Sierra gold

[DDancer]

alex,
Did you really read the thread from the beginning? The original topic had nothing to do with the value of gold monetarily. It addressed potential historic value then the topic digressed to remote viewing~~

Frankn,
I have also seen and read the reports that have come out about remote viewing. They make for interesting reading and even some of the *ahem* documentary footage is intriguing. However I still find myself sitting on the fence as to its validity though I am inclined to feel there is a real phenomena at work. Like you I feel there is probably some part of our make up that may allow for extrasensory perception. At this time however such things remain without satisfactory explanations so for me they fall under a bit of Faith and with Faith comes some Belief. Maybe wishful thinking but I enjoy the thought that maybe one day those wishes will be justified by science.

Tom,
No such thing as the old future science line I'm disappointed you didn't feel to rejoinder my argument. Used to be the world was flat and the cosmos orbited the earth I think " true science" put a kibosh on that line of thinking~ though there are still people thinking its true and that we once roamed the world with dinosaurs... maybe true science will explain that one day.
I wish ya luck with that tennis shoe. Honestly Everyone has to believe in something.

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

Diving for Pleasure and Treasure - Grab it through Amazon!

[DDancer]

Frankn,
I don't hold with any of the philosophy about LRL devices and really do not believe the government has some sort of device hidden in a warehouse somewhere. I am trained in and work with electronics and electrical systems so I use that to justify my remarks. Nothing I've seen or heard of to date even remotely interests me when someone makes claims of essentially building a useless circuit and claiming its tapping into the vibrations of the universe. We have devices like that and they are called radios The vibrations they receive are translated to real information, usually rock and roll for me, and under the scientific method are very repeatable in controlled experiments And they work for everybody provided the batteries are installed correctly.

Dowsing, in my opinion, is a real and observable phenomena. The phenomena appears to work for some people but not for others and the techniques involved are varied. The arguments have long been made, and controlled tests conducted, to try and find a validation of the principle behind the phenomena. No ones been able to do it yet and it, dowsing, still persists. Many say its just fokelore or a mime of our species. Might it be related to "cosmic vibrations" or is the phenomena just an extension of something inherent to our species? May hap that remote viewing falls into this realm as well. There is historical account of such "viewing" as late as the 1800's when "science" as a functional foundation for understanding our environment was developing. (To be honest science had been developing as a functional tool for understanding much longer than that but a true "methodology" had not been constructed yet> it only really occurred in the late 1800's into the 1900's as a valid tool)
Lots of questions exist at anyrate. So the proverb goes "Don't chuck the baby out with the bath water" as far as I am concerned.

A good thought Frankn.

 

[alex141]

really just want to know .......... if Gold has hovered near historic highs after hitting a record $1,266.50 an ounce in June, but the stolen (74 oz) bar's has a $550,000 valuation reflects historic value far beyond its melt-down worth.

Would taking the bullion to a expert for valuation be too risky?

 

[Tom_in_CA]

really just want to know .......... if Gold has hovered near historic highs after hitting a record $1,266.50 an ounce in June, but the stolen (74 oz) bar's has a $550,000 valuation reflects historic value far beyond its melt-down worth.

Would taking the bullion to a expert for valuation be too risky?

Alex, what on earth are you talking about? Have you found this gold, or haven't you? If you haven't found it, then all such talk about how-to-get-the-most value upon-sale is silly. FIRST FIND IT.

You refuse to believe it's fanciful legends. Dime-store ghost story tales, fine. Then if it's that iron-clad true (and believable true methods that are without doubt accurate), then go get the treasure. THEN come back on and show it, and no one will doubt these cyrstal methods. And THEN there can be fruitful talk about the best ways to liquidate, etc...

 

[GoldenNerd]

I'll have to agree with Tom_in_CA on this one; find it then worry about disposing of it.

Or just open a trading account, spin up some massive leverage and make a couple billion dollars that way - screw hunting for a few measly bars of gold. After that, go look for it and who even cares about resale/disposal?

It makes zero sense to chase trivial amounts of money when (if) you have the abilities you claim that you have.

Also, "accidentally" posting a crude drawing which cannot be validated (including the date) will not engender a positive reaction in a skeptical crowd. If you have the education and background that you claim then you should know better.

As for dowsing, if it actually worked, they would be racking it up in the oil fields. Or the gold fields.

Too many claims of ESP(P) from too many sources which not only make no sense, have no backing and a suspect history, but also which are not currently being exploited to their fullest potential. Credibility = zero. Sorry.

 

[Tom_in_CA]

...

As for dowsing, if it actually worked, they would be racking it up in the oil fields. Or the gold fields.
...

Or would be repeatable in lab controlled experiment testing. Right? But nnneeeooooh, they've got that covered too:

a) the tester didn't have "the gift". or

b) the tester "needs more experience". If you've only used it a week, then practice for a month. If you used it for a month, well then obviously you need to practice for a year. If you've used it for a year, then obviously you need multiple years. And so on. As you can see, it's never that it "didn't work". It's always lack of experience, practice, skill, etc....

c) why the double standards? Md'rs don't find gold every time they go out either, so why the double-standard for testing LRLs, dowsing, esp, crystal balls, spooks, etc...?

d) durned those sun spots anyhow.

So you see, they've got those bases covered .

 

[alex141]

Proof... ha. It's a fool's task. It's an indefensible position. Non believer would never believe. It does not fit your paradigm.

I would have to show you copies of checks from casinos or something like that...right? But, even then you wouldn't believe it.. You would say. I just got lucky once, show me multiple checks from different casinos. Or show me multiple casino checks from different casinos with the same dates.. It would go on and on... I've been down that road before.

As noted Mr.Tom can say whatever he wants, pick up his detector and happily go dig up a few more bottle caps.



It's not something most people can allow themselves to believe.

 

[Tom_in_CA]

It's not something most people can allow themselves to believe.

No, to the contrary: People post "found" items ALL THE TIME on the "found" section of T'net. Eg.: the latest bragging rights of rings, old coins, even caches. And people (the readers here) "believe" them, all the time.

But there's a big discrepancy between those, and yours. Yours is just talk at this point.

So .... we're all waiting to see

 

[DDancer]

Awh come on now and be charitable. Its the right thing to do. Now charity does not mean you have to agree however no ones disproven the tennis shoe covered in peanut butter and sprinkled with birdseed idea yet.

If such gold were recovered and put up for sale then it would be a huge boon for the finder and probably the government. Alex find the gold. Don't worry about what it was worth 60 years ago *or more*. Sure would be nice to see though

 

[alex141]

Mr. Tom.. Your right again.. I'm all talk... no need to be concerned.. sorry for the any distraction that I may have cause to keep you away from your search.

Mr. Mike had great advice and I am going to take it and "Melt it and keep my mouth shut". Alex

 

[Frankn]

Ah yes. The old "future science" line. Ie.: maybe science can't explain it *now*, but someday, we'll understand. Just like how scientists once thought the earth was flat, or that heavier-than-air flight was impossible, etc... So too will science some day come along and explain the things we can't now explain scientifically.

Ok, then so too will science some day come along and explain my tennis shoe peanut butter treasure finder! Just throw it around enough likely looking ruins, take a detector to "pinpoint", dig enough holes, and .... presto, you'll find metal. Maybe even a goodie. And someday, science will explain how my treasure finder shoe works!

Hay Tom, a good comical explanation, but you missed my point. Science has proven AND also disproven theory. Theory is just an idea of how something works. It can be proven OR disproven later.

Here are some examples. In theory, science states that a bumble bee can't fly, But fortunately for the bee, He doesn't know that.

The theory of gravity has changed from an Earth attraction to a force 'dark matter' pressing down on us.

So, my point was that until something is actually proven, the case is not closed. Yes we all have our own personal theories, but who truly knows? Frank...-

 

[Frankn]

Frankn,
I don't hold with any of the philosophy about LRL devices and really do not believe the government has some sort of device hidden in a warehouse somewhere. I am trained in and work with electronics and electrical systems so I use that to justify my remarks. Nothing I've seen or heard of to date even remotely interests me when someone makes claims of essentially building a useless circuit and claiming its tapping into the vibrations of the universe. We have devices like that and they are called radios The vibrations they receive are translated to real information, usually rock and roll for me, and under the scientific method are very repeatable in controlled experiments And they work for everybody provided the batteries are installed correctly.

Dowsing, in my opinion, is a real and observable phenomena. The phenomena appears to work for some people but not for others and the techniques involved are varied. The arguments have long been made, and controlled tests conducted, to try and find a validation of the principle behind the phenomena. No ones been able to do it yet and it, dowsing, still persists. Many say its just fokelore or a mime of our species. Might it be related to "cosmic vibrations" or is the phenomena just an extension of something inherent to our species? May hap that remote viewing falls into this realm as well. There is historical account of such "viewing" as late as the 1800's when "science" as a functional foundation for understanding our environment was developing. (To be honest science had been developing as a functional tool for understanding much longer than that but a true "methodology" had not been constructed yet> it only really occurred in the late 1800's into the 1900's as a valid tool)
Lots of questions exist at anyrate. So the proverb goes "Don't chuck the baby out with the bath water" as far as I am concerned.

A good thought Frankn.

Well before I retired, I spent 30+ years working on mechanical and electronic equipment. I spent a lot of this time on 'secured locations'. I have seen and heard a lot that is not available to the general public. The device I spoke of is on a ship and used to identify underwater elements. It does exist.
As far as the current crop of LRLs, they are pure bull. PS I knew about NS A long before Snowden spoke.

Frank...-

 

[Tom_in_CA]

...So, my point was that until something is actually proven, the case is not closed....

Thus you agree then that the "case is not closed" on my tennis shoe treasure finder theory, until it is dis-proven. Right? Great, because then at present, no one has dis-proven my treasure-shoe device. (and even if they did, I'd just say they don't have the gift, need more experience, etc...). So far, so good for my shoe! Glad you concur

But then in your next post you say:

"As far as the current crop of LRLs, they are pure bull."

How can you say that? Might not future science come along and vindicate them too?

 

[Msbeepbeep]

So if I understand all this, what makes it possible for any this to work is the human equation in it. Whether it be the tennis shoe w peanut butter/birdseed, dowsing rod, detector, Remote viewing, pendulum, that feeling you get, etc. and as with anything people do, some are more successful than others, and we don't know exactly how or why, so we chalk it up to belief. This is not a put down of the unexplained, Been there, done that-no control.

Did I get any part of that right?

Alex141- the question you asked you already know the answer to, it may not be the one you wanted. Amazingly you seem to have no fear.

 

[Frankn]

Thus you agree then that the "case is not closed" on my tennis shoe treasure finder theory, until it is dis-proven. Right? Great, because then at present, no one has dis-proven my treasure-shoe device. (and even if they did, I'd just say they don't have the gift, need more experience, etc...). So far, so good for my shoe! Glad you concur

But then in your next post you say:

"As far as the current crop of LRLs, they are pure bull."




How can you say that? Might not future science come along and vindicate them too?

Tom in copying only part of my post, you took it out of context!
I stated that theories may be proven or disproven. I also stated that I liked to see logical proof but kept an open mine. That doesn't mean that I believe every hair brained theory that comes along be it LRL or tennis shoe locator. I use my experience and accumulated knowledge to decide if I personally believe in a theory and I have a good BS filter.
Frank...-

 

[Tom_in_CA]

So if I understand all this, what makes it possible for any this to work is the human equation in it. Whether it be the tennis shoe w peanut butter/birdseed, dowsing rod, detector, Remote viewing, pendulum, that feeling you get, etc. and as with anything people do, some are more successful than others, and we don't know exactly how or why, so we chalk it up to belief. .....

ms-beep-beep, well yes and no. First, yes, OF COURSE some people are more experienced and better md'rs than the next guy. So if that's what you mean by the human equation into it, then yes.

But this failing to factor in double blind testing in controled experiments. So for example: If you took 1000 people, of varying experience levels in md'ing (from never having ever detected, to full-fledged experts), let's say you did the following experiment:

If you prop. up that metal detector on a wooden bench, turn it on, and set the threshold. Those 1000 people each come by and wave a quarter in front of the coil. And you will notice that it "beeps" for all 1000 of them. There's no "gift" or "experience" required. It beeps the same regardless. There's no "belief" required.

Contrast that to trying to set up a wand or remote viewing, etc.... No such similarity of double-blind testing/proving can be done .

 

[Frankn]

ms-beep-beep, well yes and no. First, yes, OF COURSE some people are more experienced and better md'rs than the next guy. So if that's what you mean by the human equation into it, then yes.

But this failing to factor in double blind testing in controled experiments. So for example: If you took 1000 people, of varying experience levels in md'ing (from never having ever detected, to full-fledged experts), let's say you did the following experiment:

If you prop. up that metal detector on a wooden bench, turn it on, and set the threshold. Those 1000 people each come by and wave a quarter in front of the coil. And you will notice that it "beeps" for all 1000 of them. There's no "gift" or "experience" required. It beeps the same regardless. There's no "belief" required.

Contrast that to trying to set up a wand or remote viewing, etc.... No such similarity of double-blind testing/proving can be done .

The only thing that test has proven is that that particular detector will ID a quarter every time. It doesn't show if a brass washer will be IDed as a quarter or brass washer. It doesn't show if another similar detector will do the same thing. Your controlls were so tight the test was fixed before it started. Frank...-
View attachment 997810

 

[DDancer]

Msbeep,
In regards to the context of tennis shoe covered in peanut butter sprinkled with bird seed or the use of dowsing/remote viewing techniques then your statement is essentially correct. There is a strong human element to such methods of locating and recovering things that are desired. Be they belief's or mime's of our cultures these types of things seem to persist among rational elements in our societies. That they defy sound methods of deduction to prove/disprove peoples desire to understand the base principal causing the phenomena leads pretty much to why there is debate on said activities.

Tom, that response was pretty much a flop. Everybody who swings a detector "believes" they will find something. And yes some people are better with detectors than others. In fact there are people who "appear" to walk onto goodies much easier than others using the same machine and techniques while also holding comparable levels of experience. One can almost hold the irrational belief that there is some sort of "magic" in play or maybe the fates, destiny, god(s) whatever. Its all in the voodoo you do Making comparison to blind testing of a proven element and saying anyone can do it just does not hold water when shuttling a thousand people thru a test with a thousand beliefs only to never pick up the detector and go find something unknown.

Frank,
I understand I'd like to believe I have a good BS filter myself. As to the machine you alluded to that finds~ elements~ underwater I'd have to think that would be based on some pretty good science and not a guy using a dowsing rod or looking into a crystal ball I still doubt the government, or one of its bodies, has something really spectacular hiding somewhere but hey I'll keep an open mind. Never know when they, whoever they are, will break out a flying saucer.

 

[Frankn]

By DDancer:

Frank,
I understand

I'd like to believe I have a good BS filter myself. As to the machine you alluded to that finds~ elements~ underwater I'd have to think that would be based on some pretty good science and not a guy using a dowsing rod or looking into a crystal ball

I still doubt the government, or one of its bodies, has something really spectacular hiding somewhere but hey I'll keep an open mind. Never know when they, whoever they are, will break out a flying saucer.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Well, the cat is out of the bag. It was announced on TV this morning that a company is comming out with a device that focuces a light beam on a subject and vibrates it's molecules. It can read the caloric content ,the vitamen concentration and other things like if there are any medicines mixed in . It is a hand held device thanks to modern integrated circuits. It has been tested on various foods with success. I think the metal detector is next. it will use a light beam to give an exact reading of the elements below. It is comming, probably after my time. Frank...-


PS: The Gov. is hiding more than you would suspect in the name of security.

 

[unbrokendreamz]

i wish you the best of luck. where abouts are you in california?

Proof... ha. It's a fool's task. It's an indefensible position. Non believer would never believe. It does not fit your paradigm.

I would have to show you copies of checks from casinos or something like that...right? But, even then you wouldn't believe it.. You would say. I just got lucky once, show me multiple checks from different casinos. Or show me multiple casino checks from different casinos with the same dates.. It would go on and on... I've been down that road before.

As noted Mr.Tom can say whatever he wants, pick up his detector and happily go dig up a few more bottle caps.



It's not something most people can allow themselves to believe.