Im going to build an LRL (seriously)

Status
Not open for further replies.
Re: I'm going to build an LRL (seriously)

fenixdigger said:
Toto; I saying that an operating lrl will pick up any valid signal. Without knowing what is there first, it's not a test, but a hunt. If you run your test in an unscanned area you prove nothing. Of course if that is what you want,,,
Click to expand...

Well call it a hunt then. If it can't hunt, no point in bringing it to El Paso.

--Toto
 

Re: I'm going to build an LRL (seriously)

Duh, I don't know what you are talking about so I'll say something cool about the calculator. NEVER mentioned the Examiner.
It's twue, It's twue.
 

Re: I'm going to build an LRL (seriously)

PuffDaddy said:
woof! said:
PuffDaddy, if you're still interested in locating a gold coin in 15 minutes on a less than 1 acre site, I suppose we could discuss that. I'm not interested in a discussion of the technology you've got, although if it is not something that can be used with a reasonable degree of safety, I wouldn't want it to be used to locate my gold coin, let it find someone else's.

--Toto
Click to expand...

Toto,

When I get into your area this Fall,I shall be more than happy,to give you a demonstration of my LRL,with no risk to you of losing your test-target;simply because you have the correct attitude. You do not already "know" that it's going to fail. Those who do "know" that it is going to fail,are in flagrant violation,of The Scientific Method--and,are inherently dishonest.
Like your-self,Carl M,has allowed for the possibility,that it may one day be successful--But James R does not--and it is that class that I detest. And I would donate his prize-gold to the Wounded Warrior Project,where it could be properly sanctified.

David
Click to expand...

Well, PuffDaddy, I'll be surprised if your LRL can do it, but at least you seem to have some confidence that it can do it, which counts for something. The other guys have already said theirs can't do it, so no need for me to invite them.

I hope you do understand that I'm not interested in a "demo" of the Fenix or Chuckie kind, nothing new about those outdoor parlour games. What I'd like to see is a real LRL locate without flimflammery or shenannigans.

--Toto
 

Re: I'm going to build an LRL (seriously)

The H3Tec apparatus purported operating principle is fraudulent. The "smoking gun" is the patent, which documents the fraud as a matter of public record.

Don't know what you mean by 47 caches to choose from. I've got a 1-ounce gold coin which I can bury someplace.

--Toto
 

Re: I'm going to build an LRL (seriously)

No, SWR , you are saying, just like always. I'll go slow,,, A working Lrl will lock on any existing signals. That is why we

visit an area several times to verify targets. No mention of the Examiner except on your end.
 

Re: I'm going to build an LRL (seriously)

I challenge you to validate your claim that there are no working LRLs. Please furnish the data on ALL Lrls being used past or present as to not finding any targets.
 

Re: I'm going to build an LRL (seriously)

All Elements have their own specific frequency, Scientists, and Einstein know that. In order to know they have a specific frequency, there has to be a device that reads that frequency, and if you can READ that frequency, it's obviously possible to duplicate the same specific frequency and TRANSMIT it.
Isn't that the basis for an LRL, to generate a specific frequency. Are you skeptics saying that that isn't possible ?, or do you agree on that part, and your arguing that a frequency can't be made, and sent a long distance, like radio ? We all know that you don't believe dowsers can follow, or read the frequencies, but do you deny the existence of a self generated frequency..?
I don't know what Einstein used to read those specific Element frequencies, but i doubt it was dowsing rods, so I'm sure you can make an LRL that doesn't use dowsing rods..
 

Re: I'm going to build an LRL (seriously)

dowser said:
All Elements have their own specific frequency, Scientists, and Einstein know that. In order to know they have a specific frequency, there has to be a device that reads that frequency, and if you can READ that frequency, it's obviously possible to duplicate the same specific frequency and TRANSMIT it.
Isn't that the basis for an LRL, to generate a specific frequency. Are you skeptics saying that that isn't possible ?, or do you agree on that part, and your arguing that a frequency can't be made, and sent a long distance, like radio ? We all know that you don't believe dowsers can follow, or read the frequencies, but do you deny the existence of a self generated frequency..?
I don't know what Einstein used to read those specific Element frequencies, but i doubt it was dowsing rods, so I'm sure you can make an LRL that doesn't use dowsing rods..
Click to expand...

"All elements have their own specific frequency." Gee, where've we read that before? Not in the CRC handbook, not in a college physics textbook, not in any scientific or engineering applied science writing at all. The literary genre where we keep reading that is LRL pseudoscience.

Now here's the funny part. It's LRL fans who keep saying this, so, what are the frequencies? They all disagree, except in those rare instances where one LRL'er just copies someone else's list!

I hope Dowser sticks with dowsing. Getting involved with LRL's will likely turn him into a gibbering gullibilly and ruin whatever dowsing ability he might have.

--Toto
 

Re: I'm going to build an LRL (seriously)

~SWR~
If I were to strap on your machine, I would be dowsing. I have no problem reading the advertisement
Click to expand...
So tell us where the advertisement for PuffDaddy’s device can be found?..Got you again ..Art
 

Re: I'm going to build an LRL (seriously)

The truth is all elements,not just metals, have a specific frequency that makes up their mass. Even if I told you the frequency where gold responds to a meter,it wouldn't help you, because there is more to it than that. I learned mostly from a professor at a large university how these things work. He taught science and mathmatics and held
several degrees himself. Through a mutual aquaintance he and I talked much about theory,then practice. He is retired now,so I have not talked to him in 5 years. He doesn't want to be bothered now, and I respect his wishes,although, if I were to need an answer to a question,which I don't,I could contact him privately. He taught me more than any other person has in my life. I also learned from a native american the ways of dowsing,which is totally different from LRL use. Puff daddy is right on most accounts,although I have used some of the units he dismissed as having no operating theory, and have found that they can indeed find some treasure. Some have problems with ghost signals,but can be reprogrammed(not an accurate discription),to find metals with some discrimination properties.There are 3 different principles that LRL's use,and they are not what people think they are. Most don't know how they work,but can experiment with them and learn how they work,with enough time and practice. Some take longer than others to understand how they work,just like with handheld metal detectors,understanding their subtleties is the path to increase accuracy. Every unit I have used,had their own little personality,so to speak,and had to be recognized for what they did. I used to be a skeptic,just like most of you,until one day I accompanied a woman to her farm to find a lost jar of coins her grandfather had buried. I couldn't locate them,so her neighbor happened by,an man in his 80's,and asked what she was doing.After she told him,he asked her if she had a silver dollar,after retrieving it ,he used that silver dollar to find the cache of silver dollars her grandfather had buried.I was amazed and inquired how he did it.He said that lightning had struck him in his younger years and changed his electrical system and by accident he discovered he now had a gift that he hadn't before possessed.After burying that silver dollar under a haystack,while he was behind the barn,he walked straight up to the haystack and retrieved that silver dollar.He did it 10 times straight,using different locations. rockhound
 

Re: I'm going to build an LRL (seriously)

Dowsing has been around for thousands of years. I regard the modernist "magnetic, electric" explanations being bandied about as to how it actually works as being inferior to the explanations from hundreds of years ago, and those explanations weren't so good either. The reason I regard the modernist "magnetic, electric" explanations as inferior is because magnetic and electric fields are things that can be measured with lab equipment and scientific measurement does not support the theories. Many of the theories can be dismissed without need for measurement, inasmuch as the theory itself is easily shown to be untenable in light of observation.

That people who are holding L-rods can get different results depending on things that influence their expectations, that's ordinary common sense. And it's what makes it inevitable that when hobbyists go screwing around with MFD's and such, they'll get results that they interpret as physical response to the frequency setting even though (for instance with the RangerTell) the supposed frequency setting isn't even a frequency setting.

One finds similar mental processes going on with compulsive gamblers who despite the fact they constantly get skunked, believe they've got the game figured out.

--Toto
 

Re: I'm going to build an LRL (seriously)

A man who lived a mile from me found out that I had a metal detector. He contacted me and asked if I would find his wifes ring she had lost. I went to see him and the property and had a chat with him. After talking to him I was not convinced of his sincerity,since all I wanted was to search his yard for finding the ring. His yard was an acre with an older home and I expected that silver could be there. My usual fee was waved in hopes of finding some silver and if I didn't find the ring first,I would not hunt his property.He seemed in agreement but still unsure. I waited 2 weeks before contacting him again.This time he wanted no contact whatsoever. A week later my friend and I were hunting a local park when I mentioned something about it. He said,"I know that man and he wanted me to find it for free.Later on I drove by his house and saw him using an LRL in the yard." We learned later that he decided to find the ring himself,bought an LRL,found the ring,then returned it before the refund ran out,less the 15% restocking fee. Why he wouldn't let either of us detect his yard was never known.It would have been cheaper to hire us than pay a 15% restocking fee. Some people are just strange,I guess. He wasn't interested in treasure hunting,so he returned the unit.Makes me wonder what he has buried in his yard he wouldn't want anyone to find. We both were using handheld detectors at the time. What he bought was an Electroscope,but I am not sure which model. The one I use was built by my professor friend,with help from my Electrical engineer friend who passed away In December. Now I am on my own designing and building my own with stronger and farther distance,but I am an inventor,so I should have no problem redesigning one.I do know how 3 different types work,and your are right,frequency alone will not work. rockhound
 

Re: I'm going to build an LRL (seriously)

I have no doubt that real dowsing happens. By this I mean locating stuff that theoretically you shouldn't have been able to locate, stuff that really existed, not just assuming it must be there because that's where the doddlebugging led you. The reason I know is because I've done it. Never used it for treasure hunting, but a few years ago I did it as a bit of a hobby trying to understand how it worked. One big advantage I had was that I had the scientific knowledge necessary to eliminate the popular theories of how it works. Another big advantage I had was that I was perfectly willing to accept that dowsing fails double-blind testing with prize money at stake. In other words, I agree with A.R. about the results of dowsing under scientifically controlled conditions, I merely disagree with him about how to apply that fact to a better understanding of what the dowsing phenomenon is. And I'm quite comfortable with the fact that it's the hands that control where the rods point, even though it may feel as though the rods are moving of their own accord. Which means I don't have to go down the pseudoscientific "the body antenna" road to explain why the rods work only if you're holding them.

LRL's are constructed physically like dowsing rods, because if you can't dowse with 'em, you got nothing. I suppose that someone could get their hands on an Electroscope and dowse with it. I happen to know that the electronics are fraudulent (Thomas obviously agrees, read the advertisement), so put an Electroscope in my hands and I probably couldn't get past laughing at the damn thing.

Taking that scenario further, there are people out there who don't know crap about any of this stuff, but an ordinary dowsing rod would not look to them like something that could do anything, so it wouldn't work for them. If an Electroscope looks to them like something that stands a chance of "doing something" because of the digital readout and telescoping "antennas", then rather than looking at it and laughing at it like me, they might use the thing and possibly get a good dowse out of it. Not because of the bogus electronics, but because of what they believe about the thing. As I have occasionally explained, if you want to dowse while denying you're dowsing, you can pay the price of denial and go for it. However much denial you need, there's something on the market at that price point.

--Toto
 

Re: I'm going to build an LRL (seriously)

A few months ago I posted designs for LRL's, one of which had no moving parts at all, and another in which the swivel pointers were motor driven. The LRL fans failed to thank me (understatement!) for these advancements in the state of the LRL art, but I wouldn't be surprised to see either or both commercialized at which point the LRL fans will be fawning over them.

Of course neither works if you don't hold the gizmo in your hands. Nor are any new principles of detection involved-- only "improvements" in the physical user interface.

One potential problem with commercialization: if either is commercialized, someone may discover my invention disclosures here on the TNet LRL forum and debunk the whole thing. A plugged-in world with access to good search engines........ it changes the landscape for fraudsters. Thanks, Mark Austin!

--Toto
 

Re: I'm going to build an LRL (seriously)

PuffDaddy said:
woof! said:
PuffDaddy, if you're still interested in locating a gold coin in 15 minutes on a less than 1 acre site, I suppose we could discuss that. I'm not interested in a discussion of the technology you've got, although if it is not something that can be used with a reasonable degree of safety, I wouldn't want it to be used to locate my gold coin, let it find someone else's.

--Toto
Click to expand...

Toto,

When I get into your area this Fall,I shall be more than happy,to give you a demonstration of my LRL,with no risk to you of losing your test-target;simply because you have the correct attitude. You do not already "know" that it's going to fail. Those who do "know" that it is going to fail,are in flagrant violation,of The Scientific Method--and,are inherently dishonest.
Like your-self,Carl M,has allowed for the possibility,that it may one day be successful--But James R does not--and it is that class that I detest. And I would donate his prize-gold to the Wounded Warrior Project,where it could be properly sanctified.

David
Click to expand...

PuffDaddy, we're almost on opposite sides of a fence on this thing, but at least you're willing to take seriously people's skepticism and also to take seriously the possibility of a "demo" (I hate that word, it sounds so Chuckie, but can't think of a better one at the moment) in which the apparat is expected to do what a "long range locator" should reasonably be expected to do. You say you're not in the Chuckie and Fenix league and it's obvious that whether or not your gizmo works, at least you have confidence that it does, and the other guys are full of alabis why their stuff can't do something that a basic LRL ought to be able to do to warrant being taken seriously. My level of confidence in whatever you've got certainly doesn't match yours at this point, but my confidence in what the other guys have equals theirs, which is zero, you've already seen their posts. They ain't got squat.

I suppose you've been lurking here long enough to notice that of the most active forum denizens on both sides of the aisle, it's all about prove this! prove that! You get very little of that out of me.

My proposal to lose an ounce of gold to an LRL that works, is that. The conditions emphasize functionality of the LRL, both in ways I have already mentioned and in ways that I won't disclose but will become evident during the event itself. I'm not trying to prove that your gizmo doesn't work (that would be a waste of my time and yours) nor am I interested in proving that it does "work". As I presently envision it, it won't even be double-blinded: I'll know where the target is in advance, and one of the problems I face is how to prevent information leakage. If you locate the coin under the conditions I've proposed, it proves that you located the coin under the conditions I proposed. It may have been sheer luck or there may have been information leakage or even outright but undetected fraud, I won't know and either you won't know or won't tell, and for everyone else it all comes out the same. If your attempt to locate the coin under the conditions I proposed fails, it does not prove that your gizmo doesn't work, only that in that particular circumstance it didn't do the job, possibly for reasons known to nobody. I either lose the coin or I don't, and although the results may point in one direction or another, they "prove" very little. I'm willing to lose an ounce of gold to an LRL that seems to work under moderately well controlled conditions, something that to my knowledge has never happened before in history. To my knowledge nobody's ever lost an ounce of gold to an LRL at all, other than while paying the invoice.

I do insist that you have some skin in the game, and the reason is simple: not having any skin in the game is too great a temptation to waste both our times. If we go through with this and you don't find the coin according to the protocol which is quite reasonable, my time and effort in setting the whole thing up is a waste other than just another hard learning experience. I don't expect you to have the whole ounce of gold as your skin in the game, since your gizmo will be facing search conditions which although they seem reasonable, may have unexpected difficulties. But if you're gonna be generous and return the coin to me if you find it, heck, if Art lived in El Paso even he could waste my time with that. If you haven't got skin in the game, you don't believe that your gizmo can do the job, and I don't want to bother with a gizmo the user of which doesn't believe can do this simple job.

To put it another way, I am not interested in risking an ounce of gold to embarrass an LRL, that's a waste of time, LRL's have already been embarrassed themselves to death as you yourself have pointed out. By going to the trouble of risking the coin under reasonably carefully controlled conditions, I want to see the damn coin located successfully.

--Toto
 

Re: I'm going to build an LRL (seriously)

Hi David,

I live in Oregon, a very manageable distance from Tacoma. You are welcomed to take a shot at my $25,000 if you think you have an LRL that Really Works. However, I require the test to use good scientific protocol, and I won't deviate from that. After all, it's my $25,000. The Good News according to Fenix is that you will be able to thoroughly pre-scan the test site and mark all anomalies, which we can then avoid in the target placement. If you have an LRL that can indicate the location of a 10-ounce gold bar lying on the ground 10 feet away, then this will be the easiest $25k you will ever earn. If your LRL cain't do that, then I expect it to be rather useless as a gold locator, and neither of us will be interested in the test.

- Carl
 

Re: I'm going to build an LRL (seriously)

~woow~
The LRL fans failed to thank me (understatement!) for these advancements in the state of the LRL art,
Click to expand...
Why should we thank you for doing that..Your designs just added unnecessary parts into the device..Our swivel handles work just find by allowing the connection between the object and the device to do the turning.

Of course neither works if you don't hold the gizmo in your hands. Nor are any new principles of detection involved-- only "improvements" in the physical user interface.
Click to expand...
So. What were the improvements to the user interface?..

I don’t think that your designs will be stolen in the near future..Art
 

Status
Not open for further replies.

Securities & Exchange Comission employs "fake locators" to teach lesson

⬅️ Previous Thread

Fake Explosives and Drugs Detectors

Next Thread ➡️

Top Member Reactions

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 4 (members: 0, guests: 4)

Latest Discussions

Back
Top