Dowsing vs LRL’s

~SWR~
Quote from: Saturna on Today at 08:06:44 AM

Quote
I always carry a cheat sheet with me to be sure that I always have the information


LOL, your life IS a cheat sheet.

Quote from: aarthrj3811 on Today at 07:39:29 AM

Looks like the only thing that you can understand is stuff that is fake or made up information
Any sentence that ends in a period is spun and twisted. Any sentence that ends with a question mark is dodged and duck..Why..because they have no answers..Art

"The door to Knowledge & Understanding, is never open to a closed, or prejudiced mind”
 

"The door to knowledge and understanding is never unlocked by insults."
Who do you think you are quoting ?
"The door to Knowledge & Understanding, is never open to a closed, or prejudiced mind”
 

The Big Four Proofs of LRLs Fraud.
fal•la•cy
   ˈfæl ə siShow Spelled[fal-uh-see] Show IPA
–noun, plural -cies.
1.
a deceptive, misleading, or false notion, belief, etc.: That the world is flat was at one time a popular fallacy.
2.
a misleading or unsound argument.
3.
deceptive, misleading, or false nature; erroneousness.
4.
Logic . any of various types of erroneous reasoning that render arguments logically unsound.
5.
Obsolete . deception.
You are correct..The 1852 definition of
Dowsing is Obsolete making it a deception’

This article is about the logical fallacy. For other uses, see Straw man (disambiguation).
"Man of straw" redirects here. For the novel by Heinrich Mann, see Der Untertan.
A straw man is a component of an argument and is an informal fallacy based on misrepresentation of an opponent's position.[1] To "attack a straw man" is to create the illusion of having refuted a proposition by substituting it with a superficially similar yet unequivalent proposition (the "straw man"), and refuting it, without ever having actually refuted the original position.[1][2]
Yes your illiusions are very real but is not our problem but yours
 

artie---

No. You see, a rebuttal is supposed to reference specifically what it is that your are contesting.

Your version, above, is the equivalent of just sticking your tongue out at someone, when you don't have a real answer.



So, in order to please you, I will reply in a way that is apparently the only thing you can understand.




:tongue3: :tongue3: :tongue3: :tongue3: :tongue3:







Feel better now? So go have your pablum, and take a nice nap. You'll feel better afterwards.


:hello:








Big Four Proofs of LRLs Fraud
 

Still no answers….A + As a fair Dowser and also a LRL user I will tell you a few facts..I can locate a few flakes of Gold with a set of Dowsing Rods for a distance of @ 70 paces. A Gold Nugget which weights a little less than a ¼ oz for a little less than a ¼ mile. With all 4 of the MFD’s and LRL’s that I own I can find those same targets at a distance of 2 and 3 miles.

Could these experts please explain how this can occur if the electronics have nothing to do with the process ?..Art
OK..here’s some more…When using Baited Dowsing Rods and I find a signal line the only information I have is that it is a Gold signal. That is the same information that I get from my rod type LRL’s. The only other information that I can get is the depth of the target. But I have to follow the signal until I reach the target to get the depth. Yes there are a few ways to size the signal if you know how.
When using my Ranger Tell on the same signal I can determine the depth of the object, the distance to the object, the estimated weight of the object and if it is a coin, bar or a ring….All this from the spot where I found the signal.
So how can I do this if the stuff in the box does not do these tasks for me ?...Art
 

artie---

Don't try to put words into my mouth.

I'm saying that real proof would change my mind, but nobody has ever shown any real proof.

Like I told you before, a video of actually locating an unknown target, in undisturbed ground, would be a good start. Not tipping the rod(s) when you walk up to a target on the surface, which you already know is there.

And putting a rock, or piece of paper, or plastic egg, obviously doesn't count. That's just silly, to any third party observer. Surely you must realize that simple point!

:coffee2:



Big Four Proofs of LRLs Fraud
 

Nope, all you'll get are staged videos and massive defensiveness.


If you want actual video of treasure being found, you'll have to settle for the users of sidescan sonar, ROV's, gold pans and such, and especially metal detectors.
 

~EE THr~
in undisturbed ground, would be a good start.

Did you see any disturbed ground in my movie ? All I can see is a set of quad tracks that were made when the ground was much wetter..Why should I make another movie for you guys to eyeball ?
 

Attachments

  • Untitled.jpg
    Untitled.jpg
    61.6 KB · Views: 486
archibald---

It was under the rock, man.

Come ooooooooooooon!



I was born at night, but it wasn't last night.



Anybody and everybody, would move the rocks before they started digging.
 

~EE THr~
archibald---
It was under the rock, man.
Come ooooooooooooon!
I was born at night, but it wasn't last night.
Anybody and everybody, would move the rocks before they started digging.
Next Excuse please
 

Attachments

  • 11123.jpg
    11123.jpg
    30.2 KB · Views: 459
  • 1114.jpg
    1114.jpg
    34.7 KB · Views: 462
  • 11117.jpg
    11117.jpg
    6.9 KB · Views: 495
Can any one tell me what is wrong with using this nugget for testing ? Will it respond to the signals from a LRL or MFD or Dowsing any different in testing than it did when I first found it ? Can anyone tell me why after many tests I have to soak the nugget and my Easter Egg halves in vinegar and salt ?..Art
 

Attachments

  • 100_0567[1].jpg
    100_0567[1].jpg
    46.9 KB · Views: 501

Top Member Reactions

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top