aarthrj3811 said:
aarthrj3811 said:
EE THr said:Since the LRL promoters on here continually try to pull opposing topics off into childish arguments with their insults, it becomes necessary to point out the original subject.
It's time to Get back on topic, again!
Only one LRL user, Eddie, has given rational answers to the first three questions (admitting that Carl's test is fair, and that he could never pass it).
Update: Now there is an additional question!
The Questions LRLers Refuse to Answer
1. Why don't you take Carl's test?
2. What do you feel is wrong with Carl's double-blind test?
3. What do you think is a fair test?
4. What average percentage of success do LRLs consistently and reliably have, under optimum conditions?
5. Art's idea of a fair test is for 30 people, "like the drug companies." But he won't answer the following question: All 30 people searching for the same target at once, 10 at a time, 1 at a time; or all 30 searching for 30 targets all at once, or what?
6. Why are there no treasures documented to be found with LRLs? Especially in the U.K., where they are paid for their finds by the government? We see found treasures in the news, but none were found with LRLs! If LRLs are so much better than standard metal detectors, there should be even more than with detectors, but there is none. Why is that?
7. Why don't you want any LRL to be tested by a University of your choice?
8. Why won't your LRL follow a moving target when the handle is clamped to a rigid object?
Number one leads to number two, and two leads to three.
Number four should be common knowledge, because the LRL promoters brag continuously.
Number five is just con-artie's way of not answering.
Number six is so obvious, they won't even try to give a phony answer!
Number seven---so far they have just pretended that seven doesn't even exist!
Number eight results in various nonsense excuses and insults, because there is no answer that won't admit that their LRLs are fake.
The LRL promoters won't, under any circumstances, rationally answer number three; because then they would have to take that test which they described! Because if it were their idea, they can't disagree with it! And when they took their own test, they would fail!
When asked #3, they immediately turn to insults or purely nonsensical posts about anything besides the subject at hand. So obvious!
But, this is their big chance [again], nonetheless....
Don't be a doof---show the proof!
P.S. When will you man-up and take Carl's double-blind test, and collect the $25,000.00?
ref: Are LRLs More Than Just Dowsing?
However, I predict that the LRL promoters will simply spam the thread even more, merely to divert attention away from these logical issues.
EE THr said:Eddie---
You don't have to quote an entire long post, just delete the parts that you aren't referring to, huh?
If that's not exactly what you said, then exactly what did you say. Or what would you like to say about it now?
And what would change, that you could pass it in the future, but not now?
And while you're at it, you can answer the rest of the new questions on there.
Don't be a doof---show the proof!
P.S. When will you man-up and take Carl's double-blind test, and collect the $25,000.00?
ref: Are LRLs More Than Just Dowsing?
EddieR said:EE THr said:So once again back to the actual topic---
If anyone who actually uses an LRL would like to actually answer the topic questions, here they are again---
1. Why don't you take Carl's test?
2. What do you feel is wrong with Carl's test?
3. What do you think is a fair test?
(Very simple and straightforward questions. These are not trick questions.)
Don't be a doof---show the proof!
P.S. When will you man-up and take Carl's double-blind test?
ref: Are LRLs More Than Just Dowsing?
Here ya go.
1. I would take Carl's test if he were here. I also might fail it, as my hunts in the past were not always successful. Since I didn't have a 100% success rate in the field, I shouldn't expect more during a test.
2. In my opinion, I think Carl's test is properly set up.
3. In my opinion, I think Carl's test is fair.
There ya have it. Answered and done.
Now you can quote that post that I asked you to earlier....or were you making that up?
By the way, what type of LRL do you have? What brand, model, etc?
EE THr said:Since the LRL promoters on here continually try to pull opposing topics off into childish arguments with their insults, it becomes necessary to point out the original subject.
It's time to Get back on topic, again!
Only one LRL user, Eddie, has given rational answers to the first three questions (admitting that Carl's test is fair, and that he could never pass it).
Update: Now there is an additional question!
The Questions LRLers Refuse to Answer
1. Why don't you take Carl's test?
2. What do you feel is wrong with Carl's double-blind test?
3. What do you think is a fair test?
4. What average percentage of success do LRLs consistently and reliably have, under optimum conditions?
5. Art's idea of a fair test is for 30 people, "like the drug companies." But he won't answer the following question: All 30 people searching for the same target at once, 10 at a time, 1 at a time; or all 30 searching for 30 targets all at once, or what?
6. Why are there no treasures documented to be found with LRLs? Especially in the U.K., where they are paid for their finds by the government? We see found treasures in the news, but none were found with LRLs! If LRLs are so much better than standard metal detectors, there should be even more than with detectors, but there is none. Why is that?
7. Why don't you want any LRL to be tested by a University of your choice?
8. Why won't your LRL follow a moving target when the handle is clamped to a rigid object?
Number one leads to number two, and two leads to three.
Number four should be common knowledge, because the LRL promoters brag continuously.
Number five is just con-artie's way of not answering.
Number six is so obvious, they won't even try to give a phony answer!
Number seven---so far they have just pretended that seven doesn't even exist!
Number eight results in various nonsense excuses and insults, because there is no answer that won't admit that their LRLs are fake.
The LRL promoters won't, under any circumstances, rationally answer number three; because then they would have to take that test which they described! Because if it were their idea, they can't disagree with it! And when they took their own test, they would fail!
When asked #3, they immediately turn to insults or purely nonsensical posts about anything besides the subject at hand. So obvious!
But, this is their big chance [again], nonetheless....
Don't be a doof---show the proof!
P.S. When will you man-up and take Carl's double-blind test, and collect the $25,000.00?
ref: Are LRLs More Than Just Dowsing?
However, I predict that the LRL promoters will simply spam the thread even more, merely to divert attention away from these logical issues.
EE THr said:Edith---
Ooooooooooooooooooh!
I missed one word?
Wooooooooooooooooooow!
You lie every day about your make-believe fantasy LRLs, and I get one little word wrong, and you choose that to nit pick about? You really need to get a life!
I even gave you a chance to correct it, but it's not important enough to you to simply do so. If you know for certain that I used a wrong word, then that means you at least think you remember exactly what word it was supposed to be. But it's much to much effort for you to set it right, supposedly.
I am certain, without even looking it up, that you said, en essence, that you couldn't pass Carl's test.
If you don't care enough to make your point, then I will just let that stand, as above.
Unless you now think you can pass Carl's test. And if so, when will you be taking that test?
The fact remains that LRLs don't work, the makers are guilty of false advertising, and their products are nothing but junk.
Want to dispute that? Then show us some proof. We have already show several valid forms of evidence that they don't work, so you need to prove your silly claims, or quit whining.
And, while you're at it, take a look at the topic of this thread, and answer all of the questions, if you've got the guts to.
In the mean time---
Don't be a doof---show the proof!
P.S. When will you man-up and take Carl's double-blind test, and collect the $25,000.00?
ref: Are LRLs More Than Just Dowsing?
EddieR said:
