LongRangeLocators Forums  

Go Back   LongRangeLocators Forums > Main Forums > The Challenge

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 11-20-2010, 05:26 AM
Carl-NC's Avatar
Carl-NC Carl-NC is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Oregon
Posts: 889
Default H3Tec Challenge

This thread will cover my discussions with H3Tec. In early 2010 I was sent an H3Tec device for testing and inspection. As part of my investigation, I wrote an email to Chuck Christensen at H3Tec with some questions about the device:

Quote:
Chuck,

I've recently obtained an H3Tec device for performance evaluation and eventual engineering evaluation. For the performance evaluation, I would like to run the H3Tec through some tests that validate it does something useful, like detecting gold. In my initial trials, I get no reaction from the device; it behaves just like a dowsing rod. In fact, unless it is held in my hand, the pointer won't move at all, even when a 10-ounce gold bar is waved right in front of it.

Is the device supposed to work when it is not being held by the user? If the device won't work unless a person is holding it, can you explain how that is not equivalent to dowsing? Can you suggest any specific test methods that will unambiguously demonstrate true objective operation, preferably without the need for it to be held?

The second phase is to disassemble the device and see what's inside. On your web site, you claim it uses "nano-ionic resonance." Yet beyond discussions of H3Tec that term does not appear to exist in science, at least in web searches. What is being resonated? How are ions involved? Can you explain what scientific theory is used in H3Tec devices? Can you provide references in real, scientific literature?

On your web site, you claim that the U.S. Army was trained and has purchased at least two H3Tec units. On forums you claim it has been deployed overseas, specifically "H3's are in the Middle East protecting our troops." Is the H3Tec actively being used by the Army? Can you provide the name and phone number or email of a contact person in the Army who can verify that the H3Tec is being successfully deployed in any capacity?

Since my initial evaluation of the H3Tec device showed no apparent functional ability, I would like to try again with your suggested test methods. If I still can't get the device to perform, would you be willing to demonstrate the H3Tec in a professionally-administered randomized double-blind test?

Regards,
Carl Moreland
Geotech
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 11-20-2010, 05:33 AM
Carl-NC's Avatar
Carl-NC Carl-NC is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Oregon
Posts: 889
Default

Chuck's reply to my email was as follows:

Quote:
Dear Mr. Moreland;

H3 Tec demands that you return the H3 detector, H3 software, and H3 system as defined in the following paragraphs within 30 days of the date of this email to the following address:

H3 Tec Shipping/Receiving
P O BOX 140533
Ogden, UT 84415

You are not the licensee and have obtained this device illegally. Failure to return H3 Tec’s property will force us to seek remedy in a court in the State of Utah where the contract was initiated.

Each H3 system (training, manuals, and other materials manufactured by H3), H3 detector, and its corresponding H3 software is sold through a license agreement between H3 Tec, LLC and the licensed end user or owner of the device and is under a strict contract and Nondisclosure Agreement (NDA) signed by H3 Tec, LLC and the licensee. The license and agreement are specific to the user who purchased this license package and was trained on the correct use of the H3 device; neither the license, device, software, system, nor the agreement is transferable. Any breach of this license and NDA is a violation of the H3 user agreement that is put in place at the time of purchase.

In addition, the H3 is protected by patents applied for on behalf of H3 Tec, LLC by Stoel Rives, LLC (our intellectual property and compliance law firm), and granted to H3 Tec by the United States Patent Office. This patent states that H3 has title to this invention and the right to exclude others from reverse engineering, making, using, offering for sale, selling, or importing the invention. This patent and the workings described are company-propriety and protected by U.S. Patent Law and the courts of the State of Utah.

I encourage you to consider carefully before tampering with, reverse engineering, or testing any H3 device. You are prohibited from disclosing any company-proprietary information to which you may have access. We will not hesitate to invoke legal action if you proceed.

Sincerely,

Charles L. Christensen
CEO and Chairman of the Board

You can't hide from H3.
"Anything that cannot be explained by the current state of the art is a discovery."

H3 Tec, LLC
P O Box 150433
Ogden, UT 84415

P: 602.464.3832
F: 801.475.4984
C: 801.814.6577

e: info@h3tec.com
w: www.h3tec.com

CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE
This email message may contain confidential information that is legally privileged. Do not read this email if you are not the intended recipient. This email transmission and any documents, files, or previous email messages attached to it may contain confidential information that is legally privileged and may constitute inside or non-public information under international, federal, or state securities laws. Unauthorized forwarding, printing, copying, distribution, or use of such information is STRICTLY PROHIBITED. If you are not the addressee, please promptly destroy this email and its attachments without reading or saving in any manner, and notify the sender of the delivery error by email; or you may call H3 Tec's corporate offices in Ogden, Utah, U.S.A at (+1) (602)464-3832.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 11-20-2010, 05:37 AM
Carl-NC's Avatar
Carl-NC Carl-NC is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Oregon
Posts: 889
Default

I wrote Chuck back to point out serious deficits in his demands, and to offer my LRL challenge:

Quote:
Chuck,

I am unaware of any contract or license; perhaps you can forward copies to me. However, if misrepresentation was involved then any contract or license will be null and void. Based on what I see so far, a whole lot of misrepresentation is involved. In any case, I am not bound by any contract with H3Tec.

Furthermore, a patent provides absolutely no protection to inspection, reverse-engineering, or public scrutiny of the device. This is well-established law. Based on other misinformed comments you've made regarding patents, you may want to consider a new patent attorney.

It appears that you are neither inclined to answer my questions, nor to provide a procedure for objectively testing the H3Tec. Therefore, I offer you my $25,000 LRL prize if you, as the operator, can success-
fully demonstrate the H3Tec in a professionally-administered randomized double-blind test. I can arrange such a test with Sandia National Labs, which has extensive experience in testing these kinds of devices.

Rather than send this device to you, I will instead forward it to James Randi, who would like to inspect it and provide his own public report on what he finds. Finally, assume that any correspondence between us is not confidential and may show up in my public report on the H3Tec.

Carl Moreland
Geotech
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 11-20-2010, 06:10 AM
Carl-NC's Avatar
Carl-NC Carl-NC is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Oregon
Posts: 889
Default

H3Tec claims that their device was tested and "certified" by Chemir Analytical Services, which is a legitimate testing lab. H3Tec includes some footage of their visit to Chemir in one of their videos. So I decided to contact Chemir to ask about the test and the results:

Quote:
Mr Charles Christensen of H3Tec is advertising a device as being tested and "certified" by Chemir. I would like to contact the person(s) involved in the testing of the H3Tec device to ask a few questions.
Chemir replied:

Quote:
Dear Mr. Moreland,

Good morning. I am the Quality Assurance/Quality Control Manager at Chemir, and I'm writing to tell you we received your recent inquiry. Perhaps I can help you, but please note that we have confidentiality agreements with each of our clients. There may not be much information I can provide you without direct consent from Mr. Christensen, and so I suggest you ask him to join the conversation.

You can reach me via e-mail or at the information below.
To which I responded:

Quote:
Thanks for the reply. Basically, all I want to find out is whether the "H3Tec" device was tested by Chemir, and whether those tests were performed using a randomized double-blind protocol.

I have recently obtained an H3Tec device and have found it to be nothing but a dowsing rod. In randomized double-blind tests, dowsing never works, yet Mr. Christensen is touting the Chemir test results as proof that his device works. He even goes so far as to say, "Chemir Labs certified H3's claims."

Beyond the question of test protocol, what were the claims that Chemir certified?
Chemir again:

Quote:

Carl,

I will attempt to contact Mr. Christensen about this matter and reply to you by next week whether or not I receive a reply from him. I appreciate your patience while I do my best to comply with our confidentiality agreements.
Later that day:

Quote:

Dear Mr. Moreland,

I have reached Mr. Christensen, and he has expressed his intent not to join this conversation. Thus, in compliance with our client confidentiality practices, no personnel at Chemir will be available to answer detailed questions regarding this product testing.

I appreciate your effort to notify us of a potential situation where a person or company is falsely representing our business or relationship.
It's very curious that Christensen would want to keep the test methods and results a secret, unless he is misrepresenting what actually happened. Chemir's last statement seems to suggest this very scenario.

At this point, I asked Chemir how much they would charge if I personally brought the H3Tec device in for them to perform a double-blind test. They responded:

Quote:
I'm sorry, we cannot help with a product evaluation like this one.
A follow-up phone call clarified that Chemir does not perform double-blind product testing. They recommended another company.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 11-20-2010, 06:17 AM
Carl-NC's Avatar
Carl-NC Carl-NC is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Oregon
Posts: 889
Default

During all this, I sent James Randi a run-down on my adventures with H3Tec. He sent them the following email:

Quote:
August 7th, 2010.

Kathy & Charlie: I assure you that the James Randi Educational Foundation will not be bound by any such "following paragraphs" if and when we obtain one of these devices for testing, which we intend to do, so please send us a serious, pompous, warning of dire legal consequences, so we may publish it for our readers. However, I assure you, no "reverse engineering" is being contemplated, sought, or even considered; that would be a waste of our time and labor, since there's no engineering to be found.

A simple test of your device could easily be conducted, should you be willing, and if the device works, that would result in the million-dollar prize of this Foundation being awarded to you or whoever you might designate. But though we are willing, able, and well prepared to witness such a test, you will -- predictably -- refuse to participate. Any such test would be conducted by you, personally, or any other person you might choose to designate, of course, under a simple protocol designed by you.

I confidently assert that this offer will be (a) refused, (b) ignored, and/or (c) mocked in ignorance of reality.

The "H3 Tec" device does not, cannot, and will never, work as advertised, but it will continue to sell because there exists a certain percentage of the public that is naïve enough to purchase it. And, contrary to the cute advertising motto you use, I am very capable of "hiding" from an H3. Anyone is…

PROVE ME WRONG.

(silence, except for frantic scurrying noises as lawyers are alerted to this nuisance, in preparation for another dire warning to be issued in legalese.)

James Randi
I assume he got no response.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 11-20-2010, 06:32 AM
Carl-NC's Avatar
Carl-NC Carl-NC is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Oregon
Posts: 889
Default

Uh-oh, time for another threatening email from Chuck. This time he copies Kory D. Christensen, who is apparently his patent attorney. Or, as I like to call him, his "attorney-of-the-same-name." I wonder if this guy is giving Chuck such phenomenally bad information, or if Chuck is making it up on his own.

Quote:
Mr. Carl Moreland,

You have been informed in writing and made very aware of H3 Tec’s license and use restrictions. As I have explained to you before, Non-disclosure agreement, contract, and license is maintained for each and every H3 system sold. The fact that you say you have our property and are going to share our private information with everyone on the Web is enough for us to believe you are serious. Possession of H3 Tec’s property without a license constitutes theft. You have admitted that you are in possession of stolen property; therefore, you are required by law to return it. With that, we are again demanding that the H3 you have in your possession be returned to us, and that you inform us of the name of the party who transferred it to you. You can do this now, or you will be deposed through our attorneys in the very near future. Such deposition will include the company for which you are working and therefore represent.

The only misrepresentation in this situation is yours, and you have blasted it to anyone within sight and ear shot. It is on your phone, emails, website, and blog site. In fact, you have contacted our independent testing laboratories, illegally misrepresented yourself as our authorized vendor, and attempted to obtain company-confidential and proprietary information in the form of our lab tests. All your activities are illegal and we will seek remedy.

We have collected a lot of evidence in this matter, and will forward it to our attorneys for processing. Thinking you are smarter than our attorneys is less than amusing. You are an engineer, and have been an engineer for your entire career; you are not a lawyer. H3 Tec, LLC and H3 Tec, LLC’s property is protected--well protected. Our IP is very valuable, and we have invested deeply in the legal title and protections of our company. We use world-class business practice that were set up by our business attorney. I’m sure your employer, Mr. White, does the same thing with his business and property.

H3 Tec, by using the proper procedures to obtain patents on this IP and a host of other IPs, retains title and protections. H3’s IP, contracts, and licenses will be strictly enforced. This means that, as I have told you before, transfer of and/or possession of a transferred H3 detector system is strictly forbidden by law, and I am asking for the second time that you return our property immediately.

We also demand that you remove any mention of H3 Tec, H3 Tec products, Chuck Christensen, and Kathy Christensen from any media and/or domain over which you have control or influence and through which reference has been made to H3 Tec or the Christensen’s

As indicated by the confidentiality notice provided in this and all of our company emails, this email and its contents are strictly confidential. The contents of this email are company-propriety information and will be treated as such. This email may not be reproduced in or out of context using any media, electronic or otherwise, and cannot be verbally transferred to any other party in whole or out of context to anyone other than H3 Tec, LLC .

Sincerely,

Charles L. Christensen


H3 Tec LLC
Davis Applied Technology College
450 South Simmons Way, Suite 650
Kaysville, UT 84037

P: (801) 593-2272
F: (801) 593-2110
W: www.h3tec.com
E: info@H3tec.com


CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE
This email message may contain confidential information that is legally privileged. Do not read this email if you are not the intended recipient.
This email transmission and any documents, files, or previous email messages attached to it may contain confidential information that is legally privileged and may constitute inside or non-public information under international, federal, or state securities laws. Unauthorized forwarding, printing, copying, distribution, or use of such information is STRICTLY PROHIBITED. If you are not the addressee, please promptly destroy this email and its attachments without reading or saving in any manner, and notify the sender of the delivery error by email; or you may call H3 Tec's corporate offices in Kaysville, Utah, U.S.A at (+1) (801) 593.2271.
By the way, I authorized me to distribute this email.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 11-20-2010, 06:38 AM
Carl-NC's Avatar
Carl-NC Carl-NC is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Oregon
Posts: 889
Default

Not wanting to appear to be ignoring Chuck's pleas, I again offered my challenge. I even agree to all his demands IF the device is successful in a scientific test. Also, I copied his attorney-of-the-same-name so there would be no doubt that I have offered Chuck a legitimate settlement that satisfies their "demands."

Quote:
Chuck,

I again offer you $25,000 if you can successfully demonstrate the H3Tec device in a professionally administered randomized double-blind test. Success will not only win you my prize money, but I will remove all negative comments about the H3Tec device and persons involved from my web site, issue a public apology, and publicly endorse the device.

I await your response to this offer.

If you want the H3Tec unit I had, you will now need to contact James Randi. Also, I believe he has directly offered you a 1 MILLION DOLLAR reward for a successful demonstration, if you consider my offer to be financially insufficient.

Carl Moreland
Geotech
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 11-20-2010, 06:51 AM
Carl-NC's Avatar
Carl-NC Carl-NC is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Oregon
Posts: 889
Default

Chuck was getting nowhere with his begging, so he asks the wife to beg instead:

Quote:

Mr. Moreland;

H3 Tec, LLC is very serious about your interference with our technologies and company. Without regard to H3’s business and investment, you have made defamatory, slanderous, and blatantly false statements and you have broadcast those statements across the world through various means. You have also represented yourself as a vendor of H3 Tec’s devices and technology in order to gain company-sensitive, private data. You have represented yourself as subject-matter expert pertaining to our products. Your reckless actions and false statements have caused harm to our company and reputation.

As a result, you have seven days from the date of this email, specifically midnight Mountain Daylight Time on August 24, 2010, to comply with the following demands:

1. Remove all negative references to H3’s technology, H3 Tec, and the Christensens from your websites, blogs, and other media.

2. Provide the name of the party who transferred H3 Tec’s property and materials to you, and return all H3 Tec property and systems to our hands at the following address:

H3 Tec Shipping/Receiving
P O Box 140533
Ogden, UT 84415

H3 Tec property and systems includes the following:
a. Any H3 detector and its corresponding H3 software.
b. H3 Tec training materials, manuals, and any other materials manufactured by H3 Tec, LLC.

3. If, as you have claimed on multiple occasions, you indeed have had possession of H3 Tec’s property and if you transferred H3 Tec’s property to another party, you have compounded your problem and must contact whomever currently has possession of H3 Tec’s property and have it shipped to the address provided in item 2, above.

4. Post apologies and retraction statements for the references in item 1, above, and stop your interference with our activities.

Logically, if H3 Tec wanted your help with its product, you would be hired to perform that work. H3 Tec has no intention of hiring you, does not want your help, and neither requires nor seeks your endorsement. You are not recognized as an expert in any field in which we are interested.

Should you deem it necessary to communicate with us after the aforementioned seven days have expired, please direct all correspondence to our attorney at the address provided below as we will no longer respond to you in writing or otherwise.

Kory D. Christensen
Stoel Rives, LLP
201 South Main Street, Suite 1100
Salt Lake City, Utah 84111


Sincerely,

Kathleen G. Christensen
President & General Manager

You can't hide from H3.

"Anything that cannot be explained by the current state of the art is a discovery."

H3 Tec, LLC
P O Box 150433
Ogden, UT 84415

P: 602.464.3832
F: 801.475.4984
C: 801.209.9020

e: kathleen@h3tec.com
w: www.h3tec.com

CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE
This email message may contain confidential information that is legally privileged. Do not read this email if you are not the intended recipient. This email transmission and any documents, files, or previous email messages attached to it may contain confidential information that is legally privileged and may constitute inside or non-public information under international, federal, or state securities laws. Unauthorized forwarding, printing, copying, distribution, or use of such information is STRICTLY PROHIBITED. If you are not the addressee, please promptly destroy this email and its attachments without reading or saving in any manner, and notify the sender of the delivery error by email; or you may call H3 Tec's corporate offices in Ogden, Utah, U.S.A at (+1) (602)464-3832.
This email was sent August 17. Note the deadline of Aug 24 to comply with all their "demands". So I sent the following quick reply (still copying their attorney-of-the-same-name):

Quote:
Kathy,

I will agree to your terms, plus award you the sum of $25,000, if you, or anyone you designate, can successfully demonstrate the H3Tec device in a professionally administered randomized double-blind test. This test would be administered by Sandia National Labs, a world-renown research facility which has significant experience testing long-range locator devices.

If your device works as you claim, then I expect you will eagerly accept this offer, as the test will be incredibly easy to pass, and the publicity will bring phenomenal business opportunities.

If your device is only a dowsing rod, then I expect you will decline or ignore this offer, as the test will be impossible to pass.

Carl Moreland
Geotech
and decided to wait until Aug 24. Aug 24 came & went. Nothing. Weeks went by. Nothing. But on some public forums, both H3Tec and their dealers continue to puff up their chests and make legal threats. As Randi said, "pompous."
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 11-20-2010, 08:36 PM
Carl-NC's Avatar
Carl-NC Carl-NC is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Oregon
Posts: 889
Default

Forgot to mention... in my last email to H3Tec, I added my own "confidentiality notice":

Quote:
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE

This email message may or may not contain confidential information that could be but may not be legally privileged. Do not read this email unless it was sent to you; if you read this email and weren't supposed to, then bad on you. Unauthorized printing, copying, reading, or dreaming about is STRICTLY FROWNED UPON. If you do these bad things, we will grit our teeth, stomp our feet, and hold our breath until we turn blue. Also, by reading any part of this confidentiality notice, you agree to pay us $10,000.
I assume Kathy didn't read this notice, as I have never received the $10,000 she would owe me for doing so.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 11-20-2010, 09:06 PM
WM6's Avatar
WM6 WM6 is offline
Guru
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Borovnica, Slovenia
Posts: 2,392
Default

Another great anti-fraud project Carl. Thank you for all your efforts in this way.

This one of the best statement in this case:

"However, I assure you, no "reverse engineering" is being contemplated, sought, or even considered; that would be a waste of our time and labor, since there's no engineering to be found."
__________________
Global capital is ruining your life?
You have right to self-defence!
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 11-20-2010, 09:16 PM
Carl-NC's Avatar
Carl-NC Carl-NC is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Oregon
Posts: 889
Default

Early in my investigation of the H3Tec device, I emailed Ike Tiner with some questions. Ike was a vocal proponent of H3Tec and it appeared that he lived in Oregon, at a reasonable distance from me, so I hoped we could get together for some basic experiments:

Quote:
Hi Ike,

I see that you own an H3Tec device. I recently obtained one for testing purposes and so far cannot get it to do anything. It appears to be just a dowsing rod. I'm curious if you've had any solid success with the H3Tec.

Regards,
Carl
Ike responded positively about his experiences, and suggested I talk to H3Tec directly. I replied:

Quote:
Ike,

I got my H3 from a rather disgruntled owner, who sent it to me to investigate and put it through some double-blind testing. I've been investigating LRLs for 12 years, and after testing and dissecting around 20 different models I've yet to see one that works. So far, this one does nothing as well.

I'm going to try to get Chuck to demonstrate operation to me, but I've already expressed my skepticism toward his device and he is not too pleased with what I've had to say. I had in the past (before I got this device) asked if he would be willing to run some double-blind tests with me and he wouldn't reply. Double-blind testing is the only reliable way to test dowsing-based devices, and my experience with other LRL manufacturers is that they avoid it like the plague.

I plan to do some more testing with the unit, and dissect it to see what's inside. At that point I'll get back with Chuck and see if he will agree to tests. If he won't, would you be willing to get together and run through some operational experiments? I would like to get someone with experience with the device to handle it.

Regards,
Carl
Ike responded, "Thank you for your response...But lets clear once thing up... The H3 is NOT a dowsing base tool.... as long as that thought is your head... your success with the H3 will be very limited..."

Well, yes, it IS a dowsing device, there is no doubt about that. But I let it go. I soon discovered in reading Ike's forum posts on thunting.com that he has moved to Texas and is a dealer for H3Tec. So he has a personal investment in defending H3Tec.

Since Chuck refuses a scientific test of his device, I made a similar offer to Ike on thunting.com. This began when someone asked about the H3Tec, and I responded:

Quote:
I have recently wrapped up a 2-month detailed investigation of the H3Tec, including a full dissection. It is nothing but a dowsing rod. As such, it obviously could not detect gold or silver or anything else (yes, I ran tests). It does have a real circuit inside (unlike so many LRLs that don't) but the circuitry doesn't really do anything, other than look high-tech and make the buyers feel they got more for their $10,000 than just a dowsing rod.

I have offered my $25,000 to Mr. Christensen if he can successfully demonstrate the device but so far all I've gotten back are legal threats and a lot of foot stomping.
Ike replied (some portions omitted for brevity):

Quote:
Thank you for your post, Carl-NC...

In my lastest post, I said I wouldn't say anything else about the H3 or H3tec... but this posting by Carl absolutely requires a comment due to its one sided, and biased and untruthfull comments

From these comments, are the readers to assume you are an expert, with well documented education in electronic, magnetism, molecular and atomic structures, computer science, hardware and software with a great working understanding of several languages as well as mechanical engineering???

...because you would need to be well versed in all those academic subjects along with several others to stumble onto the the basis of the technology behind the H3... Mr Christensen is extremely well educated, in those fields and much more...DOWSING HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE SUCCESS OF THE H3....it is truly scientific....

It would be helpful for you to tell the truth and the complete story... You left out the part where you contacted me personally and I, as well and Mr, Christensen have extended SEVERAL offers to you to come to Salt Lake City for a complete demonstration on the H3 and yet each time you have declined to do so... I still have the emails in my personal account and I can publish them for all to see that while legal issues have come and are coming about for you between yourself and H3tec... these came about ONLY after you declined several invitations and several request to stop saying negative things about the H3 and H3tec without the proper information to back up your statements... largely due to lack of your knowledge on the H3 and its patented technology....of which H3tec owns all the patents, of which there are MANY.......

Since you have $25,000 to use as a reward for a successful demonstration, why haven't you... or better yet, why don't you simply go to Salt Lake City for a demonstration, it is FREE other than your transportation and lodging and food....It certainly wouldn't cost $25,000 to go the SLC, to prove your point....

I will make the following offer....to ANYONE... (there are also dealers in Southern California as well as in Ohio and Slat Lake City.....contact H3tec for their contact information)

I live in the Corpus Christi area of TX... and I will demonstrate and TEACH you how to properly use the H3... and you WILL find things a regular metal detector cannot find....All anyone has to do is contat me and set up an appointment....you pay for your transportation, food and lodging....

I am an authorized dealer for the H3 and H3tec... my territory covers all the southern states, LA to AZ and from CO southward... I have been properly trained and understand the H3e very, very well....and have also been successful with it too....
Ignoring some of the false statements Ike makes, I responded by offering HIM my $25,000 prize:

Quote:
Hello Ike,

I'm sure Mr. Christensen told you that I did offer him the $25,000 (plus other considerations) if he could successfully demonstrate the H3Tec device in a professionally administered randomized double-blind test. I'm sure he also told you that he responded with threats of a lawsuit if I didn't immediately surrender the device to him. I have the emails if you'd like to read them, although Mr. Christensen said they are "strictly confidential" and cannot be repeated to anyone.

I will make the same offer to you: $25,000 if YOU as the operator can successfully demonstrate the H3Tec device in a professionally administered randomized double-blind test. There is one caveat: the prize money is only available if H3Tec agrees to the test and for you to officially represent the company. If you want to demonstrate the device on your own, independent of the company, then I am certainly interested (as I said in my email to you) but the prize money isn't available unless it's a sanctioned test.

Since Mr. Christensen doesn't seem to be interested in a truly scientific test of the H3Tec, maybe you are (I would be, if I were selling them). Let me know. And feel free to post the contents of our prior emails.
Naturally, Ike refuses:

Quote:
Instead of clouding the issues with getting money involved, aLL that we ask of you is to visit SLC and take a test drive....
Like Chuck, he desperately wants to avoid a truly scientific test of the device, and stick with a "sales demonstration" and "hands-on training." Self-deception, and deception, is much easier with those methods.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 11-20-2010, 09:40 PM
Carl-NC's Avatar
Carl-NC Carl-NC is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Oregon
Posts: 889
Default

In an earlier thread on this forum, Chuck chimed in to disagree with me after I reported on seeing the H3Tec at the Texas Treasure Show. He made the following offer:

"We would be more than happy to give you a full demonstration of our products as well as a quick training session."

I replied,

"Would you do the demonstration under randomized double-blind conditions?"


He wouldn't respond to this question, even after I asked it again.

In a very recent exchange on TreasureNet, I repeated my challenge to Chuck, and extended to all their dealers:

Quote:
Fact #1: The H3Tec "locator" is a dowsing device. No question. Anyone can disassemble one and see that.

Fact #2: The H3Tec has no ability to do what the manufacturer claims it will do.

I (again) make the following challenge to Chuck Christensen:

I will pay the sum of $25,000 if you can successfully demonstrate the H3Tec device in a professionally administered randomized double-blind test. Success will not only win you my prize money, but I will remove all negative comments about the H3Tec device from my web site, issue a public apology, and publicly endorse the device.

Please don't tell me you've performed this test. First, I don't believe you; Chemir told me they don't do double-blind product testing, plus you gave them strict instructions not to release any details of what they actually tested. Secondly, I don't care what you did in the past. I want to see, in person, the H3Tec device work in a scientific test. I do NOT care for a "sales demonstration," or "hands-on training," or testimonials. Scientific test, period.

Since H3Tec will (again) reject my offer, I make the following alternative challenges to H3Tec's dealers:

I will pay the sum of $25,000 to Ike Tiner (aka 'KlondikeIke') if he can successfully demonstrate the H3Tec device in randomized double-blind test.

I will pay the sum of $25,000 to Dexter Hulse (aka 'Curtis') if he can successfully demonstrate the H3Tec device in randomized double-blind test.

I will pay the sum of $25,000 to Jeff Haslett if he can successfully demonstrate the H3Tec device in randomized double-blind test.

If the device works as claimed, success will be trivial. If it doesn't, failure is certain.

No excuses.
No alibis.
Again, Chuck dodged the challenge.

Cain't do it.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 11-24-2010, 03:50 PM
Carl-NC's Avatar
Carl-NC Carl-NC is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Oregon
Posts: 889
Default

Here is the latest from Chuck:

Quote:
Carl,

Kindly remove all H3 material off your website. You have 24 hours to do so. Non-compliance will not be met favorably. You will force us to innate actions that are very negative for you and will take time out of our positive and busy schedule.

Sincerely,
Chuck
Charles L. Christensen
CEO – COB
H3 Tec, L.L.C.

P.O. Box 150433
Ogden, UT 84015
P: 602.464.3832
C: 801.814.6577
F: 801.475.4984
E: Chuck@h3tec.com
W: www.h3tec.com

CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE
This email message may contain confidential information that is legally privileged. Do not read this email if you are not the intended recipient.
This email transmission and any documents, files, or previous email messages attached to it may contain confidential information that is legally privileged and may constitute inside or non-public information under international, federal, or state securities laws. Unauthorized forwarding, printing, copying, distribution, or use of such information is STRICTLY PROHIBITED. If you are not the addressee, please promptly destroy this email and its attachments without reading or saving in any manner, and notify the sender of the delivery error by email; or you may call H3 Tec's corporate offices in Ogden Ut, U.S.A at (+1) (602) 464.3832
I have no idea what "force us to innate actions" means. Perhaps his "well documented education in electronic, magnetism, molecular and atomic structures, computer science, hardware and software with a great working understanding of several languages as well as mechanical engineering" prevents him from understanding the English language.
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 11-24-2010, 04:34 PM
Carl-NC's Avatar
Carl-NC Carl-NC is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Oregon
Posts: 889
Default

The whole reason I decided to post all these emails is because Chuck is deliberately spreading... er... fabrications about what's been said. Ferinstance, he has said:

In fact, you have contacted our independent testing laboratories, illegally misrepresented yourself as our authorized vendor, and attempted to obtain company-confidential and proprietary information in the form of our lab tests.

This has been repeated to his dealers and posted on forums. As anyone can see from the actual emails, I did no such thing. I was completely honest in my inquiry. If the test results really supported Chuck's claims, then there should be no reason to hide them.
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 11-24-2010, 09:12 PM
WM6's Avatar
WM6 WM6 is offline
Guru
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Borovnica, Slovenia
Posts: 2,392
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Carl-NC View Post

I have no idea what "force us to innate actions" means.
They will destroy your forum at long range distance by H3Tec isotope.
__________________
Global capital is ruining your life?
You have right to self-defence!
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 11-24-2010, 09:53 PM
Jim's Avatar
Jim Jim is offline
Guru
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Tampa, FL
Posts: 369
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Carl-NC View Post
The whole reason I decided to post all these emails is because Chuck is deliberately spreading... er... fabrications about what's been said. Ferinstance, he has said:

In fact, you have contacted our independent testing laboratories, illegally misrepresented yourself as our authorized vendor, and attempted to obtain company-confidential and proprietary information in the form of our lab tests.

This has been repeated to his dealers and posted on forums. As anyone can see from the actual emails, I did no such thing. I was completely honest in my inquiry. If the test results really supported Chuck's claims, then there should be no reason to hide them.
The last nasty-gram I got from Chuck said:

Hi Jim,

Just a note, maybe for the wise. We have been following you and your talk about our company. It is less than informed, and more than unchallengeable. I’m sorry you have come out to purposely do damage to our company without even accepting an invitation to use the H3, come to our manufacturing facilities and test drive the H3. You have pushed this issue past the point of reason or reconsideration.


Sincerely.....yada yada


Reconsideration....eh? I've reconsidered H3's advertisement "H3 Treasure Detectors are scientific instruments, not toys"....and come to the same conclusion...not a scientific instrument
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 11-25-2010, 08:01 AM
Carl-NC's Avatar
Carl-NC Carl-NC is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Oregon
Posts: 889
Default

Since the purpose of this thread is to publicly document my challenge to H3Tec and their responses, let's take a look at some more... err... "fabrications" that Chuck posted:

Carl ... has told the world that we do not manufacture a product stating "It has no board in it", "it can't work".

Ignoring the butchered English, I have never claimed the H3 device "has no board in it." In fact, I stated (THunting forum, 8/15/2010):

"It does have a real circuit inside (unlike so many LRLs that don't) but the circuitry doesn't really do anything, other than look high-tech and make the buyers feel they got more for their $10,000 than just a dowsing rod."

I also don't think I've ever said "it can't work," only that it's just a dowsing rod, and doesn't do what the manufacturer claims it will do.

We have invited Carl to Utah to see our production and assembly shop as well as test drive our products.

Chuck has never invited me to "see our production and assembly shop." He did say (Geotech forum, 4/11/2009):

"We would be more than happy to give you a full demonstration of our products as well as a quick training session."

I replied:

"Well, I just might take you up on that. Would you do the demonstration under randomized double-blind conditions?"

No answer. I repeated this question a few more times but Chuck kept dodging the question.

He refuses stating that he's offering us a 25K challenge.

I will gladly accept a demonstration of the device, as long as its executed using an acceptable scientific test procedure. I have no use for a typical sales demo.

Well it's a contract that can't be met, so he get's 5k for his efforts.

As I've stated, passing a scientific test is trivial if the device works, and impossible if it doesn't work. Sound like Chuck is admitting the device doesn't work.

In any case, the "5k" comment is blatantly wrong. There is no provision in the challenge for paying me anything. If the device works, I lose $25,000. It it doesn't work, I get nothing.
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 11-26-2010, 05:02 AM
Rudy's Avatar
Rudy Rudy is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Claremont, CA
Posts: 242
Default

Carl,

You might want to point out to the gentleman from HT 3 that you can not possibly be in breach of their confidentiality agreement since you never signed one with them.

Many years ago, I was being deposed in a patent infringement suit and as part of the discovery process, a letter from a competitor to a customer, that was in my possession was produced. The attorney for the other side tried to rattle me by pointing out that at the bottom of the letter was a paragraph stating that the letter contained company confidential information. The lawyer asked me why I had not returned the letter to our competitor since it contained their confidential information? I looked at him straight on and said that I didn't return it because I had never signed a confidentiality agreement with them. At that point he asked for a 15 minute recess in the deposition, probably to try and figure out another angle of attack.
__________________

HH Rudy,
MXT, HeadHunter Wader


Do or do not. There is no try.
Yoda
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 11-26-2010, 12:44 PM
Jim's Avatar
Jim Jim is offline
Guru
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Tampa, FL
Posts: 369
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rudy View Post
Carl,

You might want to point out to the gentleman from HT 3 that you can not possibly be in breach of their confidentiality agreement since you never signed one with them.
Hi Rudy....the nasty-grams I get from H3 Tec are equally as ridiculous. According to the lead....they are sending me someone else's property. I have never signed a confidentiality agreement or a NDA with them. I have, however...been posting my opinion that their "scientific instrument" is fraudulant. Thus, the threatening nasty-grams


This messages is property of H3 Tec, as are all electronic, voice, or written communications: See notice below.


Jim,


Since you have no idea what you are talking about I’m going to wish you and yours a very Happy Thanksgiving. I will at one caveat, You should well be aware of the rights of a patent holder and their property, you should know about slander and libel. You should also understand about industrial sabotage, and espionage. If you don’t, you should get very familiar with them in the near future.



Have a very happy Thanksgiving, and by the way, your website might be a reflection upon your professionalism.



Much luck and health to you in the future, and you will be seeing us very soon.



Sincerely,



Chuck


CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE
This email message may contain confidential information that is legally privileged. Do not read this email if you are not the intended recipient.
This email transmission and any documents, files, or previous email messages attached to it may contain confidential information that is legally privileged and may constitute inside or non-public information under international, federal, or state securities laws. Unauthorized forwarding, printing, copying, distribution, or use of such information is STRICTLY PROHIBITED. If you are not the addressee, please promptly destroy this email and its attachments without reading or saving in any manner, and notify the sender of the delivery error by email; or you may call H3 Tec's corporate offices in Ogden Ut, U.S.A at (+1) (602) 464.3832
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 11-26-2010, 02:51 PM
Rudy's Avatar
Rudy Rudy is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Claremont, CA
Posts: 242
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim View Post
Hi Rudy....the nasty-grams I get from H3 Tec are equally as ridiculous. According to the lead....they are sending me someone else's property. I have never signed a confidentiality agreement or a NDA with them. I have, however...been posting my opinion that their "scientific instrument" is fraudulant. Thus, the threatening nasty-grams


This messages is property of H3 Tec, as are all electronic, voice, or written communications: See notice below.


Jim,


Since you have no idea what you are talking about I’m going to wish you and yours a very Happy Thanksgiving. I will at one caveat, You should well be aware of the rights of a patent holder and their property, you should know about slander and libel. You should also understand about industrial sabotage, and espionage. If you don’t, you should get very familiar with them in the near future.



Have a very happy Thanksgiving, and by the way, your website might be a reflection upon your professionalism.



Much luck and health to you in the future, and you will be seeing us very soon.



Sincerely,



Chuck


CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE
This email message may contain confidential information that is legally privileged. Do not read this email if you are not the intended recipient.
This email transmission and any documents, files, or previous email messages attached to it may contain confidential information that is legally privileged and may constitute inside or non-public information under international, federal, or state securities laws. Unauthorized forwarding, printing, copying, distribution, or use of such information is STRICTLY PROHIBITED. If you are not the addressee, please promptly destroy this email and its attachments without reading or saving in any manner, and notify the sender of the delivery error by email; or you may call H3 Tec's corporate offices in Ogden Ut, U.S.A at (+1) (602) 464.3832

I wonder, has anyone with one of these "boxes" seen a label (or perhaps imprinted on the case), containing one or more U.S. Patent numbers? Companies afraid that their competitors will reverse engineer their invention and market it usually "mark" their equipment with such a label. The reason is that, if the item is so marked and they win their patent infringement suit against their competitor, they are entitled to recover treble damages as far back as competitor's unit #1 sold. Otherwise their damages are capped starting with the competitor's unit sold after the infringement suit was filed.

Yes, that boiler plate notice they tack on to emails is ludicrous. Our legal department would use it too on their emails. It was more of a CYA than anything else. And, since it is always at the bottom, how does one know it was there until after one reads the email?
__________________

HH Rudy,
MXT, HeadHunter Wader


Do or do not. There is no try.
Yoda
Reply With Quote
  #21  
Old 11-26-2010, 05:31 PM
Carl-NC's Avatar
Carl-NC Carl-NC is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Oregon
Posts: 889
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim View Post
You should well be aware of the rights of a patent holder and their property...
This has been a recurring theme... I'm wondering if Chuck actually believes that a patent prevents anyone from dissecting his device and publishing the details of the design. If he does, he is either deluded or his attorney-of-the-same-name is giving him Really Bad Advice.

The irony, as I think I've mentioned before, is that his patent doesn't even provide protection against his product being copied and sold! Both independent claims begin, "A method/apparatus for detecting a substance, comprising..." This means, first and foremost, the device must be able to detect a substance. If, in the end, a device constructed according to the claims and teachings of the patent in incapable of detecting a substance, then there is no violation of the patent... the patent is junk.

Based on what I've seen of the H3 device, anyone can copy and produce it without violating the patent. Ergo, the patent is just for marketing purposes. That is, it's to impress people who foolishly believe patents are only granted for proven technology.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rudy View Post
The reason is that, if the item is so marked and they win their patent infringement suit against their competitor, they are entitled to recover treble damages as far back as competitor's unit #1 sold. Otherwise their damages are capped starting with the competitor's unit sold after the infringement suit was filed.
Damage assessment varies, but typically the starting point is when notice of infringement is filed, typically in a company-to-company letter. Treble damages usually only result when there is willful infringement.

Last edited by Carl-NC; 11-26-2010 at 10:58 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 11-26-2010, 06:10 PM
Rudy's Avatar
Rudy Rudy is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Claremont, CA
Posts: 242
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Carl-NC View Post
This has been a recurring theme... I'm wondering if Chuck actually believes that a patent prevents anyone from dissecting his device and publishing the details of the design. If he does, he is either deluded or his attorney-of-the-same-name is giving him Really Bad Advice.

The irony, as I think I've mentioned before, is that his patent doesn't even provide protection against his product being copied and sold! Both independent claims begin, "A method/apparatus for detecting a substance, comprising..." This means, first and foremost, the device must be able to detect a substance. If, in the end, a device constructed according to the claims and teachings of the patent in incapable of detecting a substance, then there is no violation of the patent... the patent is junk.

Based on what I've seen of the H3 device, anyone can copy and produce it without violating the patent. Ergo, the patent is just for marketing purposes. That is, it's to impress people who foolishly believe patents are only granted for proven technology.



Damage assessment varies, but typically the starting point is when notice of infringement is filed, typically in a company-to-company letter. Treble damages usually only results when there is willful infringement.
Carl, has the US Patent Number been published in the forum (if so I couldn't find it)? If you don't mind posting it or sending me a PM with it, I'd like to take a look at it. I know quite a bit about patents having four of them and three others that were in process prior to my retirement.
__________________

HH Rudy,
MXT, HeadHunter Wader


Do or do not. There is no try.
Yoda
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 11-26-2010, 06:54 PM
Jim's Avatar
Jim Jim is offline
Guru
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Tampa, FL
Posts: 369
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rudy View Post
Carl, has the US Patent Number been published in the forum (if so I couldn't find it)? If you don't mind posting it or sending me a PM with it, I'd like to take a look at it. I know quite a bit about patents having four of them and three others that were in process prior to my retirement.
Hi Rudy.....try this

http://tinyurl.com/y9f8e3w
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 11-26-2010, 08:12 PM
Qiaozhi's Avatar
Qiaozhi Qiaozhi is offline
Guru (Administrator)
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 3,643
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim View Post
Hi Rudy.....try this

http://tinyurl.com/y9f8e3w
In the application it states: "The method of claim 1, wherein the step of receiving an indication further comprises allowing an arm connected with the detection module to pivot in the direction of the substance to indicate presence of the substance".

It is difficult to see how this patent was even allowed. It's only value is to the Marketing Dept.. to trick the unwary into believing that the detection method has some value, when in fact it has none. I can only assume that the suggested embodiments do not affect the patent application so much as the claims being made.

Here is the full patent document (with graphics) ->
http://www.freepatentsonline.com/7750634.pdf
This patent appears to have been granted, even though it states in the text, such things as:
"the arm aligning to the element or compound"
"having a rod that pivots within a handle."
"The rod is supported and allowed to swing on precision bearings inside the handle."
"the rod swivels allowing the arm of the rod to pivot, to point to the direction of the target substance."

etc., etc.

It is clearly a dowsing rod in disguise.
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 11-26-2010, 08:53 PM
Jim's Avatar
Jim Jim is offline
Guru
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Tampa, FL
Posts: 369
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Qiaozhi View Post

It is clearly a dowsing rod in disguise.
Of course it is.

Just a thought....does the patent cover the H3 Tec Tricorder series? That's the model that uses a dowsing rod to "excite" the atoms/molecule and a smaller dowsing rod that "listens" to the atoms talk.

There seems to be a difference between the item patented and the current H3 models
Reply With Quote
Reply


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 07:25 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.