When Ordinary Science Fails to Explain

[EE THr]

The problem with the so-called "LRLs" is that they claim to be able to locate specific types of targets, within their claimed specifications, under good conditions.

A metal detector will always do this.

Any other legitimate piece of equipment will perform as specified, under the above conditions.

An LRL has never been proven to the World to work significantly greater than just guessing.

Huge difference.

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

Cry Of The Eagle: History And Legends Of The Cherokee Indians And Their Buried Treasure - Grab it through Amazon!

[EE THr]

What I was asking for was a diagram like one below. Is there one for any LRL out there?

We already have the transmitter,in the form of a signal generator(not my favorite system--ironically). What you are asking for,whether you understand it or not--Is a receiver,for the return signal,that is more than a "swingy-thingy". Thus,one could have a measurable/metered reading,that can be quantified...such as we have with the metal detector.
OKM's LRL,the Bionic 01,purports to be such a device. If they have not in fact yet accomplished this--they are at least on the correct heading.
I predict that this concept(at least)is the future of metal detection. My device,however,will reproduce the precise frequency(s)/signiture of any substance/element/compound(irrespective of complexity).
The swingy-thingy,however,in the hands of a competent operator,is sufficient to the task at hand.

LongRanger

Wrong again, on all counts.

What he was asking for was a complete schematic of an LRL, like the ones below---





Your disjointed double-talk is of no help, whatsoever.

However, you did manage to give away your precious "secret," because any engineer can produce a device to transmit and receive any frequency. Unfortunately, this does not provide "Long Range Detection" of anything (besides the RADAR effect, which does not identify metals).

And a signal generator is just a signal generator. They do not have the power output nor the correct output impedance to, in any way, qualify as "transmitters." That's why they call them "signal generators"! (Duh!)

The guy asked for a schematic, and you gave him a prediction based on nothing, and some phony science. Typical of every LRL promoter there ever was.

 

[EE THr]

The problem with the so-called "LRLs" is that they claim to be able to locate specific types of targets, within their claimed specifications, under good conditions.

A metal detector will always do this.

Any other legitimate piece of equipment will perform as specified, under the above conditions.

An LRL has never been proven to the World to work significantly greater than just guessing.

Huge difference.

Heckel,
How would you know,since you have never done anything in your own right?! Sitting in your armchair with your (f)lap-top,doesn't make you an authority on anything--except how to squat,and squawk,from your nest. Exactly,what have you ever ventured to do,in a practical way,that is relevent to long range detection?!
Does your "knowledge" derive from actual experience,or did it originate from your "ivory nest"?!

LongRanger

As usual, your attempts to prove your point have failed, so you resort to personal attacks.

I, myself, am not the subject here.

You are merely trying to change the subject, by diverting attention off of the facts about the LRL scam, by attempting to evoke an emotional response from me. That's an old trick. Sorry, it won't work.

The fact remains---
An LRL has never been proven to the World to work significantly greater than just guessing.

 

[werleibr]

What I was asking for was a diagram like one below. Is there one for any LRL out there?

We already have the transmitter,in the form of a signal generator(not my favorite system--ironically). What you are asking for,whether you understand it or not--Is a receiver,for the return signal,that is more than a "swingy-thingy". Thus,one could have a measurable/metered reading,that can be quantified...such as we have with the metal detector.
OKM's LRL,the Bionic 01,purports to be such a device. If they have not in fact yet accomplished this--they are at least on the correct heading.
I predict that this concept(at least)is the future of metal detection. My device,however,will reproduce the precise frequency(s)/signiture of any substance/element/compound(irrespective of complexity).
The swingy-thingy,however,in the hands of a competent operator,is sufficient to the task at hand.

LongRanger

Wrong again, on all counts.

What he was asking for was a complete schematic of an LRL, like the ones below---







Your disjointed double-talk is of no help, whatsoever.

However, you did manage to give away your precious "secret," because any engineer can produce a device to transmit and receive any frequency. Unfortunately, this does not provide "Long Range Detection" of anything (besides the RADAR effect, which does not identify metals).

And a signal generator is just a signal generator. They do not have the power output nor the correct output impedance to, in any way, qualify as "transmitters." That's why they call them "signal generators"! (Duh!)

The guy asked for a schematic, and you gave him a prediction based on nothing, and some phony science. Typical of every LRL promoter there ever was.

EE is right that is what I was asking for.

Also if your homemade "element detector" would work, then the true possibilites would be endless. The government would be all over you wanting to buy it.

 

[EE THr]

There's more involved than the radar effect. DUH! And any signal can be amplified,and transmitted. DUH! And a signal generator does produce/transmit a signal(when fitted with an antenna-especially an open circuit--where impedance is less of a factor),according to it's power out-put. DUH!

You're starting to sound like rockhound, now, spurting nonsensical "electronics" heresay.

A whip antenna is not an open circuit electronically. It will actually draw current, if tuned to the frequency fed to it. And this is why the output of anything feeding it must be impedance matched to it, for optimum power transfer.

You might know how to connect a battery, or wire a light switch, but those are considered electrical, not electronic, devices---and your ignorance of antennas, transmitters, and signal generators is only one of the differences.

You don't even have a good bluff.

 

[rockhound]

Puffdaddy, I once had a thought to enlighten them about these things but after I saw their game, I decided not to show anything. You can't debate a subject with someone who has a closed mind. They will never test any theories or try anything that does not fit into their reality. They are really antiScience in their ways. Scientists always test and evaluate data based on a set of parameters and then test these theories again to establish a positive or negative replication of the test. Only after several attempts are they then satisfied that the test can be replicated successfully or not. These are the parameters I use to determine whether a test is valid or not. I have tested many things in treasure hunting circles, metal detectors, LRL's, MFD's and other types of location equipment. I have documented my experiments and have the data to support my conclusions. Sorry, these are for my own personal use only. I will not attempt to discuss LRL theory or electronics with anyone on this forum because of the closed mindedness of some individuals. Good Luck to all those who are trying to unravel the mystery surrounding these instruments. rockhound

 

[EE THr]

Carl taught you better than that! I refer you to his open-circuit antenna,my boy...!

When you refer someone to something, you're supposed to post a link to it. (Duh!)

 

[EE THr]

Rocky and Puffy---

Both of you fail to say anything factual. Merely attempts at personal insults, non-electronics gibberish, and a lack of knowledge about Scientific Method in general.

The funniest part is when you guys claim that "Science is not Science."

And both of you claim to understand electronics, yet are proven to be doofs at it, time after time.

You both are your own best skeptics, as usual.

Keep up the good work!

 

[aarthrj3811]

~EE~

What he was asking for was a complete schematic of an LRL, like the ones below---

Just a simple question for the experts...Just who drew the alleged schematics?

 

[Ted Groves]

There is no way,that I'll be venturing into "them there" Superstitions....

Then you lose.

So it's back to square one.

LRL promoters used unrelated mysteries, in an illogical attempt to "prove" that their fraudulent devices work, because they can't simply pass a scientific test, because their fantasy machines are a hoax.

The more you try to change the subject, the more you confirm that you can't make your stuff work!

You are your own best skeptics!

What else is new? They been doing the same thing for over 20 years now. I think it must be "instructions" that comes with their bogus treasure finders.

 

[EE THr]

~EE~

What he was asking for was a complete schematic of an LRL, like the ones below---

Just a simple question for the experts...Just who drew the alleged schematics?

Are you saying that they are wrong? If so, indicate which part is wrong.


Or are you just fishing for another ad hominem attack?

 

[EE THr]

What has Quackle done with respect to Long Range Detection. Explain to PuffDaddy just what those tests consisted of--and PuffDaddy will see if Quackle can be helped.

Heckel didn't want me to locate his jar of silver dollars. Instead,he wanted me to find the Lost Dutchman's Mine,and send him a sample. And then he spouts about the "scientific method".
He must be a Democrat.

What any person has done concerning your imaginary "LRL" devices has no bearing on the fact that they are nonexistent, and the whole concept is a scam. Your attempt to try and make it somehow relate is just another diversion away from the obvious---they don't work, and never have, or else someone would have stepped forward and proven it to the World by now.

There was never any mention of a "jar of silver dollars" in your challenge to me, which was to name a known treasure so that you could find it with your super duper Longe Range Locator. I did name such a known treasure---a very well known one, in fact---the Lost Dutchman Mine. This is the perfect area for the use of a device which would have all the abilities that you claim yours does. You could zero in on it from a distance, and then go straight to it.

The only evidence you would need is an ore sample which matched the remaining samples of The Dutchman's stash of very unique ore. So you wouldn't need to have me or anyone else following you around, and that would make it even easier for you to work your magic, plus nobody would get a peek at your "top secret" equipment!

Then you started whining about it being a remote area.

Of course, it is in a remote area---if it was in the city, someone would have found it by now! But it's a real treasure, just what you asked for! That's why it would be perfect for your fantasy device!

Then you have to go and make up phony stories about it, as usual. The problem is that everything you really said is right here on this thread! B-u-s-t-e-d !




You are still your own best skeptic!

Keep up the good work!

 

[EE THr]

Heckel,

How your silver dollars is containerized,is hardly relevent...whether in a jar,a tin can--or even wrapped up securely in one of your diapers. It matters not to me. I'm willing to do the test! You're grasping at straws,because you're a chicken.
Apparently,Quackle hasn't done any research/tests either--To speak of.

The Long Ranger

It's not about the jar---there was no mention of silver dollars at all. You said "treasure."

See #33 in Are LRLs More Than Just Dowsing?.

You guys just go on and on with the BS!

And you remain your own best skeptics!

Keep up the good work.

 

[EE THr]

All I'm asking,is that you set up a true/legitimate treasure lead,that you honestly believe in--and we'll see what I can do. After-all,that is the true test of any technology. It has to be a bonifide treasure/cache lead--not an insincere "setup",calculated to prove,or disprove. And,if I can accomplish the task,where conventional means have proven insufficient,then we can split the booty. And,you'll have to promise to quit shredding my pant-cuffs. And,the secret of the technology,must remain integral.

LongRanger

Busted again!

Quit whining and go get that treasure, like you promised!

And, as I said before, you don't need to split it with me---you can keep all the loot!

Write when you have found it.

 

[EE THr]

All I'm asking,is that you set up a true/legitimate treasure lead,that you honestly believe in--and we'll see what I can do. After-all,that is the true test of any technology. It has to be a bonifide treasure/cache lead--not an insincere "setup",calculated to prove,or disprove. And,if I can accomplish the task,where conventional means have proven insufficient,then we can split the booty. And,you'll have to promise to quit shredding my pant-cuffs. And,the secret of the technology,must remain integral.

LongRanger

Busted again!

Quit whining and go get that treasure, like you promised!

And, as I said before, you don't need to split it with me---you can keep all the loot!

Write when you have found it.

Heckel,

First prove to me that the Dutchman,truely got his gold out of the Superstitions. Then I'll look for it.
But,you will have to show me absolute proof of this. And,the only way you will be able to do so,is to know exactly where it is your-self--and place your jar or picture in the cave. You must supply me with a samply of the gold--so,that when I locate the mine--we can have proof that they are one and the same. Do you think you can get your motorized wheel-chair in there?

The Long Ranger

Where else do you think he got it from?

 

[EE THr]

It's not for me to speculate--But,rather for you to prove. We are only interested in the facts...! Hearsay does not stand up to scientific scrutiny--nor is it acceptable,in a court of law.

It seems that you favor scientific scrutiny only when if favors you, but totally disregard it when referring to your claims about LRLs.

No one has ever proven that the Superstitions even has the correct geology to support the claims.
All we have are a lot of "he said,she saids"--and God only knows,how many dead people.
How can I be certain that one of your deranged relatives,is not lurking there-about,with a Daisy BB gun. And,to think that I'd be way out their,with "no steenking badges"

The Long Ranger

Obviously, as I pointed out earlier, the only way to hunt a "known" treasure area is to have first located the treasure, in order for it to qualify as "known." I guess that it never occurred to you that when someone finds a treasure, the last thing on their mind would be to tell you about it! But, since that didn't seem to faze you any, I gave you one which is generally accepted as being in a localized area---within five miles of Weaver's Needle.

You said that you wanted a real treasure, not a planted one, so how can you now complain about a real treasure? Besides, if it is there, you supposedly would be able to locate it; so if it's not there, you supposedly would be able to say that it's not there, and we could decide on a new site.

Write me when you have determined if it's there or not.

Unless you are afraid of the invisible Apaches left there to guard it.

 

[EE THr]

YOU ARE CHECK-MATED!!!

Not hardly. The "find a treasure" thing was your idea.

Since you can't work your own puzzle, you are the one who is check mated.

 

[aarthrj3811]

~EE~

Are you saying that they are wrong? If so, indicate which part is wrong.
Or are you just fishing for another ad hominem attack?

I do not know if the schematics are correct or not...I know that mine has a lot more electronics in them...I have ask where they come from many times with this same kind of reply..If you don’t know where they come from just tell us that...Art

 

[EE THr]

YOU ARE CHECK-MATED!!!

Not hardly. The "find a treasure" thing was your idea.

Since you can't work your own puzzle, you are the one who is check mated.

You went crazy,up in the Superstitions...!

So that's the last act of your diversion away from the fact that no LRL has ever been proven to the World to actually work at all?

Well, that's typical of the LRL promoters' line. First you make a challenge, then you back out with wimpy excuses, and try to blame it on someone else.

That's just what happens when someone buys an LRL and finds out it doesn't work, and asks the manufacturer for help. He's just given a bunch of BS, and if he doesn't go away, they say it's all his fault that it won't work.

So you are conforming perfectly to the pattern, just like I knew you would.

And once again, you have proven yourself to be your own best skeptic.

Keep up the good work! (And I predict that you will.)

 

[EE THr]

~EE~

Are you saying that they are wrong? If so, indicate which part is wrong.
Or are you just fishing for another ad hominem attack?

I do not know if the schematics are correct or not...I know that mine has a lot more electronics in them...I have ask where they come from many times with this same kind of reply..If you don’t know where they come from just tell us that...Art

They are the schematics for which they are labeled. You are just trying to find something to BS about.

If you know enough about electronics to criticize the schematics in any way, then you know enough to trace out the connections in your RangerTell and make a schematic of your own. But if you did know how to do that, you would have done it by now, and noted any differences.

And since you have not, therefore you do not, so it would do you no good to to have any further information about them. They are either accurate or they are not, that's all that matters.

Since nobody has ever contested their accuracy, then they stand as correct. Period. Live with it.

​