Different Ways of Testing LRLs

[EE THr]

So, now that we have a test procedure of which you approve, above, who would you trust to administer it?

You seem to have skipped the most important part of my question to you, artie.

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

Cry Of The Eagle: History And Legends Of The Cherokee Indians And Their Buried Treasure - Grab it through Amazon!

[aarthrj3811]

Sorry Randi that your educational system has been a complete failure..
http://www.skepticalinvestigations.org/exam/Dace_amazing3.htm
. Only skeptics, educated by James “Amazing” Randi and other magicians, are capable of spotting the tricks of the trade. “Scientists are easily fooled,” explained Randi, “because they think they know.” But only skeptics really know.

 

[aarthrj3811]

con-artie;

You have yet to suggest a different way of testing your LRLs, which you feel is fair.
Since that is what the topic of this thread is all about, why are you even posting here? Other than simply trying to promote your fantasy beliefs in LRLs?

Gee EE..I have posted a test for the owner/operators that will prove to them that their devices will pass the test or not. It proves the same thing that Carl’s test would accomplish..So please tell us why this test is not the same? So..where does the fantasy beliefs come into the discussion?

This is my version of a Blind test. I use halves of 6 Plastic Easter eggs and a coin. I give my son the coin and he goes out the back door and I stay inside while he places the coin under one of the egg halves. ART PEEKS OUT THE WINDOW AS THE COIN IS "HID" He then goes around the house and knocks on the front door. I go out, not having any contact with him. I start Locating thinking of anything else except for the my device. Sometimes it is what I'm going to do tomorrow or a movie I saw the night before. I locate the coin, go in the house and give it to the him and start over again. I make 10 to 15 passes and then take a break. My results are all ways the same. I find the coin every time.

When I do the test and I think about finding the coin my results are different. The best was 60% finds but the usual is between 30% and 50% finds. I have done this test more than 20 times.

Please go to this web site so you may understand what we are posting about. http://www.geotech1.com/cgi-bin/pages/common/index.pl?page=lrl&file=reward.dat

One of your fantasy beliefs is that a private test is the same as a public test. You want us to trust you that you are telling the truth about your private test results. Yet you don't trust anyone to administer a public test, not Carl, not Randi, not your local metal detector club, and not even your local high school science department. Instead, you refuse to take a random double-blind test run by any of them.

So, now that we have a test procedure of which you approve, above, who would you trust to administer it?

Nope...this is not a double-blind or even a legitimate test when there is a possibility of cheating

​

Thank You again SWR for showing the membership how the skeptics use the quote system to twist and spin..Art

 

[EE THr]

artie;

So, now that we have a test procedure of which you approve, above, who would you trust to administer it?

 

[aarthrj3811]

So, now that we have a test procedure of which you approve, above, who would you trust to administer it?

Answered may times but first you would have to know what a double blind test is..Carl and Randi do not qualify...What makes a few Treasure Hunters un qualified to watch my test?…Art

A double blind test is a scientific test in which neither test subjects nor administrators know who is in the control group and who is in the experimental group.

 

[fenixdigger]

I still think the SHO-NUFF experiment is the best way to test a LRL. 5 targets, 1 being real, the rest, decoys, no idea of which is

the good one, tried 5 times. How can it get any simpler? I use a modified version of this for training. I don't see why it is so

important to people that can't get out there anyway. I guess it's not if they can't try it to see.


The 10,001 Post Prediction continues,,,,,

 

[aarthrj3811]

I still think the SHO-NUFF experiment is the best way to test a LRL. 5 targets, 1 being real, the rest, decoys, no idea of which is
the good one, tried 5 times. How can it get any simpler? I use a modified version of this for training. I don't see why it is so
important to people that can't get out there anyway. I guess it's not if they can't try it to see.

Most are non treasure hunters to start with. Most have never had the experience of finding a treasure. Most do not know what a hobby is. Definitely they have no idea about the subject matter…Most are an embarrassment to the whole Skeptic cult..Art

 

[aarthrj3811]

~SWR~

....and the whining about using bent coathangers/dowsing continues.
This guy, is absolutely clueless when it comes to designing an electronic test to test the electronics in LRL's that allegedly uses electronics to locate treasure.
Dear Mr. Bent Coathanger user......do you see a pattern here? Electronics, perhaps?
Knock it off with the whining/pouting about your dowsing with bent coathangers and design a test that will actually test what these threads are about. The electronics.

All I see is a couple of skeptics whining about a test preformed by a treasure hunter. He has given you a chance to prove to yourselves the difference between Dowsing and using a LRL. It is your lose of knowledge..Art

 

[EE THr]

So, now that we have a test procedure of which you approve, above, who would you trust to administer it?

Answered may times but first you would have to know what a double blind test is..Carl and Randi do not qualify...What makes a few Treasure Hunters un qualified to watch my test?…Art

A double blind test is a scientific test in which neither test subjects nor administrators know who is in the control group and who is in the experimental group.

That's another lie, artie. You have never said who you would trust to publically administer your test.

And no, there is no need for a discussion of what is a proper test, because you have already committed yourself to the test whicy you, yourself, designed. So that's a moot point now, and forever.

You can take the test at your local metal detector club, or at your local high school science class.

Or, you can name any other unbiased administrator to conduct the test. Who would you approve of?

 

[EE THr]

I still think the SHO-NUFF experiment is the best way to test a LRL. 5 targets, 1 being real, the rest, decoys, no idea of which is

the good one, tried 5 times. How can it get any simpler? I use a modified version of this for training. I don't see why it is so

important to people that can't get out there anyway. I guess it's not if they can't try it to see.


The 10,001 Post Prediction continues,,,,,

That's real good, fenix. So, now that we know of a test that you approve of, and can easily pass, all you need to do is name who you would like to publically administer the test.

You have the same choices as artie.

Well?

 

[EE THr]

I still think the SHO-NUFF experiment is the best way to test a LRL. 5 targets, 1 being real, the rest, decoys, no idea of which is
the good one, tried 5 times. How can it get any simpler? I use a modified version of this for training. I don't see why it is so
important to people that can't get out there anyway. I guess it's not if they can't try it to see.

Most are non treasure hunters to start with. Most have never had the experience of finding a treasure. Most do not know what a hobby is. Definitely they have no idea about the subject matter…Most are an embarrassment to the whole Skeptic cult..Art

Gee, artie, I was being very careful not to insult you. Can't you controll yourself enough to have a decent, intelligent, discussion?

All you need to do, to put the whole thing to rest, is choose who you want to pubically administer your test that you designed.

Well?

 

[EE THr]

~SWR~

....and the whining about using bent coathangers/dowsing continues.
This guy, is absolutely clueless when it comes to designing an electronic test to test the electronics in LRL's that allegedly uses electronics to locate treasure.
Dear Mr. Bent Coathanger user......do you see a pattern here? Electronics, perhaps?
Knock it off with the whining/pouting about your dowsing with bent coathangers and design a test that will actually test what these threads are about. The electronics.

All I see is a couple of skeptics whining about a test preformed by a treasure hunter. He has given you a chance to prove to yourselves the difference between Dowsing and using a LRL. It is your lose of knowledge..Art

It doesn't matter to me if you use coat hangers or LRLs.

Who would you like to administer the test?

 

[fenixdigger]

Yes Art, I see their state of confusion has not gotten any better. Let me try to put this where it can be understood.

This little experiment is designed to be almost no cost. It can be done with a Examiner, a MFD, a Electro-Scope or any of the other

LRLs on the market. It uses a "bait" to develop a "signal" where "most" LRLs simulate a targets signature to develop this "signal".

As all of the dowsers here have said, it is not "dowsing" But since our resident do nothing, know everything x-spurts say different,

it must be so. Sorry it makes them so mad, but seems the truth invokes all kinds of conditioned responses. Hate it for them.

Please feel free to commence the excuses you can't try this, and don't forget the insults, demands or name calling.


SHO-NUFF,,,,, one size tests all LRLs and exposes all fake x-spurts.

 

[EE THr]

Yes Art, I see their state of confusion has not gotten any better. Let me try to put this where it can be understood.

This little experiment is designed to be almost no cost. It can be done with a Examiner, a MFD, a Electro-Scope or any of the other

LRLs on the market. It uses a "bait" to develop a "signal" where "most" LRLs simulate a targets signature to develop this "signal".

As all of the dowsers here have said, it is not "dowsing" But since our resident do nothing, know everything x-spurts say different,

it must be so. Sorry it makes them so mad, but seems the truth invokes all kinds of conditioned responses. Hate it for them.

Please feel free to commence the excuses you can't try this, and don't forget the insults, demands or name calling.


SHO-NUFF,,,,, one size tests all LRLs and exposes all fake x-spurts.

I'll try your test, when you pass Carl's test. Or even your own test, in public, with an unbiased administrator of your choice.

 

[EE THr]

fenix brothers---

I still think the SHO-NUFF experiment is the best way to test a LRL. 5 targets, 1 being real, the rest, decoys, no idea of which is

the good one, tried 5 times. How can it get any simpler? I use a modified version of this for training. I don't see why it is so

important to people that can't get out there anyway. I guess it's not if they can't try it to see.


The 10,001 Post Prediction continues,,,,,

That's real good, fenix. So, now that we know of a test that you approve of, and can easily pass, all you need to do is name who you would like to publically administer the test.

You have the same choices as artie.

Well?

Since you love testing so much, and you always get perfect results, how come you didn't respond to my question, above?

 

[aarthrj3811]

Is someone going to ring a bell, or sound an alarm when this "treasure hunter" shows up?
I mean...all I see here is a couple of guys claiming to be "treasure hunters" traipsing about with pocket calculators and no treasure

Gee SWR..When we post finds it seems that you can not see them..Art
9050 LRL and MFD users will go into the field and enjoy their hobby of Treasure Hunting
Soon to be 10,000 then 15,000 and then even more
And Millions of Dowsers will also be using their Dowsing Rods

 

[fenixdigger]

Please feel free to commence the excuses you can't try this, and don't forget the insults, demands or name calling.


How did we do on this? Seems to have got some action.

 

[aarthrj3811]

~SWR~

Is someone going to ring a bell, or sound an alarm when this "treasure hunter" shows up?
I mean...all I see here is a couple of guys claiming to be "treasure hunters" traipsing about with pocket calculators and no treasure

As we know you do not see very well..We have had 63 Testimonials from owner/operators, photo’s and movies of finds and links to many more finds…I guess if you can not see all this you are the one with the problem ..Art

 

[fenixdigger]

Hey Art, Just for shorts and giggles, how many people have you talked to over the years that have made good recoveries with

LRLs. Don't count Real Deal, his find is legendary and would hurt their heads anyway.

My count is 9. This does not include Dell or any high profile people, just regular hunters.

 

[aarthrj3811]

Hey LT…I would say about a dozen..The biggest was about a year ago. He had a signal that was 40 feet deep..He also received a cave signal..He followed that signal about ¾ mile to an entrance to a natural cave (volcanic vent)..He went in and the ¾ mile trip was mostly on his stomach. He found 40 gold bars and tried to carry 3 out of there. He only got out with one. He said when his knees and elbows healed up he was going back…Have not heard anything else from him..
Last week I was told of a find of a 2 ½ oz gold bar that was recovered in Texas. I told them that there should be 6 more of them in the area (KGC treasure marker)...Art