Known Facts About LRLs Only---No Insults or Tall Tales

[EE THr]

Known Facts About LRLs Only---No Insults or Tall Tales


The Big Four Proofs of LRLs Fraud

1. There is no explanation, using standard electronics, for the devices ever working.
2. The movement of the swivel pointer or rods is not powered by the devices.
3. Makers and owners of these devices refuse to take a properly administered random double blind test.
4. LRL promoters refuse to approve of a credentialed professional organization at which to have their devices or schematics evaluated.

The proponent's only rebuttal is that they claim to find what they are looking for. This, however is not being contested by items #1-4. The statement of this list is that the electronics add-ons, to what is merely a dowsing device, are not necessary, and are only there to charge high prices. This makes their reports of allegedly finding stuff a total Straw Man type of fallacy, and thus void as rebuttals to this list. Besides, just saying you found something, or publishing non-verifiable "testimonials," or easily alterable photos, or "set up" videos, is obviously not proof. A random double-blind test, fully documented by an unbiased observer, would be real proof.




More evidence will be added from time-to-time. Feel free to post any known and provable facts.

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

Family Maps of Hinds County, Mississippi, Deluxe Edition - Grab it through Amazon!

[EE THr]

This is an interesting Government document, from the National Criminal Justice Reference Service Website, at http://www.ncjrs.gov/, which is mostly about explosives detection equipment, but also mentions LRL Fraud, in the excerpt below, as indicated by the green font color---


"From time to time, there are new devices that enter the market. Most companies make reasonable claims, and their products are based on solid scientific principles. Claims for some other devices may seem unreasonable or may not appear to be based on solid scientific principles. An old truism that continues to offer good advise is “If it sounds too good to be true, it probably is not true.” If there are any questions as to the validity of a device, caution should be used and thorough research must be performed before a purchase is made. Money can be wasted and even lives may be risked. Although there may be other types of nonoperational devices around, dowsing devices for explosives detection have emerged during the past couple of years. There is a rather large community of people around the world that believes in dowsing: the ancient practice of using forked sticks, swinging rods, and pendulums to look for underground water and other materials. These people believe that many types of materials can be located using a variety of dowsing methods. Dowsers claim that the dowsing device will respond to any buried anomalies, and years of practice are needed to use the device with discrimination (the ability to cause the device to respond to only those materials being sought). Modern dowsers have been developing various new methods to add discrimination to their devices. These new methods include molecular frequency discrimination (MFD) and harmonic induction discrimination (HID). MFD has taken the form of everything from placing a xerox copy of a Polaroid photograph of the desired material into the handle of the device, to using dowsing rods in conjunction with frequency generation electronics (function generators). None of these attempts to create devices that can detect specific materials such as explosives (or any materials for that matter) have been proven successful in controlled double-blind scientific tests. In fact, all testing of these inventions has shown these devices to perform no better than random chance.

"Mostly these devices are used to locate water and now are used extensively by treasure hunters looking for gold and silver. In recent years some makers of these dowsing devices have attempted to cross over from treasure hunting to the areas of contraband detection, search and rescue, and law enforcement. The Quadro Tracker is one notable example of this cross-over attempt. This device was advertised as being a serious technology with a realistic sounding description of how it worked (close examination showed serious errors in the scientific sounding description). Fortunately, the National Institute of Justice investigated this company and stopped the sale of this device for these purposes, but not before many law enforcement agencies and school districts wasted public funds on the purchase of these devices.

"Things to look for when dealing with “new technologies that may well be a dowsing device are words like molecular frequency discrimination, harmonic induction discrimination, and claims of detecting small objects at large distances. Many of these devices require no power to operate (most real technology requires power). Suspect any device that uses a swinging rod that is held nearly level, pivots freely and “indicates” the material being sought by pointing at it. Any device that uses a pendulum that swings in different shaped paths to indicate its response should also arouse suspicion. Advertisements that feature several testimonials by “satisfied users,” and statements about pending tests by scientific and regulatory agencies (but have just not happened yet) may be indications that the device has not been proven to work. Statements that the device must be held by a human to operate usually indicate dowsing devices. Statements that the device requires extensive training by the factory, the device is difficult to use, and not everyone can use the device, are often made to allow the manufacturer a way of blaming the operator for the device’s failure to work. Another often used diversion is that scientists and engineers cannot understand the operation of the device or the device operates on principles that have been lost or forgotten by the scientific community.

"In general, any legitimate manufacturer of contraband detection equipment will eagerly seek evaluation of their device’s performance by scientific and engineering laboratories. Any doubt that a device is legitimate can quickly be dispelled by making a call to any of the known agencies whose business it is to know about security-related technology."

ref: http://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/178913-2.pdf
Credit: Originally found and posted by SWR.

 

[EE THr]

And then there is this excerpt from Wikipedia---

Long Range Locator

Media exposure and controversy

Author Tom Clancy came under fire for including the DKL Lifeguard, a long range locator purported to be useful for detecting people, in critical passages of his novel Rainbow Six. A study by Sandia National Laboratories proved the Lifeguard to be completely useless, and other designs by the Lifeguard's creator Thomas Afilani have been shown to contain numerous dummy components with no clear function.

Accusing the manufacturers of fraud, Great Britain banned export of the GT 200 (used by the government of Thailand) and also the ADE 651 (used by the government of Iraq) in January 2010.

 

[EE THr]

An Example of an LRL's So-called "electronics"


The supposed key feature of the free-swinging LRLs is the alledged "electronics" which is supposed to somehow enhance the dowsing ability of the user.

Here is an example of an LRL dowsing rod, and it's "electronic" enhancements.

They actually stick a scientific calculator on top of the plastic box which contains an un-powered do-nothing conglomeration of random electronic parts, in hopes of convincing anyone who opens it up, that it is actually somehow "electronic."

The user is supposed to do specific math calculations on the calculator, and that is supposed to change the "output frequency" to resonate with different materials, including gold and silver. However, calculators to not "change frequency," at all, and certainly not by performing calculations on them, and there are no "output," emissions, but only very low level, common incidental circuit noise.

This is a picture of an older model of the RangerTell LRL, with an inset of a newer model---



This is a schematic of the plastic box portion of an older model. As can be seen, there is no battery to power it, and no transistor or anything to amplify anything up to what could be considered even a very low transmitting power, and most assuredly nowhere near enough power to travel "Long Distance." And there is no receiver section, either. Also, there is no drive mechanism to turn the pointing device, and thus the free-swinging pointer LRL category---



This is the inside of the older model---



This is a photo of the inside of a newer model. Still no battery, and no transmitting amplifier, or receiver section. And the pointer is still free-swinging, with no drive mechanism. Thus it just flops around, depending on which way the "user's" hand is tilted. An unpowered crystal was added, I guess to try and justify it being a "new" model---



These images were borrowed from Carl's Geotech Website, and SWR's posts.

 

[EE THr]

The H3 Treasure Tracker


Here is another example of a free-swinging pointer LRL.

The H3 Treasure Tracker comes in a hard case, and includes an auxiliary dowsing rod, as seen in the upper left of the photo. The handle, on the lower right, attaches to the bottom of the main unit. The pointer rod is seen through the transparent window. Cost is said to be from $5,000.00 to $15,000.00, apparently depending on configuration extras.





This is what it looks like fully assembled, including the extra dowsing rod.





This shows the pointer rod without the cover. It looks suspiciously like an ordinary brass dowsing rod.





But what is underneath the plastic? Is there an electromechanical or magnetic drive mechanism of some kind? This photo shows a single wire going to the plastic cylinder which holds the pivot section of the pointer rod.





The photo below shows that the single wire goes to what looks like a contact pad, in the end plate of the pivot cylinder.





However, the pivot section of the pointer rod is held in place by a pair of ball bearings, with neither an electromechanical nor electromagnetic drive system. The pointer rod is totally free-swinging, and just flops around, depending on how the "operator" tilts his hand, and regardless of whether the unit is turned on or off!





These photos are borrowed from SWR's posts, and Carl's Geotech Website, where it is reported that the unit is completely nonfunctional, and no better than a plain dowsing rod or bent coathanger. But the price is from 5,000 to 15,000 times higher!

The $25,000.00 reward for passing a random double-blind test, with a score of only 70% success or better, was offered to the manufacturer, but he declined to take the test. It's obvious why he refused!

The full report can be read here.

 

[EE THr]

Here are some more known facts about LRLs, to add to the list---



To wit---

916 F.Supp. 613 (1996)
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff,
v.
QUADRO CORPORATION, Wade L. Quattlebaum, Raymond Fisk, Malcom S. Roe, Quadro Corporation of Texas, William J. Long, et al., Defendants.
No. 1:96CV38.
United States District Court, E.D. Texas, Beaumont Division.

February 10, 1996.

...

*618 The court finds that the government has demonstrated, by a preponderance of the evidence, that defendants engaged in a scheme to defraud and that defendants used the U.S. mail and interstate wires to perpetrate the fraud. This finding is supported by the testimony of the witnesses, exhibits, and affidavits. The evidence shows by a preponderance that:

(1) Defendants made representations regarding the structure and ability of the Quadro Tracker.
(2) Defendants representations were false. The government presented evidence regarding the structure of the Quadro Tracker which shows that the "chip" inside the device consists of a piece of copy paper with a photocopied image of the object which the Quadro Tracker will purportedly find. The governments' experts testified that the device could not locate objects as represented by defendants under any known principles of modern science. The court finds the testimony of defendants' experts credible and compelling.
(3) The manner in which the Quadro Tracker was manufactured by defendants establishes that the defendants knew or should have known that there was no reasonable scientific basis for the Quadro Tracker to operate as advertised in their marketing brochures, demonstrations or training sessions. Therefore, the defendants knew or should have known that their representation were false.
Even if defendants subjectively believed in the ability of the Quadro Tracker, defendants made numerous representations to government agencies and the general public with reckless disregard to the truth or falsity of the representations.
(3) Defendants enticed law enforcement, correctional and educational authorities to purchase the Quadro Tracker through the use of the U.S. mails and over interstate wires via telephone calls and faxes.
(4) The extent of defendant's advertising and distributorship network indicates that sale of the Quadro Tracker is an ongoing scheme which would continue to defraud government agencies and consumers unless an injunction is granted.

 

[EE THr]

Does anyone notice a resemblance between these two Long Range Locators?


DKL LifeGuard---





Electroscope Gravitator---






It turns out that they are both designed by the same man, Thomas Afilani. The DKL LifeGuard, is listed in this report by Sandia National Laboratories, which was sponsored by the National Institute of Justice, as follows---

"21. DKL and LifeGuard inventor Thomas Afilani have claimed that the operator, the antenna,
and the body of the device along with the dielectric material combine to form a dielectric
array."

The above claim, by the way, corresponds exactly with the warning the National Criminal Justice Reference Service, in their report on fraud in detection devices, as excerpted in "Known Facts About LRLs...," as follows---

"Things to look for when dealing with “new technologies" that may well be a dowsing device are words like molecular frequency discrimination, harmonic induction discrimination, and claims of detecting small objects at large distances. Many of these devices require no power to operate (most real technology requires power). Suspect any device that uses a swinging rod that is held nearly level, pivots freely and “indicates” the material being sought by pointing at it. Any device that uses a pendulum that swings in different shaped paths to indicate its response should also arouse suspicion. Advertisements that feature several testimonials by “satisfied users,” and statements about pending tests by scientific and regulatory agencies (but have just not happened yet) may be indications that the device has not been proven to work. Statements that the device must be held by a human to operate usually indicate dowsing devices. Statements that the device requires extensive training by the factory, the device is difficult to use, and not everyone can use the device, are often made to allow the manufacturer a way of blaming the operator for the device’s failure to work. Another often used diversion is that scientists and engineers cannot understand the operation of the device or the device operates on principles that have been lost or forgotten by the scientific community."



The Electroscope is also made by Alifani, as shown on their Website.



This naturally raises the question of why an allegedly successful company would produce, and attempt to sell, a totally bogus piece of equipment, and risk their reputation?

 

[EE THr]

Of all the Electroscopes shown on their Site, this one looks the best, because it's like a prop from a Star Wars movie. It's got that "ray gun" thing going on---

 

[EE THr]

Here is another Electroscope that looks cool.

This one incorporates a "Guidance System."






It looks like it turned out to be to heavy for him to use his special "wrist flick," which he and others can be seen using to get the devices to point where they are supposed to, in his videos.

 

[EE THr]

Here's an interesting shot...a Gravitator without the side handles---





This one can be seen in action, in this video.

 

[EE THr]

Is there more than a just a resemblance between the LifeGuard and the Gravitator?





This report by Sandia National Laboratories, has the following to say about the LifeGuard---

"The passive detection module is an open circuit, and the most critical component of the passive detection module is composed of human hair glued between two small pieces of polystyrene. The conclusion of the analysis is that the design of the DKL Model 3 passive detection module and all other models designed using the same basic concept are not based upon the principle of dielectrophoresis nor on any other accepted scientific principles as understood by the scientific and engineering community. In the absence of DEP forces causing the antenna assembly motion, the only available sources for causing the motion are (1) operator motion, (2) gravity (gravity makes the antenna rotate when the handle is tilted even slightly), and (3) wind. It is also our conclusion that the device cannot function as a passive long-range detector of human heartbeats."

Is the data in green text, above, the idea behind the name of the Gravitator?


Here is a look inside the LifeGuard---




The wiring style has a similar look to the Ver-tex Receptor innards, posted by SWR.


Here is a picture of the human hair glued inside the "dielectrophoresis" module---

 

[EE THr]

Just to be clear---

The the free-swinging, pivotal pointer devices, are generally referred to as LRLs (Long Range Locators). These are the ones which have attempted to cross-over into the security industry, and are referred to by the National Criminal Justice Reference Service excerpt in post #2.

The ones without a free-swinging pointer are called Molecular Frequency Discrimination (MFD) and Harmonic Induction Discrimination (HID) devices, and are also referred to in the same excerpt. There are also the "Ion Chamber" types. That would make four types which are sometimes all referred to as "LRLs," and fall into the same class of so-called "Long Range Locators" which use non-scientific theories and circuitry, and for which many fantastic claims of performance have been touted, yet which remain totally unproven.

Other legitimate sensing devices, such as Ground Penetrating Radar (GPR), and true Sonar devices are never referred to as "LRLs," and do not fall into this category. Legitimate devices which actually measure ground resistance are not referred to as "LRLs," and also do not fall into this category. Magnetometers are never referred to as "LRLs," and do not fall into this category, either.



The National Criminal Justice Reference Service report states that the devices they tested were treasure hunting LRLs which attempted to cross-over into the security industry, using the same devices as used for THing, thus making the report, and the tests it mentions, and it's conclusions about LRLs, pertinent to treasure hunting LRLs and their promoters.