". The driller already guessed wrong, which tilts the odds in favor of someone more knowledgeable about the aquifer geology of the area-- whether that knowledge be acquired through formal science-based education, informal experience and insight leading to similar skill with or without dowsing, or even a combination of all that.

No funny fizzicks, no majick.


Never heard of a water dowser using an LRL. Water dowsers usually don't get paid unless the well actually produces water. Where actual results are essential, an LRL just makes the whole thing look ridiculous. After all, LRL's are obvious frauds.

--Dave J.

[EDIT] Now notice the contrast to LRL'ers. If they never find a damn thing, they're still happy as clams pretending to find stuff. Their stories are in this very forum. And, when they do find stuff, the story is almost always:

"I got my metal detector out, swung the area until I got a beep, and dug a rusty nail. Treasure!" Detectorists without LRL's usually do better because they're not wasting their time with an LRL, they're using their brains.

The story is NEVER like that of a water dowser: "Owner of the site spent $20,000 drilling where I pointed, and we got water out of the thing, I earned my $1K fee fair and square, the money was well spent!" Would you or anyone else spend tens of thousands of dollars on excavation for no reason other than that an LRL'er insisted that there was something really, really valuable buried there? No, you would not! Because we all know the same thing about LRL's-- they're toys for pretending to find treasure, they do not work for actually finding real treasure.

I have examples where me and other men found objects with LRLs and with dowsing method.
You have not same experience, but maybe you have bad experience from persons who was not able to find something.
So i believe that it is not possible to reconcile.
I am a treasure hunter and i don't sell lrls or dowsing systems, so i have no interest to write any lie.

[WM6]

Originally Posted by Geo

I have examples where me and other men found objects with LRLs and with dowsing method.
You have not same experience, but maybe you have bad experience from persons who was not able to find something.
So i believe that it is not possible to reconcile.
I am a treasure hunter and i don't sell lrls or dowsing systems, so i have no interest to write any lie.

Geo, I believe you, that you do not wrote lie.
At least not intentionally, all you wrote is your point of view on some "phenomena".
Your problem is, that you are blind believer and you are not able to distinct between self-delusions and real physical phenomenon.
But all this already discussed and proved many times.

Par example in this thread:
http://www.longrangelocators.com/for...ad.php?t=17848

Main problem of self delusions is, that those not-existing "phenomenon" on which blind believers exaggerate in fact blocked real progress and real development in field of long (or middle) range detecting, cause blind believers are not able to validate his work on scientific way. They enjoy world of self-delusion and hot beliefs so much, that constantly adopt reality according his needs, as all blind believers do.

Apart from this, you are brave man and I can only support your experiments in field of long range detecting.

[Qiaozhi]

Originally Posted by WM6

Geo, I believe you, that you do not wrote lie.
At least not intentionally, all you wrote is your point of view on some "phenomena".
Your problem is, that you are blind believer and you are not able to distinct between self-delusions and real physical phenomenon.
But all this already discussed and proved many times.

Par example in this thread:
http://www.longrangelocators.com/for...ad.php?t=17848

Main problem of self delusions is, that those not-existing "phenomenon" on which blind believers exaggerate in fact blocked real progress and real development in field of long (or middle) range detecting, cause blind believers are not able to validate his work on scientific way. They enjoy world of self-delusion and hot beliefs so much, that constantly adopt reality according his needs, as all blind believers do.

Apart from this, you are brave man and I can only support your experiments in field of long range detecting.

I agree.

[Geo]

Originally Posted by WM6

Geo, I believe you, that you do not wrote lie.
At least not intentionally, all you wrote is your point of view on some "phenomena".
Your problem is, that you are blind believer and you are not able to distinct between self-delusions and real physical phenomenon.
But all this already discussed and proved many times.

Par example in this thread:
http://www.longrangelocators.com/for...ad.php?t=17848

Main problem of self delusions is, that those not-existing "phenomenon" on which blind believers exaggerate in fact blocked real progress and real development in field of long (or middle) range detecting, cause blind believers are not able to validate his work on scientific way. They enjoy world of self-delusion and hot beliefs so much, that constantly adopt reality according his needs, as all blind believers do.

Apart from this, you are brave man and I can only support your experiments in field of long range detecting.

You do some mistakes. I am not blind believer.
I was from the first persons who said that Mineoro did not work for me ( i was owner of PDC210 super).
I said that OKM bionic alfa did not work at a treasure hunting at Olympus.
I said that many clones of GoldGun don't work at Greece.
I said that Crypton don't work at Greece.
I said that PDK don't work at my field test place.
BUT i saw lrls that worked at me.
So the Alonso's PD worked at my hands at portugal(at field test place of Morgan).
I saw DC2008 to detect the gold medal of morgan at (only) 1m far. I saw my lrl at portugal to locate the gold medal from 3.5 m. I saw one English LRL to locate a gold coin from more than 20m. I saw my lrl (the same with this at video with oil trees) to locate the mortar from distance more than 500m. So i see the lrls with open eyes, but some sceptics here are blinds. There are some commercial lrls here but sceptics don't see them. If these commercial lrls works then the sceptics must see the lrls with other eyes else they must write something about them except if they afraid something.

[Qiaozhi]

Originally Posted by Geo

You do some mistakes. I am not blind believer.
I was from the first persons who said that Mineoro did not work for me ( i was owner of PDC210 super).
I said that OKM bionic alfa did not work at a treasure hunting at Olympus.
I said that many clones of GoldGun don't work at Greece.
I said that Crypton don't work at Greece.
I said that PDK don't work at my field test place.
BUT i saw lrls that worked at me.
So the Alonso's PD worked at my hands at portugal(at field test place of Morgan).
I saw DC2008 to detect the gold medal of morgan at (only) 1m far. I saw my lrl at portugal to locate the gold medal from 3.5 m. I saw one English LRL to locate a gold coin from more than 20m. I saw my lrl (the same with this at video with oil trees) to locate the mortar from distance more than 500m. So i see the lrls with open eyes, but some sceptics here are blinds. There are some commercial lrls here but sceptics don't see them. If these commercial lrls works then the sceptics must see the lrls with other eyes else they must write something about them except if they afraid something.

When you see dowsing and certain LRLs working with your own eyes, it can be very compelling. But even the most careful scientists can fool themselves that something works, when in fact it does not. This problem is caused by unconscious bias.

As an engineer you owe it to yourself to carry out double-blind tests of both dowsing and LRLs; unless of course you [unconsciously] don't really want to know the answer. Also, as an engineer, you should know that you cannot simply accept the evidence of your own eyes. The human mind is far too easily tricked into seeing patterns that are not there, or imagining things that do not exist.

[Geo]

So you mean, if I find a treasure chest with a lrl should not believe my eyes????

[Qiaozhi]

Originally Posted by Geo

So you mean, if I find a treasure chest with a lrl should not believe my eyes????

I think you understand what I mean.

If you used a conventional metal detector during the final search, or dug numerous empty holes in the process of looking for the treasure, you can never be absolutely certain that the LRL contributed anything. If you refuse categorically to perform a properly controlled duble-blind test, then I guess you've already made up your mind and don't want to be confused by the facts.