What do LRL Promoters Fear the Most?

[aarthrj3811]

Promoter
• Promoter (entertainment), one who makes arrangements for events
• Corporate promoter, an entity who takes active steps in the formation, organization, or financing of a corporation
• Promoter (biology), a regulatory region of DNA located upstream of a gene, providing a control point for regulated gene transcription
• Promoter (catalysis), an accelerator of a catalyst, though not a catalyst itself
• Promoter (role variant), one of the sixteen personality types of the Keirsey Temperament Sorter
• Promoter (Catholic church), an office of the Catholic Church such as Promoter of the Laity, Promoter of Peace and Justice, or Promoter of the Faith (also known as the Devil's Advocate)

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

A History of Mining on the Kenai Peninsula, Alaska - Grab it through Amazon!

[EE THr]

Promoter
• Promoter (entertainment), one who makes arrangements for events
• Corporate promoter, an entity who takes active steps in the formation, organization, or financing of a corporation
• Promoter (biology), a regulatory region of DNA located upstream of a gene, providing a control point for regulated gene transcription
• Promoter (catalysis), an accelerator of a catalyst, though not a catalyst itself
• Promoter (role variant), one of the sixteen personality types of the Keirsey Temperament Sorter
• Promoter (Catholic church), an office of the Catholic Church such as Promoter of the Laity, Promoter of Peace and Justice, or Promoter of the Faith (also known as the Devil's Advocate)

Did you fail to provide a link to your source, because you intentionally left one out?

That's known as a "lie of omission."

ref: Ask.com




Promoter, Dictionary.com---

1. a person or thing that promotes, furthers, or encourages.






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]

ER---

What do LRL Promoters Fear the Most?

They fear taking Carl's double-blind test.

They fear the Big Four Proofs of LRL Fraud and the Predictable Pattern of LRL Con Artists.

They fear agreeing upon a protocol for a fair and unbiased random double-blind test.

They fear committing to a statement of what their LRLs are: dowsers, dowsing enhancers, or all electronically operated devices.

They fear their LRL devices being analysed by electronics professionals at a college of their choice.

They fear the schematics of LRL devices being evaluated by electronics professionals at a college of their choice.

They fear anyone challenging their claims.

They fear Science.

They fear truth.



And they fear this---



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?

Interesting claim. Now PROVE that I'm afraid of the truth. I'm talking undeniable proof (like you pseudo-skeptics whine about all the time).

I know that your memory is pretty much shot, going by your past postings....but you have referred to me as a promoter in several past posts directed to me. So...what definition are you currently going by when you use the word "promoter"?

It's too late for that ER---you've already called yourself a promoter, when you asked me to prove it. Duh. So it seems that it's your memory that's shot. By the way, isn't that what you amateur sick-ologists like to call "transference" But I thought the sick-ologists called it "projecting"? I guess they just can't make up their corrupt minds, huh? Or maybe sick-ology itself is suffering from what the like to call multiple personality disorder? Then that would be another case of.... Oh well, you get the idea. (Or maybe not! )






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?

Post where I used those words. You can't....because I didn't. You are making things up yet again. You realize that by making things up like that, you are just looking foolish, right?


Well, maybe you don't realize it. But we do.



Duh.

 

[EddieR]

I know that your memory is pretty much shot, going by your past postings....but you have referred to me as a promoter in several past posts directed to me. So...what definition are you currently going by when you use the word "promoter"?

Alternatively...you seem to glump all opponents as skeptics. Several of us have posted we are not skeptical about these devices, and have supported our stance with reliable references, sources, photographic evidence and schematics.

You yourself appear to have memory issues. Maybe you should try cleaning your own house before whining about what other folks are doing

No. You are pseudo-skeptics. There is a big difference.

 

[EE THr]

I know that your memory is pretty much shot, going by your past postings....but you have referred to me as a promoter in several past posts directed to me. So...what definition are you currently going by when you use the word "promoter"?

Alternatively...you seem to glump all opponents as skeptics. Several of us have posted we are not skeptical about these devices, and have supported our stance with reliable references, sources, photographic evidence and schematics.

You yourself appear to have memory issues. Maybe you should try cleaning your own house before whining about what other folks are doing

No. You are pseudo-skeptics. There is a big difference.

ER---

Unless you admit that you are a promoter, that list wouldn't apply to you.

So, you must admit that you are a promoter first, before I can show you anything. Because if you're not a promoter, then it's a moot point, right?

So are you or aren't you?

(If you're not sure what you are, I certainly can see why! Bwaahaahaahaahaahoooooooooooie!)



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?

 

[aarthrj3811]

Unless you admit that you are a promoter, that list wouldn't apply to you.
So, you must admit that you are a promoter first, before I can show you anything. Because if you're not a promoter, then it's a moot point, right?
So are you or aren't you?
(If you're not sure what you are, I certainly can see why! Bwaahaahaahaahaahoooooooooooie!)

Hey Eddie…Just the same old pseudo-skeptics..same old Psycho Babble
Just a different tactic of different excuses for the lack of knowledge about the subject..Art

 

[EE THr]

Unless you admit that you are a promoter, that list wouldn't apply to you.
So, you must admit that you are a promoter first, before I can show you anything. Because if you're not a promoter, then it's a moot point, right?
So are you or aren't you?
(If you're not sure what you are, I certainly can see why! Bwaahaahaahaahaahoooooooooooie!)

Hey Eddie…Just the same old pseudo-skeptics..same old Psycho Babble
Just a different tactic of different excuses for the lack of knowledge about the subject..Art

No, artie, it's called "logic."

Look it up, you might like it.





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]

I know that your memory is pretty much shot, going by your past postings....but you have referred to me as a promoter in several past posts directed to me. So...what definition are you currently going by when you use the word "promoter"?

Alternatively...you seem to glump all opponents as skeptics. Several of us have posted we are not skeptical about these devices, and have supported our stance with reliable references, sources, photographic evidence and schematics.

You yourself appear to have memory issues. Maybe you should try cleaning your own house before whining about what other folks are doing

No. You are pseudo-skeptics. There is a big difference.

ER---

Unless you admit that you are a promoter, that list wouldn't apply to you.

So, you must admit that you are a promoter first, before I can show you anything. Because if you're not a promoter, then it's a moot point, right?

So are you or aren't you?

(If you're not sure what you are, I certainly can see why! Bwaahaahaahaahaahoooooooooooie!)



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?

Answer the question, EEL.

 

[aarthrj3811]

No, artie, it's called "logic."
Look it up, you might like it.

I did…So are we talking about philosophy, mathematics, semantics, or computer science ? Are we talking about epistemology, ethics, metaphysics, inferences, formal language or argumentation theory?..Art
~EddieR~

Answer the question, EEL.

How dare you to ask them to answer a questions..Everyone knows that they will not as to them a questions is an negative theory..Art

 

[EE THr]

I know that your memory is pretty much shot, going by your past postings....but you have referred to me as a promoter in several past posts directed to me. So...what definition are you currently going by when you use the word "promoter"?

Alternatively...you seem to glump all opponents as skeptics. Several of us have posted we are not skeptical about these devices, and have supported our stance with reliable references, sources, photographic evidence and schematics.

You yourself appear to have memory issues. Maybe you should try cleaning your own house before whining about what other folks are doing

No. You are pseudo-skeptics. There is a big difference.

ER---

Unless you admit that you are a promoter, that list wouldn't apply to you.

So, you must admit that you are a promoter first, before I can show you anything. Because if you're not a promoter, then it's a moot point, right?

So are you or aren't you?

(If you're not sure what you are, I certainly can see why! Bwaahaahaahaahaahoooooooooooie!)



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?

Answer the question, EEL.

I alread did, Edith. It's in the quote box that you posted.

Better get that 5 year old to help you again.



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?

 

[EE THr]

No, artie, it's called "logic."
Look it up, you might like it.

I did…So are we talking about philosophy, mathematics, semantics, or computer science ? Are we talking about epistemology, ethics, metaphysics, inferences, formal language or argumentation theory?..Art
~EddieR~

Answer the question, EEL.

How dare you to ask them to answer a questions..Everyone knows that they will not as to them a questions is an negative theory..Art

#22.



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]

I know that your memory is pretty much shot, going by your past postings....but you have referred to me as a promoter in several past posts directed to me. So...what definition are you currently going by when you use the word "promoter"?

Alternatively...you seem to glump all opponents as skeptics. Several of us have posted we are not skeptical about these devices, and have supported our stance with reliable references, sources, photographic evidence and schematics.

You yourself appear to have memory issues. Maybe you should try cleaning your own house before whining about what other folks are doing

No. You are pseudo-skeptics. There is a big difference.

ER---

Unless you admit that you are a promoter, that list wouldn't apply to you.

So, you must admit that you are a promoter first, before I can show you anything. Because if you're not a promoter, then it's a moot point, right?

So are you or aren't you?

(If you're not sure what you are, I certainly can see why! Bwaahaahaahaahaahoooooooooooie!)



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?

Answer the question, EEL.

I alread did, Edith. It's in the quote box that you posted.

Better get that 5 year old to help you again.



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?

Perhaps you will just humor me then? Show me where I quoted you when you stated the definition of "LRL promoter" as you are using it.

 

[Real de Tayopa Tropical Tramp]

ERR EE you never discussed my choice of an independent panel to investigate lrl theory??

As for photographic proof, forget it as long as swr is posting, he has accepted none, despite
repeatedly asking for such.

Don Jose de La Mancha

 

[EE THr]

Perhaps you will just humor me then? Show me where I quoted you when you stated the definition of "LRL promoter" as you are using it.

I appreciate your admitting that you are an LRL Promoter. Thank you!

Now why, exactly, would I need to quote you?





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?

 

[EE THr]

ERR EE you never discussed my choice of an independent panel to investigate lrl theory??

As for photographic proof, forget it as long as swr is posting, he has accepted none, despite
repeatedly asking for such.

Don Jose de La Mancha

I never suggested that you choose an independent panel for anything. But are certainly free to do so. I can't guarantee that your idea of a suitable panel will be agreeable with anyone else, though.

 

[Real de Tayopa Tropical Tramp]

HI EE, mi buddy coffee break time again. you posted -->As an after thought,
I would like to ask you: Who should they be sent to for evaluation
*****************
Then -->I never suggested that you choose an independent panel for anything.
****************
A rose by any name still smells the same .

Drink yer coffee it is getting cold. Refill?

Don Jose de La Mancha

 

[EE THr]

HI EE, mi buddy coffee break time again. you posted -->As an after thought,
I would like to ask you: Who should they be sent to for evaluation
*****************
Then -->I never suggested that you choose an independent panel for anything.
****************
A rose by any name still smells the same .

Drink yer coffee it is getting cold. Refill?

Don Jose de La Mancha

First of all, let me enlighten you to something. When you use the quote button, it puts some information just above the quote box, in small font, that is also a link to the person's post. This can be very helpful, to see what the context was, and it also provides the exact wording, which can help the person remember more accurately what he was talking about.

Now, that was a question to you, so all you need to do is answer it.

 

[Real de Tayopa Tropical Tramp]

HI Ee, you posted -->that is also a link to the person's post. This can be very helpful, to see
what the context was, and it also provides the exact wording, which can help the person remember
more accurately what he was talking about.

************
Precisely why I quote the post first with "you posted ".

I am OIRISH, and curiously only sceptics seem to to have a problem reading and understanding me. ?

Don Jose de La Mancha

 

[aarthrj3811]

~EE~

First of all, let me enlighten you to something. When you use the quote button, it puts some information just above the quote box, in small font, that is also a link to the person's post. This can be very helpful, to see what the context was, and it also provides the exact wording, which can help the person remember more accurately what he was talking about.

Now, that was a question to you, so all you need to do is answer it.

You could have said the same thing using fewer words..You could have stated..You gave me nothing to spin or twist..Art

 

[EE THr]

HI Ee, you posted -->that is also a link to the person's post. This can be very helpful, to see
what the context was, and it also provides the exact wording, which can help the person remember
more accurately what he was talking about.

************
Precisely why I quote the post first with "you posted ".

I am OIRISH, and curiously only sceptics seem to to have a problem reading and understanding me. ?

Don Jose de La Mancha

Oh, I understand the "you posted" part.

But what good does it do if my post is somewhere near the first of the previous two dozen, or more, posts!