Any Carl Anderson dowsing rod success stories?

[aarthrj3811]

~EE THr~

7. No LRL maker, promoter, or user, has ever passed Carl's completely fair, scientifically applied, double-blind test; and very few have even tried. This would be the proof actually required, as mentioned in #6.

I had to shorten your long winded rant a little…The whole first sentence is B/S..It is true that no one has every passed Carl’s Fake Double Blind test because no one has ever taken it. It is very clear that from the start that Carl and all you skeptics say that the test is about LRL’s but keep referring to Dowsing

#6 is an admission that you have no proof unless we provide it

A plaintiff (Π in legal shorthand), also known as a claimant or complainant, is the term used in some jurisdictions for the party who initiates a lawsuit (also known as an action) before a court. By doing so, the plaintiff seeks a legal remedy, and if successful, the court will issue judgment in favor of the plaintiff and make the appropriate court order (e.g., an order for damages).

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

Agony and Death on a Gold Rush Steamer: The Disastrous Sinking of the Side-Wheeler Yankee Blade - Grab it through Amazon!

[EddieR]

ER---

You've dragged the discussion so far from the main point of LRL working or not, that you aren't even addressing what is important.

So, let me remind you.

1. LRL makers advertise to infer that their device will find gold and other valuables, yet they never directly say so; they only infer it, in order to protect themselves in court. At the same time, they infer that anyone can use it successfully. This is widely documented and readily available evidence.

2. They all depend on the dubious "ability" of dowsing, because they either rely on dowsing rods to find a nonexistent "signal line," or the entire device is mounted on a pivoting handle, usually with a bearing, so that it is entirely free swinging, and unattached to any drive device whatsoever, and without any induced magnetism or any other way of having the device determine the direction that it is "pointing" when supposedly "indicating" something in a certain direction. Those things are all known and proven physical evidence.

3. In view of #1 and #2, and since, even if dowsing works for some people, which it has never been proven to, it certainly doesn't work for everyone; therefore the inferences by LRL makers is fraudulent. That is self defining, and absolute proof.

4. LRL makers response to #3, is that there is some mysterious physics factors at work, and they then try to explain it with what they proffer to be "scientific terms." Yet their "science" is really nothing more than various people's ideas, hunches, guesstimations, and theories; none of which have ever been actually proven, and certainly are not accepted as known fact. This behavior is also self evident, documented fact.

5. The typical LRL crowd is conditioned so that when they are confronted with these obvious and proven facts, they simply turn to insults, nonsensical comments, or changing of the subject. Becuase they have no defense against the truth.

6. The final, last ditch effort, of the LRLers, is to demand that questioners provide proof that the bogus devices don't work, knowing full well that it is impossible to prove the negative; and ignoring the fact that the burden of proof in upon the claimant, and no one else (and that is a standard, documented, scientific fact.)

7. No LRL maker, promoter, or user, has ever passed Carl's completely fair, scientifically applied, double-blind test; and very few have even tried. This would be the proof actually required, as mentioned in #6.





P.S. When will you man-up and take Carl's test?
ref: Are LRLs More Than Just Dowsing?

Note the part of your post that I highlighted. Now note my post just before yours. I was talking about LRL's being tested.........

 

[EE THr]

I had to shorten your long winded rant a little…The whole first sentence is B/S..It is true that no one has every passed Carl’s Fake Double Blind test because no one has ever taken it. It is very clear that from the start that Carl and all you skeptics say that the test is about LRL’s but keep referring to Dowsing

#6 is an admission that you have no proof unless we provide it

A plaintiff (Π in legal shorthand), also known as a claimant or complainant, is the term used in some jurisdictions for the party who initiates a lawsuit (also known as an action) before a court. By doing so, the plaintiff seeks a legal remedy, and if successful, the court will issue judgment in favor of the plaintiff and make the appropriate court order (e.g., an order for damages).

artie---

So now if someone gives several good reasons that LRLs don't work, rather than addressing those proofs, you simply call it "a long winded rant"? Cute, but obvious, evasion of the point!

You have tried, on several occasions, to call Carl's test a "fake," yet it is fair and scientific, and you have never come up with a better test procedure even though you have been asked to several times. Another obvious evasion of the point!

The only proof needed is that you keep saying we should prove they don't work. That's backwards, and further evasion of the point!

You keep trying to use specialized definitions of a term which is being used in the general meaning sense. What a lame tactic, and further evasion of the point!


"5. The typical LRL crowd is conditioned so that when they are confronted with these obvious and proven facts, they simply turn to insults, nonsensical comments, or changing of the subject. Becuase they have no defense against the truth." Thanks for proving that one, too!


The more you BS, the deeper hole you dig yourself into. And there's no treasure at the bottom of this one!






P.S. When will you man-up and take Carl's test?
ref: Are LRLs More Than Just Dowsing?

 

[teleprospector]

Have any of you dowsers out there used a Carl Anderson dowsing rod and had success with it? Or know anyone who has and used it successfully? Please reply within a couple of days if you can help me out.Thanks,Norm Marsh

Yes I have the UAR rod. It's taken on some design improvements since the Carl Anderson original UAR.
Russ Simmons manufactures this equipment now as Mr. Anderson has passed away.
I've had it a long time and have had success with it. Notice I did'nt say "Instant success".
I don't know of ANYONE who's pick up a dowsing rod and made a recovery the first time out with it.
It takes a lot of time and effort to get feedback wether you are dowsing correctly no matter how many bells and whistles a dowsing unit has. You still have to learn what the movements mean.
I personally like the design, the feel, and the quality manufacturing of this rod.
I also like dowsing equipment built by Fred Stewart.
Both manufacturers offer your money back if it does not work for you.
Kellyco sells the Simmons rods and offers money back within so much time. They may apply a % re-stock fee upon return. In Kellyco's manufacturer search, look for Anderson rods.
The best way for you to find out if they work for you is to try one out.
Hope this helps,
Jon

I forgot to mention I like the dowsing tools I build too.

 

[aarthrj3811]

thanks Jon

 

[EE THr]

artie---

You've had all day, so I guess you've got no answer for my post then, huh?

That figures.





P.S. When will you man-up and take Carl's test?
ref: Are LRLs More Than Just Dowsing?

 

[aarthrj3811]

You've had all day, so I guess you've got no answer for my post then, huh?

That figures.

Keep on begging

 

[EE THr]

artie---

Is that your final answer?






P.S. When will you man-up and take Carl's test?
ref: Are LRLs More Than Just Dowsing?

 

[EddieR]

OMG--- I go off for a while and this gets turned into the amazing EE show. How did a thread about anderson rods get turned into this??

EE since you don't know anything about them ,,,, why are you even in the mix You really don't have to respond to every post on this thread.

I know everyone is hanging on your next corrective post , but Really. Come on now.

This is just a weak suggestion, ask what problems in the field are and use that training to accomplish something, crazy I know, but it may serve to do the same thing as the bickering. Of course if you feel it is out of your range, I understand.

Oooooooooooh!

A #8, followed by a #16. Nice footwork!



ref: Are LRLs More Than Just Dowsing?

For your info, Eddie (in a previous vocation) was a "lawyer" of sorts. Naturally, like others on here, he has "nice footwork"; that is the main requirement for that kind of job... that and a line of convoluted BS that would stretch from here to China and back. Now, since being disbarred, he is slinging pizza pies and in his free time chasing things that go bump in the night (Amateur Ghost Buster); and for entertainment, making inane postings on T-net.

Just thought you might like a little background.....

Oh, and BTW, if you think the activity level has dropped off slightly here, it's because the LRL (and dowsing) advocates have moved on to a relatively new "forum" where the curator developed a set of rules and terms of usage that completely prohibits ANYTHING negative or contradictory to be said about LRLs and or dowsing gimmicks. In other words, the place is completely devoid of TRUTH, and only supports the ramblings and advertising of LRL dealers and persons of a similar ilk. You can find lots of old friends over there, like Mike H., Dell W., Tim W., EddieR, Judy, Art and several others who want to keep their head firmly in the sand and safely out of the reach of real science, common sense and rational thought.

I can't put the link here, so you'll just have to Google: t r e a s u r e w o r k s

Have fun.....

Disbarred? Really? If you can prove that I want to see it. SHOW YOUR PROOF. Tell you what...you love to chide the LRL'ers for not taking Carl's test for the 25,000.00.....so here is my challenge to you. If you will provide documentation on this forum for all to see that I was disbarred....I'll PAY for your plane ticket to fly here and I will give you 25,000.00 CASH....plus pay for your return home.

Are you man enough to accept my challenge? Should be easy if you are telling the truth and not making up BS, right?


Of course, we know that you will not accept my challenge, since I was never disbarred.

Your silence will speak loudly here, by the way....


***Folks...you are about to see Ted be caught in his own little web of BS***

Even though he is being truthful (for once) when he says I'm slinging pizzas...what he is neglecting to say is that I OWN the shop, along with 2 marketing companies. THAT'S how he is.


***Edit - I'm going to sweeten the deal even more....I'll throw in a weeks stay in Gatlinburg, all expenses paid. A person would be crazy to turn this deal down....if they have the proof of their claim. Just think....paid travel, 25,000.00 CASH, a week of paid vacation....

Come on Ted! You made the accusation that I was disbarred. You enjoy using that accusation in a slanderous way to attempt to sway people. I say I wasn't. Prove me wrong...and the whole deal is yours!

Silence.......speaks.

 

[EE THr]

ER---

For your info, Eddie (in a previous vocation) was a "lawyer" of sorts.

So, what "sort" of lawyer were (or are) you, anyway?

 

[EE THr]

SWR---

OK, I get it. Thanks.

 

[aarthrj3811]

Eddie may indeed be kind to idiots, I prefer to think of his attitude as modesty, but that is open to interpretation I suppose. Eddie just happened to be one person I named, but for the record, the paranormal thing is a hobby for him, as is the pizza biz. Personally, I wouldn't screw with either one if I were him. Tort litigation is the "job" he retired from, when he tired of the rat race in the Big Apple. His family still operates one of the top firms in Manhattan, as it has since the late 1880's
~EE THr~

OK, I get it. Thanks.

I guess there always has to be a first time..Art

 

[Ted Groves]

In keeping with the technique(*) LRL advocates use to prove their LRLs actually work better than random guessing, I challenge you to show you were not disbarred and instead left the lawyer racket on your own accord.

(*) technique - person, persons or company officials representing a company and/or product make wild and unprovable claims; then rest back on their laurels, while all the time insisting that if rational science cannot prove their claims as false - then quite obviously they must be true, and ergo their bogus claim and product is automatically validated as a result of a "silent" scientific response.

How ludicrous..... but completely expected from the likes of a professionally trained BS artist, skilled in the craft of twisting the truth until it is totally unrecognizable, all in the name of freeing corporate criminals in return for a healthy share of their embezzled millions.

 

[EE THr]

SWR---

Maybe it has to do with the old, "Yes, LRLs are dowsing devices; no, LRLs aren't dowsing devices" pseudoscience "theory" that all the LRLers constantly rely on as part of their dance routine.

You know, "The LRL Shuffle"?

 

[fenixdigger]

I'm sure I would be wrong again if I was to say that this has drifted pretty far from Anderson rods.

Please explain to me what input any of you have had on the topic so I can understand where your expertise has helped.

 

[Ted Groves]

.... my being disbarred would be in the public record...

Very good, Einstein. Where do you suppose I found it? Anyone else can too... with a little of the proper digging tools. Then you can offer them the all-expense paid trip to Podunk Center. I don't have the time or inclination, and I'm not interested in that amount of money.

Maybe consider a different strategy to get out of this one. BTW, aren't you being missed by your "head-in-the-sand" buddies over at T-works?



On the Topic of Anderson Rods - They were first introduced (or advertised) roughly in the late 1970s, and really became more popular right after Treasure Magazine ran a front-page article in their May 1981 issue, Vol. 12, No. 5. At that time, you could write directly to Carl Anderson at P.O. Box 270270-C, Tampa, FL 33688.

The article was essentially a series of Questions and Answers and was prefaced by an Editor's Note that read: "Judging from the response we've been getting lately, dowsing is quickly becoming one of the most talked-about segments of treasure hunting, with a growing number of converted skeptics. We wish we had the space to cover all the questions we've gotten about dowsing, but we have chosen the most often asked ones, which hopefully will offer a good cross-section of the inquiries. For the answers, we went to Carl Anderson, renowned manufacturer, accomplished user and ongoing student of dowsing instruments. Whether you plan to pursue the subject or not, we think you'll find the comments here most revealing." (excerpted from original Treasure Magazine)

In the early 80s, Carl Anderson offered a variety of dowsing implements; among them were: The Titan Mineral Rod, The Universal Antenna Rod, The Precision-Master Rod, The PMR-II, The Universal Depth Rod and The Titan-II (a pendulum type locator) which Carl first manufactured and sold during the early and mid-70s.

One of the most convincing testimonials that often accompanied Carl's advertising, was one by Fred Goss, who gave his address as 1237 So. Dogwood, Okmulgee, OK 74447.

Another testimonial was by none other than, Russ Simmons of Wilmington, NC, who was at that time offering a school in dowsing known as The Institute of Dowsing.

I could go on and on for many pages... but to what end; besides I'm incredibly busy right now with many other projects.
-------------------------------------

You see Eddie, it's always better if you can demonstrate some shred of credibility before you come on an LRL forum and start trying to pass yourself off as know-it-all; ...when in fact you know nothing about the instruments, the practice or the people and history that actually shaped this niche industry; while you were still wetting your diapers.

 

[aarthrj3811]

~EddieR~

Trust me.....a lot of people are cracking up at you right now. Here you are, making claims that you have NO WAY of proving. Isn't that what you always whine and blubber about? That LRL'ers are making claims they can't back up? I thought so.

Yes they are laughing at the skeptics..But in fact they are helping the manufacturers to sell product
~fenixdigger~

Please explain to me what input any of you have had on the topic so I can understand where your expertise has helped.

Darn LT…I count two post that are related to the question..2 out of 85 seems to be par for the course on this board..
It has been stopped because SWR is complaining…Art

 

[Real de Tayopa Tropical Tramp]

hio swr: you posted -->Maybe a few more Glamour Shots will eliminate those thinking with their little heads
**************
sheehs blushing violently.

Don Jose de La Mancha

 

[EddieR]

.... my being disbarred would be in the public record...

Very good, Einstein. Where do you suppose I found it? Anyone else can too... with a little of the proper digging tools. Then you can offer them the all-expense paid trip to Podunk Center. I don't have the time or inclination, and I'm not interested in that amount of money.

Maybe consider a different strategy to get out of this one. BTW, aren't you being missed by your "head-in-the-sand" buddies over at T-works?



On the Topic of Anderson Rods - They were first introduced (or advertised) roughly in the late 1970s, and really became more popular right after Treasure Magazine ran a front-page article in their May 1981 issue, Vol. 12, No. 5. At that time, you could write directly to Carl Anderson at P.O. Box 270270-C, Tampa, FL 33688.

The article was essentially a series of Questions and Answers and was prefaced by an Editor's Note that read: "Judging from the response we've been getting lately, dowsing is quickly becoming one of the most talked-about segments of treasure hunting, with a growing number of converted skeptics. We wish we had the space to cover all the questions we've gotten about dowsing, but we have chosen the most often asked ones, which hopefully will offer a good cross-section of the inquiries. For the answers, we went to Carl Anderson, renowned manufacturer, accomplished user and ongoing student of dowsing instruments. Whether you plan to pursue the subject or not, we think you'll find the comments here most revealing." (excerpted from original Treasure Magazine)

In the early 80s, Carl Anderson offered a variety of dowsing implements; among them were: The Titan Mineral Rod, The Universal Antenna Rod, The Precision-Master Rod, The PMR-II, The Universal Depth Rod and The Titan-II (a pendulum type locator) which Carl first manufactured and sold during the early and mid-70s.

One of the most convincing testimonials that often accompanied Carl's advertising, was one by Fred Goss, who gave his address as 1237 So. Dogwood, Okmulgee, OK 74447.

Another testimonial was by none other than, Russ Simmons of Wilmington, NC, who was at that time offering a school in dowsing known as The Institute of Dowsing.

I could go on and on for many pages... but to what end; besides I'm incredibly busy right now with many other projects.
-------------------------------------

You see Eddie, it's always better if you can demonstrate some shred of credibility before you come on an LRL forum and start trying to pass yourself off as know-it-all; ...when in fact you know nothing about the instruments, the practice or the people and history that actually shaped this niche industry; while you were still wetting your diapers.

Oh, so you found it in the public record, huh? Reeeeeeealy?

I know you are just sooooooo busy with those other projects and all but.....psssst....watering the "little fellas" won't make them grow any, so I wouldn't consider that a successful project.

Oh, and by the way, you did post some excellent advice about demonstrating credibility. I see you learned the lesson a little late though, but experience is a good teacher. Perhaps you should remember that when changing your diaper......

 

[aarthrj3811]

~Teddy~

Fred Astaire and Ginger Rogers didn't have any better dance steps than our own Eddie/Judy dance team. But then, what could you expect from someone trained to be as slippery as snot on glass doorknob.

~SWR

o....by avoiding the question all together simply makes it go away.

Ah yes....the LRL shuffle

The Predictable Pattern of Con Artists
http://forum.treasurenet.com/index.php/topic,387205.0/all.html