Digital cameras CAN see buried gold

[franklin]

Alas, this will fall on deaf ears. Because, as you yourself say:



And they will go one step further to show this, by pointing out that SO TOO do METAL detectors "have to have the human touch" to find coins. Eg.: when was the last time you saw a metal detector get up, walk out, and find coins all on it's own ? Huh ? Huh ? Recant and believe Franklin. It's useless.

Well I said to place both on the ground with the dowsing rods balanced. The metal detector will sound off on any metal placed within it's range while the dowsing rods will just sit there unmovable unless by wind or an off balance such as an earthquake should occur.

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

Upgraded Night Vision Monocular Digital Infrared Monocular Telescope for 100% Darkness with 8X Zoom - Grab it through Amazon!

[Tom_in_CA]

Well I said to place both on the ground with the dowsing rods balanced. The metal detector will sound off on any metal placed within it's range while the dowsing rods will just sit there unmovable unless by wind or an off balance such as an earthquake should occur.

I agree with you, that this should make their workableness suspect. But alas, they will have all sorts of reasons why this is not a reasonable test, and why their hands (the hands of a "gifted" person) have to be touching it.

However, strangely, these come-back lines will come RIGHT ON THE HEELS of them JUST having given an explanation of how there is some sort of "attraction" and "signal" between the rod to the object. Hmmmm.....

 

[Ragnor]

David Villanueva, has discovered that digital cameras can be easily adapted to reveal the location of buried treasure from up to several hundred yards away.

Having successfully used a Polaroid camera for photographing auras given off by buried metal for a number of years, David was horrified when Polaroid stopped making the film in 2005 and usable original film quickly became unavailable at any price. In the short-term alternative film is available, which photographs treasure auras at least as well as the original film but Polaroid’s recent decision to cease all instant film production would make photographing treasure auras history…unless digital cameras could be used.

However, digital camera technology is very different to that of film cameras and what worked with Polaroid failed with digital. A complete re-think was needed! The breakthrough came after David learned of treasure hunters successfully using a highly specialised digital camera to locate caches buried along Spanish mule-train trails. So clearly it was possible to photograph auras digitally but could it be done without spending a fortune on high-tech equipment? After three years of intensive research the answer is absolutely yes! Some, possibly many, popular digital cameras are up to the task.

Using readily available photographic accessories that anyone can easily attach, without causing damage, the digital cameras tested were able to record an aura, from a distance, on a single quarter-ounce (seven-gram) gold sovereign coin buried six inches (150mm) underground. In extensive field trials cameras located buried metal over two feet (610mm) deep and could discriminate between different metals. The cameras could be hand-held or tripod-mounted and could capture auras anytime during daylight hours in a wide range of weather conditions. A colleague invited to test the system, with his own camera, clearly demonstrated that no special skill or ability was necessary by obtaining an aura on the first attempt.

The attached digital photograph shows an aura from one ounce of buried gold.

Well, what filters?

 

[elh]

Well, what filters?

Ragnor, looks like Midas got tired of all the bs by certain people and left out. I for one do not blame him. Once in the past I asked a simple question and it suddenly turned to BS big time by the nay-sayers. I only got one decent response.
Sending you a pm.

 

[Tom_in_CA]

... Once in the past I asked a simple question and it suddenly turned to BS big time by the nay-sayers. I only got one decent response....

How do you define "decent response" ? Is it defined as: "Responses that agree with my views" ? If so, then any view that challenges a notion (is.: Proof to the contrary of our view) is therefore "indecent" ? Just want to make sure I understand you correctly.

 

[miboje]

Thank you, Jeff. If the OP did not ask for a debate and if folks want to come along and hijack the thread to start a debate, belittle, argue and create unnecessary drama, then they can start their own thread where they can bicker among themselves all they like. Or perhaps they can be granted their own debate sub-forum where they can stay to themselves, and then likewise newbies and believers alike can be left alone and stay to themselves?
Of course, it should not be an issue, because this is a treasure forum where all aspects of treasure hunting can (should) be openly discussed and inquired about without fear of the trolls. As it is, that is not the case at all.

I would love to discuss this further with you and the other moderators. If I were a moderator, I would have put a stop to this BS by now.

Perhaps we should Do that for all forums

debate can be healthy. but an over abundance in putting things down,
can be construed as attacking members

Please Note * This is not directed at anyone in particular, But after the last couple pages of posts here,
Don't be surprised that I am Considering it.

how is a Person suppose to ask a serious Question for research purposes ,
when it is almost immediately buried under
2 pages of Nay sayer crap ! ?

I'm sure it also makes those who Believe.
and have their Researched Answers ,weary of Responding

& newbies and those of us with open minds wondering if asking anything is a waste of time at tresureNet

 

[Tom_in_CA]

...those of us with open minds ...

Jeff, with all due respect: Isn't that a self-imploding statement, in regard to the current discussion ? It's great that persons have "open minds". But that implies that their mind is "open" to evidence that leads them to another conclusion. Otherwise, their mind wasn't "open" after all. So to the extent the statement works one direction, it must also work the other direction.

.... this is a treasure forum where all aspects of treasure hunting can (should) be openly discussed and inquired about .....

Correct. And isn't that what occurred ? For it to be "openly discussed" implies that someone with counter evidence will likewise "discuss" it. If you "inquire", you are asking the question for other's inputs. Eh ? And this allows that someone might come on with counter evidence. And no, that doesn't make them a "troll". (Unless, of course, you define "troll" as: "Anyone who disagrees with me" )

 

[utmustang05]

Digital camcorder

Don't get hung up on make and model of camera, a range of cameras have produced auras and I'm getting reports almost daily of different cameras producing good results. I wouldn't bother with a cellphone camera but if you have a reasonable digital camera, you can quite easily try it out on a buried metal sample (preferably gold or silver). You will also need an IR pass filter to fit over the lens, you can make a rough and ready filter from the black section at the end of exposed traditional colour film. Fit one sheet of film in front of the lens (approx 720nm) and take a shot of your sample at the hottest part of the day, with the Sun behind you. You will probably need to process the image with your camera's software, using enhance, fix or increasing gamma. If you get a 'false colour' infrared image, the filter isn't strong enough, so add another sheet (850nm) or two (1000nm) of the film material. Once you have found the correct amount of filtering to get an aura, buy the equivalent commercial filter.

Midas thank you for this information. Do you know if a digital camcorder could be used to achieve the same effect?

 

[stickbg]

Why does gold reflect the infrared light well? Here's a scientific explanation. First, the metals reflect light because they are good conductors of electricity. Electrons are widespread among atoms in metals, so they form a "gas" of electrons that react very quickly to the changes. It is difficult to create an electric field in a conductor (metal) because the electrons are free to move to make it and keep it zero. Light is an electromagnetic wave, and when it strikes metal, it causes fluctuations in electrons near the surface. The electrons move to try to make the net electric field in the metal zero so that the combination of the electric field of the moving electrons and the electric field of light increases to zero in the metal from the light that re-emits or rebounds Far in opposite Direction. Maxwell's equations can be used to explain this. Secondly, each element has a unique atomic structure, and in different ways its electrons are "stacked," so everyone responds uniquely how well the light interacts with it and reflects its light and changes with the wavelength of light. Gold simply reflects the strong light very weakly, but the red and infrared light are extremely good.
Source: NASA

 

[Tom_in_CA]

Why does gold reflect the infrared light well? Here's a scientific explanation. First, the metals reflect light because they are good conductors of electricity. Electrons are widespread among atoms in metals, so they form a "gas" of electrons that react very quickly to the changes. It is difficult to create an electric field in a conductor (metal) because the electrons are free to move to make it and keep it zero. Light is an electromagnetic wave, and when it strikes metal, it causes fluctuations in electrons near the surface. The electrons move to try to make the net electric field in the metal zero so that the combination of the electric field of the moving electrons and the electric field of light increases to zero in the metal from the light that re-emits or rebounds Far in opposite Direction. Maxwell's equations can be used to explain this. Secondly, each element has a unique atomic structure, and in different ways its electrons are "stacked," so everyone responds uniquely how well the light interacts with it and reflects its light and changes with the wavelength of light. Gold simply reflects the strong light very weakly, but the red and infrared light are extremely good.
Source: NASA

stickbg: It's all fanciful and fun, when you can quote something from Nasa about things that might help TH'ing. Especially when high-sounding $20 words are sprinkled throughout (the treasures we can find will simply be exponentially bigger, eh ?)

But until something can be shown , then it's all dreamy eyed idle talk. If the "mousetrap" worked, believe me: Someone would be all-over-it and exploiting it.

 

[stickbg]

Have you tried or not?

 

[Tom_in_CA]

Have you tried or not?

No. Have you ? Has anyone tried it and gotten results of having found gold ? And if someone claims to have done so, has their experiences/trials been subjected to test to make sure there wasn't "more plausible explanations" at play ?

 

[stickbg]

No. Have you ? Has anyone tried it and gotten results of having found gold ? And if someone claims to have done so, has their experiences/trials been subjected to test to make sure there wasn't "more plausible explanations" at play ?

And do you think anyone if found gold will share it here? )

 

[Tom_in_CA]

And do you think anyone if found gold will share it here? )

Ahhh, here is the usual "come-back line". If an un-conventional controversial method is proposed, and if it gets questioned @ "show me the proof", your come-back line is to be expected. It's along these lines:

"Sure: It works. Sure, it finds gold. But .... lo & behold, those that are trotting off to the bank with their new-found riches don't want to post any show & tell or proof. Why ? Because they are afraid of thieves and the IRS. But rest assured: We're finding money hand over fist." Right ?

Then oddly, the show & tell sections on MD'ing forums are FILLED with md'rs proudly showing off their trophies. For gloating rights, show & tell, etc... Yes, EVEN SOME VALUABLE stuff. Gee I wonder why they're not afraid of the IRS and thieves ? I've posted gold coins before. The last one was arguably $5 to $10K (key date) value.

But I know the line: the "big-ticket item" stuff the non-conventional method users seeks is stuff like gold bars worth $100k's of Ks, etc.. Right ? Not small-fry stuff like individual coins, or smaller bread & butter caches, right ? Rest assured they're being found left & right. But those that find them are "just shy" . Right ? Gotcha.

 

[miboje]

stickbg: It's all fanciful and fun, when you can quote something from Nasa about things that might help TH'ing. Especially when high-sounding $20 words are sprinkled throughout (the treasures we can find will simply be exponentially bigger, eh ?)

But until something can be shown , then it's all dreamy eyed idle talk. If the "mousetrap" worked, believe me: Someone would be all-over-it and exploiting it.

Is there someone here who owes you proof of something? No, no one owes you proof of anything, and you are arrogant. You just keep babbling on and on and on.... You have your opinion, and we've heard it ad-nauseam. Who cares what your opinion is? Go argue with someone who wants to argue, Tom the Troll.

 

[miboje]

Jeff, with all due respect: Isn't that a self-imploding statement, in regard to the current discussion ? It's great that persons have "open minds". But that implies that their mind is "open" to evidence that leads them to another conclusion. Otherwise, their mind wasn't "open" after all. So to the extent the statement works one direction, it must also work the other direction.





Correct. And isn't that what occurred ? For it to be "openly discussed" implies that someone with counter evidence will likewise "discuss" it. If you "inquire", you are asking the question for other's inputs. Eh ? And this allows that someone might come on with counter evidence. And no, that doesn't make them a "troll". (Unless, of course, you define "troll" as: "Anyone who disagrees with me" )

You are not trying to openly discuss anything with anyone, Tom the Troll. What you are doing, and I am positive you know exactly what you are doing, is being an argumentative drama queen. Why is it that you think others are required to prove something to you when indeed it is not anyone's responsibility to prove anything to you. Go do your own damn research, draw your own conclusion, and allow others to do the same. If you come up with different conclusions than someone else, then so be it. Tom the Troll, or Tom the Drama Queen? Not sure.
MODS - Surely you can see past the facade, and do something about it?

ETA: One other thing...can we see a show of hands from folks who give a crap what Tom the Troll thinks?

 

[RobRieman]

You are not trying to openly discuss anything with anyone, Tom the Troll. What you are doing, and I am positive you know exactly what you are doing, is being an argumentative drama queen. Why is it that you think others are required to prove something to you when indeed it is not anyone's responsibility to prove anything to you. Go do your own damn research, draw your own conclusion, and allow others to do the same. If you come up with different conclusions than someone else, then so be it. Tom the Troll, or Tom the Drama Queen? Not sure.
MODS - Surely you can see past the facade, and do something about it?

ETA: One other thing...can we see a show of hands from folks who give a crap what Tom the Troll thinks?

I will put my hand up. Sure Tom speaks his mind but he lives in the real world. Until someone has some proof, this is all unicorns and rainbows. If it's real then let's talk about it, and make a few billion dollars. I like to dream too, but then reality sets in and then I wake up and go to work. If you are that certain that it is in fact real, Tom's comments would not bother you the slightest. You would sit back and laugh and count your mountain of money again. Everyone wants it to be true but damn, how long can you wish upon a star?

 

[miboje]

You can wish as long as you like. No one desrves to be badgered for their choice to believe as they wish. Where does this idea come from that anyone here has to provide proof? Is this a court of law? Show me where in T'net's user agreement that this is a requirement.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N900A using Tapatalk

 

[RobRieman]

You can wish as long as you like. No one desrves to be badgered for their choice to believe as they wish. Where does this idea come from that anyone here has to provide proof? Is this a court of law? Show me where in T'net's user agreement that this is a requirement.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N900A using Tapatalk

What's your point? Do you think it's real or not? What are you upset about?

 

[DizzyDigger]

"Digital cameras CAN see buried gold"

No, they can't.