What do LRL Promoters Fear the Most?

Status
Not open for further replies.
allo rudy my friend \_ :coffee2: :coffee2:_/ you posted -->And possibly the brand of Kool Aid you drink
***************
I agree rudy, it has been proven that the colors used in cool aid are cancerous.

Don Jose de La Mancha
 

SWR said:
EddieR said:
Once again for the challenged.....Post the quote or admit that you lied again.
Click to expand...

What's with the insults?


Are you seriously going there?
Click to expand...

Sure am.
 

I figured out what LRL promoters fear. The day that massive amounts of senseless, insulting, demanding posts make sense.

SHO-NUFF, it's not just for breakfast anymore.
 

fenixdigger said:
I figured out what LRL promoters fear. The day that massive amounts of senseless, insulting, demanding posts make sense.

SHO-NUFF, it's not just for breakfast anymore.
Click to expand...



fenix brothers---

That day will be the day that all you fenix brothers wake up to reality.
 

~fenixdigger~.
The day that massive amounts of senseless, insulting, demanding posts make sense.

SHO-NUFF, it's not just for breakfast anymore.
Click to expand...
~EE~
That day will be the day that all you fenix brothers wake up to reality.
Click to expand...
Seems to me that he has a firm grip on reality…You may want to try it sometime..Art
 

Art;

I don't know how could 8 people spending 100's of hours testing, researching, and experimenting every month equal reality compared to looking at photos and posts?

This is the bottom line. This is what is so obvious to everyone the emails me. Maybe we should make some of this public.

If these guys knew how this looked to everyone (except about 4) they would freak. Nah, They would transfer it and think

the comments were about us. How am I doing on the 10,000 post prediction?

SHO-NUFF-- it ain't too ruff See if you can beat that 22 mile lock. Loooong Range Locator
 

What is considered to be the percent of accuracy for an LRL?

We know that standard metal detector technology can distinguish the difference between magnetic objects, and what we refer to as conductive objects, of the same or similar size. Generally speaking, in the field, this is the difference between iron and conductors such as aluminum, copper, silver, and gold. This ability is known as discrimination.

With similar, but not necessarily strictly identical, abilities to locate certain targeted materials, what is the accuracy of LRLs. That is what percentage of the time will LRLs consistently, or on average, be able to actually find the desired type of target? That would be called the percentage of accuracy, and must be a figure representing "reliable" operation.

You can give two figures, if you want, one representing actual field use, where various kinds of interference may exist in different areas; and the other for structured tests, where the absence of interference is confirmed beforehand, and monitored during the tests to be sure no interference arises while testing. Please state which figure represents which type of use, that is field conditions or test conditions.

:coffee2:
 

Lots of replies today from all the LRL promoters, but no answer to this one all day.

Do we have another to add to the list of questions LRLers refuse to answer?



Uh-oh!

:hello2:
 

How’s this LT
From Carl
With LRLs and dowsing, "random chance" applies to randomized blind tests, not to field use. A randomized blind test does 2 things that a field test cannot do. First, it eliminates outside influences that might alter performance results, such as observable clues. Second, it provides a baseline from which to compare results, namely guessing.

Despite intentional attempts to mislead people, random chance doesn't apply to field use. You can't ask, "What are the odds of digging 10 holes in a park and recovering a gold coin?" There is no way to calculate that, because there is not enough information*. But in a randomized blind test, it is quite easy to calculate the odds. Depending on the design of the test those odds can vary, so it is not a fixed number that applies to every test, but it's not a "moving target" either.
Click to expand...
 

aarthrj3811 said:
How’s this LT
From Carl
With LRLs and dowsing, "random chance" applies to randomized blind tests, not to field use. A randomized blind test does 2 things that a field test cannot do. First, it eliminates outside influences that might alter performance results, such as observable clues. Second, it provides a baseline from which to compare results, namely guessing.

Despite intentional attempts to mislead people, random chance doesn't apply to field use. You can't ask, "What are the odds of digging 10 holes in a park and recovering a gold coin?" There is no way to calculate that, because there is not enough information*. But in a randomized blind test, it is quite easy to calculate the odds. Depending on the design of the test those odds can vary, so it is not a fixed number that applies to every test, but it's not a "moving target" either.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...


That is saying why Carl's test is fair.

And it's also you avoiding answering the question, isn't it.

So, does this one go onto the list of questions LRLers refuse to answer?

:dontknow:
 

That is saying why Carl's test is fair.
Click to expand...
Did I say Carls test was fair ?
Sorry you do not understand. LT and I were talking about using LRL’s in the field. Carl agreed with what LT was saying. Are you now going to bad mouth Carl for telling the truth ?

And it's also you avoiding answering the question, isn't it.
Click to expand...
I am sure you will add it to your list..That seems to be the only thing that you know anything about..Art
 

con-artie;

You're just trying to start another ridiculous argument, about nothing, in order to avoid answering my question.
 

~EE~
That is saying why Carl's test is fair.
And it's also you avoiding answering the question, isn't it.
So, does this one go onto the list of questions LRLers refuse to answer?
Click to expand...
~Art~
Did I say Carls test was fair ?
Sorry you do not understand. LT and I were talking about using LRL’s in the field. Carl agreed with what LT was saying. Are you now going to bad mouth Carl for telling the truth ?
Click to expand...
~EE~
con-artie;

You're just trying to start another ridiculous argument, about nothing, in order to avoid answering my question.
Click to expand...
 

artie---here is the list again, in case you forgot the topic.




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 suggesting or 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 stating the average percentage of success, under optimal conditions, that LRLs have.

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---

:laughing7: :laughing7: :laughing7: :laughing7: :laughing7:

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?
 

Fear is a distressing negative emotion induced by a perceived threat. It is a basic survival mechanism occurring in response to a specific stimulus, such as pain or the threat of danger. In short, fear is the ability to recognize danger and flee from it or confront it, also known as the Fight or Flight response. Some psychologists such as John B. Watson, Robert Plutchik, and Paul Ekman have suggested that fear belongs to a small set of basic or innate emotions. This set also includes such emotions as joy, sadness, and anger. Fear should be distinguished from the related emotional state of anxiety, which typically occurs without any external threat. Additionally, fear is related to the specific behaviors of escape and avoidance, whereas anxiety is the result of threats which are perceived to be uncontrollable or unavoidable.[1] Worth noting is that fear almost always relates to future events, such as worsening of a situation, or continuation of a situation that is unacceptable. Fear could also be an instant reaction to something presently happening.
 

We have another new addition to the list, so here it is, in complete form---



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 suggesting or 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 stating the average percentage of success, under optimal conditions, that LRLs have.

They fear the "Do the Math!" thread.

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---

:laughing7: :laughing7: :laughing7: :laughing7: :laughing7:

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?
 

Status
Not open for further replies.

Field Results from The Sho-Nuff Test

⬅️ Previous Thread

Do The Math!

Next Thread ➡️

Top Member Reactions

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 4 (members: 0, guests: 4)
High Plains Prospectors

Latest Discussions

Back
Top