Carl's phony LRL report

[Mike(Mont)]

I can't vouch for the other reports, but I feel it is my civic duty to report that the VR-800 report is way off. I own a locator from Vernell Electronics that has the same six elements and I will tell you the frequencies and the AQC ranges are totally different (all except for one of the frequencies). In the past I had mentioned to Carl that he was most likely using broken locators for his reports. The fact that he never mentions this in his reports should be considered unethical. That's not the word I would use to describe this but I'm trying to be politically correct (I hate that phrase). And anyone wonder what I think of skeptics?

[Mike(Mont)]

I'm sure the reply from the Carl followers is that LRL's are cheap to build. Well, how much does it cost to build a White's metal detector. Seeing how they are mass produced the labor cost is minimal, I would bet an LRL cost's more to build.

[Mike(Mont)]

The bottom line here is what I have said for years, Carl is not qualified to do an LRL "Report". Just like a mathmatician is not qualified to build lotto picking software--just because the person is skilled in math. You gotta pay your dues. Instead this is all hypocracy the deception that is carried on that he is somehow qualified.

No, I do not feel it is okay to post the accurate frequencies. No doubt many people have tried to use the freq's in the report and concluded that VR equipment is no good. That's a con game plain and simple. Now you have a slight idea why I get so disgusted.

[WM6]

Originally Posted by Mike(Mont)

The bottom line here is what I have said for years, Carl is not qualified to do an LRL "Report".

.

Sure, only LRL skammers like you are qualified to do an LRL "Report".

[Fred]

Originally Posted by Mike(Mont)

In the past I had mentioned to Carl that he was most likely using broken locators for his reports.

How do you make the difference between a broken LRL and a good one ?

[WM6]

Originally Posted by Fred

How do you make the difference between a broken LRL and a good one ?

Good one had never been in touch with sceptic fingers. You know, negative energy can destroy all fraudulent magic.

[Mike(Mont)]

The way I see it is either Carl is eating that crap with a spoon or he knows it's bogus...or both.

[Carl-NC]

Originally Posted by Mike(Mont)

I can't vouch for the other reports, but I feel it is my civic duty to report that the VR-800 report is way off. I own a locator from Vernell Electronics that has the same six elements and I will tell you the frequencies and the AQC ranges are totally different (all except for one of the frequencies). In the past I had mentioned to Carl that he was most likely using broken locators for his reports. The fact that he never mentions this in his reports should be considered unethical. That's not the word I would use to describe this but I'm trying to be politically correct (I hate that phrase). And anyone wonder what I think of skeptics?

My VR800 says "Dell Systems," not "Vernell Electronics." I only reported what I measured, and Dell never complained that any of my measurements were wrong. But it wouldn't surprise me in the least if other LRLs have different frequencies for identical "element" settings, whether those LRLs are from "Dell Systems" or whether they are "VR" models. Or even specifically other Dell Systems VR800's.

In fact, I tested a Dell "Omnitron System II" LRL. The frequencies were 1517Hz for gold and 805Hz for silver, quite different from the 612Hz and 466Hz for the VR800. This is an almost-identical LRL from the same manufacturer... why would it have radically different "element" frequencies? I've seen the same thing with 3 different Vector Trek LRLs, they all have different frequencies. In fact, in all the MFD-LRLs I've ever measured, no two units had even remotely the same frequency settings. It's as if... it's all made up.

Mike, I welcome you to post the frequencies you measured on your VR unit, and for you explain why none of the LRLs use the same frequencies. Does the frequency really matter?

- Carl

[Qiaozhi]

Originally Posted by Mike(Mont)

Just like a mathmatician is not qualified to build lotto picking software--just because the person is skilled in math.

I suppose you also believe predicting lottery numbers from past results is a worthwhile pastime.

[Geo]

Originally Posted by Carl-NC

Mike, I welcome you to post the frequencies you measured on your VR unit, and for you explain why none of the LRLs use the same frequencies. Does the frequency really matter?

- Carl

Hi.
From my experiments i saw that there are many frequences that excites a metal. The harmonics from these frequences can excite some other metals so every manufacturer select the frequency who think that it is better for the locating of the "good" metal and for the rejecting to the other metals. This is the reason that we can see two same llr with different frequences.

Regards

[J_Player]

Originally Posted by Mike(Mont)

The bottom line here is what I have said for years, Carl is not qualified to do an LRL "Report". Just like a mathmatician is not qualified to build lotto picking software--just because the person is skilled in math. You gotta pay your dues. Instead this is all hypocracy the deception that is carried on that he is somehow qualified...

From my observations, I have never seen any user of a Dell Systems or Vernell LRL showing all the fabulous treasure they recovered with it at a treasure hunting forum.
In fact I don't recall seeing even their weekend finds at the beach or at the relic grounds posted in any forum.
But I recall reading thousands of posts from people showing photos of their recoveries when they were using conventional metal detectors.
And they didin't mind telling what brand and frequencies the detectors ran at.
Cool, huh?

Best wishes,
J_P

[taxma1981]

1,17 hz for gold ,silver,bronze



Uploaded with ImageShack.us



Uploaded with ImageShack.us


Uploaded with ImageShack.us

[Qiaozhi]

Originally Posted by taxma1981

1,17 hz for gold ,silver,bronze

What was the make and model of the metal detector you used to do the pinpointing?

[taxma1981]

http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/844/pppdh.jpg/

[taxma1981]

Originally Posted by Qiaozhi

What was the make and model of the metal detector you used to do the pinpointing?

SORRY!!!!! 1,17 KHZ NOT 1,17 HZ ,


now I saw I was wrong.....

[Qiaozhi]

Originally Posted by Qiaozhi

What was the make and model of the metal detector you used to do the pinpointing?

Originally Posted by taxma1981

http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/844/pppdh.jpg/

The image you posted is for the dowsing contraption. My question was about the detector you used to do the pinpointing.

[taxma1981]

garret 250 ,why do you ask;

[Qiaozhi]

Originally Posted by taxma1981

garret 250 ,why do you ask;

Because your post (#12) implies the item was located solely by using the LRL. No final pinpointing device is even mentioned. This type of selective reporting by LRL users seems to be very common, and is why I asked the question. Whereas, in fact, the item was located using a Garrett 250, and the LRL was only used to subconsciously decide where to start using the real metal detector.

The result would be no different if you simply divided the search area into 6 sections and rolled a dice to decide where to start. A couple of weeks ago I also "subconsciously" decided where to start searching in a large field, and found a roman Denarius, whereas several other detectorists found nothing. Later on that day I also found an 1880 silver Victorian threepence.

Any LRL, that uses a swinging handle to "locate" the target, is a dowsing rod. Regardless of how much electronics is attached to the rods. Without the metal detector to make the final recovery, your find rate would be reduced to almost zero.

[taxma1981]

if it were so then everyone with a scanner could not do so when you hold a metal detector in the hands of just go and never looking for your Aunt UpComing epifotisi / / with the dowsing is different, do not know what to say

[Qiaozhi]

Originally Posted by taxma1981

if it were so then everyone with a scanner could not do so when you hold a metal detector in the hands of just go and never looking for your Aunt UpComing epifotisi / / with the dowsing is different, do not know what to say

I don't understand your reply. It appears to be somewhat garbled.

My point is, that using a dowsing rod only helps you to decide where to start searching with the metal detector. It's about as much use as one of those executive decision makers.

[taxma1981]

the other dowsing and another the prediction

[Mike(Mont)]

Translate here, one is etheric the other is astral.

It's so hypocritical how the skeptics want everyone to believe their "reasoning". They want people to accept it as unquestionable scientific fact. I've said it before they feel threatened. They can't understand because they are imprisoned with the book knowledge they parrot/repeat.

Quizo, you really remind me of Jim AKA SWR (snivel, whine, & rant). I thought you were more intelligent than that. Now I wonder if you are one and the same or if he hypnotized you (or was it by sam?).

I can't speak for others, but if I don't find the target in a three foot circle--yes, with a metal detector because it saves time--I don't look any further, I go back and retry.

[Qiaozhi]

Originally Posted by Mike(Mont)

Translate here, one is etheric the other is astral.

Your reply is just gibberish.

Dowsing (i.e. when the rods move) is caused by the ideomotor effect. Pure and simple. There is nothing "etheric" going on there. It's all in the mind.

The executive decision maker is in no way related to the word "astral" (that's just ludicrous) and the result is based on chance.

Originally Posted by Mike(Mont)

It's so hypocritical how the skeptics want everyone to believe their "reasoning". They want people to accept it as unquestionable scientific fact. I've said it before they feel threatened. They can't understand because they are imprisoned with the book knowledge they parrot/repeat.

Allow yourself to be subjected to a double-blind test, and see how successful you are then. Once the human factor (read "tricks of the mind") are eliminated, the so-called "dowsing effect" magically vanishes.

Originally Posted by Mike(Mont)

Quizo, you really remind me of Jim AKA SWR (snivel, whine, & rant). I thought you were more intelligent than that. Now I wonder if you are one and the same or if he hypnotized you (or was it by sam?).

You will note there is no "swivelling", "whining" or "ranting" in my posts. They are all consistent with each other, and are firmly based in the real world, and not one of fantasy or a belief in obsolete medieval practices.

Originally Posted by Mike(Mont)

I can't speak for others, but if I don't find the target in a three foot circle--yes, with a metal detector because it saves time--I don't look any further, I go back and retry.

I'm not sure what that means. Are you saying, you "locate" a 3-foot area with your dowsing contraption, then search using a metal detector ... and if nothing is found, you move on? Presumably you make a note each time this happens, and then compare the number of successes to the number of failures. Or do you conveniently use selective memory to forget about it?

[Mike(Mont)]

Now you really sound like sam. Disgusting. Polly want a cracker Aawkk!

I've posted somewhere (probably deleted) that I find gold somewhere around one in five hotspots. Note I said I find gold. This is in city parks without any weight cancelling. Just using an old vlf metal detector. I have no doubt the gold is there is the other four spots but I don't care to tear up the park to find it.

You skeptics are like a laboratory rat that is trained to follow a maze. Can't think for yourself. debunkingskeptics.com

[Qiaozhi]

Originally Posted by Mike(Mont)

Now you really sound like sam. Disgusting. Polly want a cracker Aawkk!

Careful. You're starting to sound paranoid.

Originally Posted by Mike(Mont)

I've posted somewhere (probably deleted) ...

Yep. definitely paranoid.

Originally Posted by Mike(Mont)

... that I find gold somewhere around one in five hotspots. Note I said I find gold. This is in city parks without any weight cancelling. Just using an old vlf metal detector. I have no doubt the gold is there is the other four spots but I don't care to tear up the park to find it.

As you said, "Just using an old vlf metal detector".
You did not say, "Just using a dowsing rod".

Originally Posted by Mike(Mont)

You skeptics are like a laboratory rat that is trained to follow a maze. Can't think for yourself. debunkingskeptics.com

I know this is somewhat off topic.
But, have you noticed how much "swivelling", "whining" and "ranting" there is in your posts?

In future, let's try to stick with the technical discussions, and not get diverted into ranting about skeptic delusions, etc. There are other forums on the internet more suitable for that sort of interchange ... and are also more dowsing friendly.