The so-called PHENOMENON

[J_Player]

Originally Posted by Esteban

No scientis told us. We, many years ago, with our empiric methods and meditions conclude that the phenomenon is complex: electricity, magnetism, chemical combinations, ions, and maybe associated with RF.

Regards

Hi Esteban,

Yes, scientists told us. There are more than 1 million online pages showing what scientists told us about this. We also have books written since the turn of the century showing the association between underground metal or other geological anomalies and variations in magnetic fields, electric fields, RF and other measurable effects. In the late 1920s through the 1950s many researchers published their findings showing how radio broadcast waves were influenced by anomalies of metal and other geological formations below the ground as well as above the ground.

I don't know who you are referring to when you say "we". But if you are referring to the early researchers from late 1800s through 1950, then I suppose you are correct. After many years of taking field measurements, they did empirically conclude that the phenmomenon is complex, judging from their publications and the diagrams they drew to chart the resulting anomalies in the RF fields.

Best wishes,
J_P

[Esteban]

Originally Posted by Fred

Ok Esteban,
So i suppose a sphere would be even better.
and if a sphere is better, to experiment a sphere with a spike in it.
Problem is if we need to wait a few years between each experiment.

Spherical objects as old rings also are better detectable. Don't understand why you need wait between each experiment.

[Esteban]

Originally Posted by J_Player

Hi Esteban,

Yes, scientists told us. There are more than 1 million online pages showing what scientists told us about this. We also have books written since the turn of the century showing the association between underground metal or other geological anomalies and variations in magnetic fields, electric fields, RF and other measurable effects. In the late 1920s through the 1950s many researchers published their findings showing how radio broadcast waves were influenced by anomalies below the ground as well as above the ground.

I don't know who you are referring to when you say "we". But if you are referring to the early researchers from late 1800s through 1950, then I suppose you are correct. Aftere many years of taking field measurements, they did empirically conclude that the phenmomenon is complex, based on the diagrams they drew to chart the resulting anomalies in the RF fields.

Best wishes,
J_P

I say "we" because no learning in "very" scientific materials. The most are pressumptions... of course based on characteristics of metals as conductivity...

[Qiaozhi]

Originally Posted by Fred

Esteban,what about aluminium? it is a metal wich oxydes rapidly and is reactive.

Originally Posted by Fred

Interesting : Bronze yes, aluminium no,iron not much, this is a clue!

Originally Posted by Esteban

If the bronze is round as coin or buttons, round form, or circular as buckle, better.

This dependence on physical shape would imply that eddy currents are an important aspect in detection ... but, at the distances you are discussing, any eddy currents would be miniscule and undetectable.

[Esteban]

Originally Posted by Qiaozhi

This dependence on physical shape would imply that eddy currents are an important aspect in detection ... but, at the distances you are discussing, any eddy currents would be miniscule and undetectable.

Don't know if eddy currents are useful factor in electronic LRL...

[J_Player]

Originally Posted by Esteban

I say "we" because no learning in "very" scientific materials. The most are pressumptions... of course based on characteristics of metals as conductivity...

The scientists made no presumptions when they took soil samples and used chemicals titrations and very precise calibrated electronic instruments to detect the presence of metal ions. These were observed results, not presmptions. They made no presumptions when they observed these metal ions are no longer ions at the surface. They measured the weight of metal compounds that they found, and the absence of metal ions at the surface or above, unlike the presence of metal ions they measured and observed taking column shapes below the surface.

Are you sure they presumed these ions are located in the columns where they claim they measured them? Are you sure they were presuming there is not a metal ion anomaly at or above the surface when their tests failed to find any metal ions above the surface?

Best wishes,
J_P

[Fred]

Originally Posted by Esteban

Spherical objects as old rings also are better detectable. Don't understand why you need wait between each experiment.

Because if you want to try a new shape you have to dig and replace the object, but by doing so you destroy the phenomenon, right?

Originally Posted by Qiaozhi

This dependence on physical shape would imply that eddy currents are an important aspect in detection ... but, at the distances you are discussing, any eddy currents would be miniscule and undetectable.

Yes, and material would not be so important i think:aluminium is a good conductor too.But irregular shapes helps to leak HV.

[Esteban]

Originally Posted by J_Player

The scientists made no presumptions when they took soil samples and used chemicals titrations and very precise calibrated electronic instruments to detect the presence of metal ions. These were observed results, not presmptions. They made no presumptions when they observed these metal ions are no longer ions at the surface. They measured the weight of metal compounds that they found, and the absence of metal ions at the surface or above, unlike the presence of metal ions they measured and observed taking column shapes below the surface.

Are you sure they presumed these ions are located in the columns where they claim they measured them? Are you sure they were presuming when their tests failed to find any metal ions above the surface?

Best wishes,
J_P

No, I made sometimes presumptions. No the scientifics, even if sometimes they suspect about some phenomenons based on previous knowledges...

[Esteban]

Originally Posted by Fred

Because if you want to try a new shape you have to dig and replace the object, but by doing so you destroy the phenomenon, right?

No, you can test it finding objects "natural" buried. You go on locations and try the detectors.

[Max]

Originally Posted by Fred

Interesting : Bronze yes, aluminium no,iron not much, this is a clue!

A clue ?

I think explaination is about easy... and empiric...

Iron rust and dissolves over the years if not thick or compact enough. So not big issue...

Aluminium production was just by after 1825 (though the electricity required to product it made its diffusion before 1900 very rare in the world... if not impossible to find in many places , including Paraguay).

So, always assuming the LRLs work as he said, the OLD buried aluminium is max 100 years old there... but probably much is just from less than 60years... foil... pull-tabs etc
Sure not few time... but enough to develop a strong halo or "phenomenon" ?

He wrote of 30years old cans if I remember well... in that case seems the cans developed strong halo stuff...

I, indeed think that aluminium is really easy detectable if bronze or copper are, don't forget that gold have similar magnetic behaviour as aluminium... that's why using too much disc in an VLF to avoid pull-tabs (aluminium) it's really likly kill your gold ring founds too!

Kind regards,
Max

[Esteban]

Here is not rare the aluminium... beer cans exist since decades and other 1,000 kinds of kitchen recipients made from him, but not all the pistols detects it. The absorptive pistol can detect items buried 5-10 years. I remember I detect with it very easy a Nintendo token with a new coin, the both in the same place, one very near the other, "in touch", but seems also here exist a kind of bimetalic effect, because this detection was very very clear. But a "cemetery" of beer cans don't be detected, I surrounded it, and zero detection.

[Morgan]

Originally Posted by Max

You posted just BS... your data about PD were fake... your description of its behaviour is just a copy and paste of other "gurus" here...

I think your PD can just find noise.

Kind regards,
Max

Hi Captain p00p

I think the other skeptics are learning something about LRL,but you become each time more and more BURRO ...

[Morgan]

Originally Posted by Qiaozhi

I think that all metal detectorists have experienced this "halo" at some time. For iron, copper, etc., it is easy to explain, but there is no reason why the "halo" should exist for a gold coin, or similar object. Of course, in some cases the object was not actually at the claimed depth at all, but was lodged in the side wall. Then the detectorist does not notice when it falls into the bottom of the hole. This can easily explain what's happening in some cases, especially if you use DD coils, which can often prove troublesome when poinpointing. In one particular case I know that this did not happen to me, because I was on my knees scratching out the soil from a deep hole with my hand, and I uncovered the coin at the bottom. It was a 1797 George III copper coin. This was one of the first early coins to be minted in the new-fangled steam presses of the time.
Without the soil in place, it was not possible to detect this coin at the bottom of the hole.
I have never experienced this "halo" for either silver or gold.

Is any way to put MAX out of the RS project ?
He already said PD is a CRAP,so he is only disturbing people here.
I vote against Max in RS project

[Geo]

Originally Posted by J_Player

Hi Geo,

This is an excellent idea. There is no need to make arguments and try to guess, when you can see with your own eyes. If I lived in Europe, I would definitely go to see. Portugal is a very nice place, and Morgan can show you the best places to visit after you see his pistol detector and other LRLs finding treasure.

Best wishes,
J_P

Hi J_P.
I would like at least other 2 persons, not alone. It is different if 3 or more persons check the PD from Morgan and say "OK, it work", and different if only Geo see it. Some people will say maybe Geo did not saw well, maybe he is friend with Morgan etc.

Regards

[ivconic]

Originally Posted by Geo

Hi J_P.
I would like at least other 2 persons, not alone. It is different if 3 or more persons check the PD from Morgan and say "OK, it work", and different if only Geo see it. Some people will say maybe Geo did not saw well, maybe he is friend with Morgan etc.

Regards

But also "he" is friend with ivconic - the sceptic! So...I know Geo is descent man and he will act fair about this.
Geo it is very good idea - trip to Portugal.
I am very sorry cose i can't afford it right now.
It is not the question of beleive and faith here. It is just good more people to examine it. More eyes,more brains, more experiences, more knowledge.
So..i am looking forward to hear news. Also, you bring camera and shot some videos so later to put on youtube or here.
Soon as i collect enough informations on this, i would start making it and try to achieve some results. Of course; this forum would be the place to post experiences.

[Qiaozhi]

Originally Posted by Morgan

Is any way to put MAX out of the RS project ?
He already said PD is a CRAP,so he is only disturbing people here.
I vote against Max in RS project

Max was very much a part of the original back-engineering. Without him we would not have the amount of information that we have today. It was a real team effort. So ... Captain p00p, or not ... as long as the really negative comments stay in the open forum that's ok.

[hung]

Originally Posted by Morgan

Is any way to put MAX out of the RS project ?
He already said PD is a CRAP,so he is only disturbing people here.
I vote against Max in RS project

Hey Morgan,

If Max was going to be voted out of the RS forum, then Qiaozhi would have to face the same fate.
He does not learn, chooses to remain ignorant and worse, contributes so the others remain ignorant also.

At least Max, although skepthic and ignorant about the science behind LRLs, is not 'cocky' and materialistic minded as Ozzy. Max's only problem is his silly jokes about Esteban's posts. But I guess it's just a self defense against what he can't comprehend.

Now one will wonder why no critical info will ever be post in these forums.

[J_Player]

Originally Posted by hung

....then Qiaozhi would have to face the same fate.
He does not learn, chooses to remain ignorant and worse, contributes so the others remain ignorant also.
...Now one will wonder why no critical info will ever be post in these forums.

Hi hung,

So what is Qiaozhi supposed to learn?
You want him to learn the critical info you post when you debunker science?
Qiaozhi started this thread by quoting the information you posted to debunker someone's misconception about gold:

Originally Posted by hung

"Gold is the most powerful 'self defensive' metal when it comes to avoid any harm to its structure, such as rust, oxidation, etc. Its DNA produces a substance which coats the metal to fight against those 'threats'."

From: http://www.geotech1.com/forums/showp...8&postcount=41

I think you posted false information about the properties of gold. And I also think Qiaozhi is correct when he implies that gold does not have DNA, nor does gold DNA produce any protective substance. But maybe I am wrong to think Qiaozhi is correct and you are wrong. Maybe I am unable to learn what you teach also.

Do you believe Qiaozhi should abandon what he was taught about gold in science classes, and learn the facts you want us to believe so we can have the same critical information that you have?

Best wishes,
J_P

[Fred]

Originally Posted by hung

Now one will wonder why no critical info will ever be post in these forums.

As long as no critical info will be posted, you will not be taken seriously.
But i think it´s you masochist side and you like it

[hung]

'Learning' is a process someone chooses to absorb or not, subjectively speaking, a piece of information based (and corroborated) by their own survey.

'Respect', objectively speaking, for other's own ideas and experiences is the least expected in this forum regarding 'etiquette'.

When one faces a piece of information which he does not agrees or ignores, 'I don't agree' and 'I don't have sufficient data to coment on' are the words that should be used. The wise, remains silent upon what he does not know.
Qiaozhi, since the start of his appearances chose to attack the proponent, discarding politeness.

He may remain ignoring LRL subjects as he wish...But 'respect' is a word he can no longer choose to ignore.

[J_Player]

Originally Posted by hung

When one faces a piece of information which he does not agrees or ignores, 'I don't agree' and 'I don't have sufficient data to coment on' are the words that should be used. The wise, remains silent upon what he does not know.

Hi hung,

I have not remained silent, because I do know. I would feel stupid if I said 'I don't agree' and 'I don't have sufficient data to coment on' the DNA of gold.
The fact is I do have sufficient data. Gold DNA does not exist!
At least that is what I believe based on the properties of gold that I was taught.

Can you explain your own ideas and experiences with gold that might convince Qiaozhi or the rest of us forum readers that gold has DNA that produces a substance to protect it?

Best wishes,
J_P

[hung]

Originally Posted by J_Player

Hi hung,

I have not remained silent, because I do know. I would feel stupid if I said 'I don't agree' and 'I don't have sufficient data to coment on' the DNA of gold.

Yes I know. I was refering to Qiaozhi's 'memorabilia' on dowsing for instance.

Can you explain your own ideas and experiences with gold that might convince Qiaozhi or the rest of us forum readers that gold has DNA that produces a substance to protect it?

This is a private survey I'm involved.
I have absolutely no interest whasoever in discussing it or convincing anyone about it. But even if I did have... no, I beleive I would not be able to convince you or some skeptics here and I doubt it that I would ever be.
Too many other aspects involved which 'conventional' science still has no data. Sorry.
Gotta go now.

[Fred]

Originally Posted by hung

'Respect', objectively speaking, for other's own ideas and experiences is the least expected in this forum regarding 'etiquette'.

When one faces a piece of information which he does not agrees or ignores, 'I don't agree' and 'I don't have sufficient data to coment on' are the words that should be used. The wise, remains silent

I agree with you Hung ,
but then, how do you call this ? :

Originally Posted by hung

"Don't waste your time with Ozzy... The only thing here that trully does not work is himself!"

Originally Posted by hung

To me, you are just the incompetent 'engineer' who besides being incapable of cloning the PD right, also made the schematics with a lot of mistakes.(...)You' are a joke Ozzy.

And many more...

[Qiaozhi]

Originally Posted by hung

Yes I know. I was refering to Qiaozhi's 'memorabilia' on dowsing for instance.

This is a private survey I'm involved.
I have absolutely no interest whasoever in discussing it or convincing anyone about it. But even if I did have... no, I beleive I would not be able to convince you or some skeptics here and I doubt it that I would ever be.
Too many other aspects involved which 'conventional' science still has no data. Sorry.
Gotta go now.

I think you have been spending too much time emailing your hero Myron Evans .... isn't that true? ... Dr. Hung.

[Max]

Originally Posted by Morgan

Is any way to put MAX out of the RS project ?
He already said PD is a CRAP,so he is only disturbing people here.
I vote against Max in RS project

I just posted the truth...about you and PD stuff... you posted fake informations, everybody knows.

Where's that 7th board, captain burro !?

Kind regards,
Max