When Ordinary Science Fails to Explain

[werleibr]

You're grasping at straws,because you're a chicken.
The Long Ranger

You asked for a "treasure lead"
When one was offered, you turned tail so fast you
twisted your neck, you are clearly the "chicken"

If the Lost Dutchman is too tough for ya, there are
plenty more "treasure leads" in the Treasure Legends
and Cache Hunting sections of this forum, as well as
many more in the state specific sections, pick one and
find it. You won't, because you can't, your LRL is a fraud,
you'll cackle like the rest of the
LRL believers who get caught in there own lies.

Like the other LRL believers,
you are nothing but...... puff, daddy.

Chicken Little,

I asked Heckel if we could pursue one of his personal leads--that he felt confident was still there,even though,conventional metal detectors had not proven successful--so he could witness the result. When he exibited trepidation over this offer,I stated,that he could hide a hundred silver dollars in a field,and that I would only keep one of them,for a memento.

Carl and Randi both,are shaking their heads,at your absurd Superstition posturing. Get honest man!

Tell me Chicken Little--Will your sky truely fall,when someone comes along,who truely has achieved Long Range Detection--Or,are you going to celibrate,with the rest of the honest world...?!

The Long Ranger

Guess what Long Ranger....You made a minor slip, and you will at this time start to back peddle. Read carefully above... Do you see it.. No? Let me make it bolder and larger.

Tell me Chicken Little--Will your sky truely fall,when someone comes along,who truely has achieved Long Range Detection--Or,are you going to celibrate,with the rest of the honest world...?!

Do you see it.. No?

Will your sky truely fall,when someone comes along,who truely has achieved Long Range Detection--

How about now? You just admitted that no one has come along and truely achieved long rage detection!! Not EVEN YOU!!!

Turklet,You are a desparate LuLu...!

Don't know how the nickname turklet started... But one could claim that with your wording that no one has achieved long range detection yet. That is all.

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

Diving for Pleasure and Treasure - Grab it through Amazon!

[aarthrj3811]

~EE~

His random double-blind test follows The Scientific Method for electronic equipment exactly. You have no idea what the term "double-blind" means, and you have proven your lack of knowledge about this time after time, right on this forum.

Any person that understands English can read the divinations for a Double Blind test and understand it

I have advised you to consult your local school or college about it, but of course you always refuse, because you prefer your own aberrated version in order to provide yourself with another lame excuse for not taking his test.

I have talked to people who have participated in Double blind tests and people who’s job was to administrate Double blind tests so I have no need to talk to people who just think they know as that is what a book told them

Plus, you have admitted on several occasions that his test would prove whether or not a person could get an LRL to work; so you have already validated the authenticity of his test. It's too late for you to change that now. Sorry.

Yes it will only prove if the person can find the targets with a LRL...
It will not prove A Dozen Points Proving LRL Fraud
http://forum.treasurenet.com/index.php/topic,410862.0.html
1. There is no standard electronics explanation for the devices ever working.
2. 2. The movement of the swivel pointer or rods is not powered by the devices.
3. 4. LRL promoters refuse to approve of a credentialed professional organization at which to have their devices or schematics evaluated, such as a university or government agency.
4. 6. LRL promoters refuse to state whether their devices are dowsers, dowsing enhancers, or all-electronically operated units.
5. 7. LRL promoters refuse to state the average percentage of success, under optimal test conditions, that their devices reliably have
6. 10. LRL promoters refuse to approve of any local metal detector club or local high school science class doing a random double-blind demonstration using their devices

So tell us just what you assume that Carl’s test will prove?...Art

 

[werleibr]

Turklet The LuLu,

I hope that I have not somehow confused you with any of your feathered G-Squad comrades: Heckel,Jeckel,Quackle...and,now the august Chicken Little. You will forgive me if I transpose your names from time to time--as on the whole,you are all making about the same squawking calls-for-help!
It must be so terrible,to be a feathered critter...no teeth...no hands(just wings to fly away from a challenge)...bird-size brains...?!

The Long Ranger...Rides again...........!

Tiz you puffdaddy that is confused. Don't know if you chose the screen name as you appear to come on here high or what. Then when you are sober you come on as another alias? I told you that you would back peddle away from your statement of no one has yet to be able to long range locate,

when someone comes along,who truely has achieved Long Range Detection--

These are your words. This statment infers that no one has Long range detected! Now you are trying name calling and taking attention off of the subject. You admitted that Long range detection has not happened yet!

 

[EE THr]

~EE~

His random double-blind test follows The Scientific Method for electronic equipment exactly. You have no idea what the term "double-blind" means, and you have proven your lack of knowledge about this time after time, right on this forum.

Any person that understands English can read the divinations for a Double Blind test and understand it

Since you can't spell in English, it's easy to see that you don't understand it, either. You have continually ignored proper definitions of "double-blind testing."

I have advised you to consult your local school or college about it, but of course you always refuse, because you prefer your own aberrated version in order to provide yourself with another lame excuse for not taking his test.

I have talked to people who have participated in Double blind tests and people who’s job was to administrate Double blind tests so I have no need to talk to people who just think they know as that is what a book told them

The people you mention are, as you have admitted on several occasions, in the food and/or drug industry, and thus they test groups of people. Group testing has no bearing on testing one person with one LRL, which is what is required to prove that you can make your LRL work, and win the $25,000.00. But no, you want a "group" to be tested, which is totally illogical. LRLs are neither a food nor a drug. That's just another of your nonsensical lame excuses for not taking Carl's test.

Furthermore, why would you care if there is a "group" or not? It's your big chance to prove that your LRL works, and you would get 25K to boot! Anyone can see that you are just grasping at straws to avoid taking the test!

The more you make this silly claim about double-blind testing, the more you expose yourself as a fraud. So, keep up the good work of being your own best skeptic!

Plus, you have admitted on several occasions that his test would prove whether or not a person could get an LRL to work; so you have already validated the authenticity of his test. It's too late for you to change that now. Sorry.

Yes it will only prove if the person can find the targets with a LRL...
It will not prove A Dozen Points Proving LRL Fraud
http://forum.treasurenet.com/index.php/topic,410862.0.html
1. There is no standard electronics explanation for the devices ever working.
2. 2. The movement of the swivel pointer or rods is not powered by the devices.
3. 4. LRL promoters refuse to approve of a credentialed professional organization at which to have their devices or schematics evaluated, such as a university or government agency.
4. 6. LRL promoters refuse to state whether their devices are dowsers, dowsing enhancers, or all-electronically operated units.
5. 7. LRL promoters refuse to state the average percentage of success, under optimal test conditions, that their devices reliably have
6. 10. LRL promoters refuse to approve of any local metal detector club or local high school science class doing a random double-blind demonstration using their devices

"The Dozen Proofs" stand on their own. Your refusal to take a double-blind test is only one of them.

So tell us just what you assume that Carl’s test will prove?...Art

That has already been stated, by you, and by me, and by Carl and Randi.

A Dozen Points Proving LRL Fraud These points have never been rationally refuted.
"The level of sanity or insanity of the subject matter, determines the level of sanity or insanity of the two-way communication attainable in any discussion."

 

[EE THr]

Turklet The LuLu,

I hope that I have not somehow confused you with any of your feathered G-Squad comrades: Heckel,Jeckel,Quackle...and,now the august Chicken Little. You will forgive me if I transpose your names from time to time--as on the whole,you are all making about the same squawking calls-for-help!
It must be so terrible,to be a feathered critter...no teeth...no hands(just wings to fly away from a challenge)...bird-size brains...?!

The Long Ranger...Rides again...........!

Puffy-Rocky-Fenix---

When someone resorts to insults, it means that they have no factual data to back up their claims.


Thus, you continue to be your own best skeptic.

Thanks, and keep up the good work!

 

[EE THr]

werleibr---

These LRL promoters are hilarious. When you show them directly that they have contradicted their own stories, they simply resort to nonsensical insults.

Then, five or ten posts later, they will make the very same statement which you have proven them wrong about!

Their purpose on here is to just keep talking as though LRLs were real. In doing so, they hope that someone will see it, and believe it, and buy one.

That is their pattern---always. They just keep going around in circles.

I don't think that anyone would spend that much effort at obviously a losing proposition, unless they were getting paid to do so.

If they aren't getting paid by the word, but by sales commissions, they had better start thinking about getting real jobs!

 

[EE THr]

Turklet...this is pure entertainment...!

OK. So maybe I'm all wrong about you.

Then what really is your purpose for your spending so much time making phony claims such as being knowledgeable in electronics, and having a secret device?

I don't need to expound on your serious lack of electronics knowledge, but the "secret" thing you, yourself, have contradicted already. You said that your friend patented your other invention, and now you can't touch it. So there you have it---you know that you could just patent you alleged device, and thus protect it. So your excuse about that is phony, too.

And you know that LRLs don't work.

But the main question is still: Why do you spend so much time trying to convince people that your device actually works?

 

[EE THr]

Get those silver dollars hidden,and lets get this show on the road--The Long Ranger has "come along"--So you have no more excuses...!

Your new request, to find hidden silver coins, has already been granted.

This is your second chance. It's a chance to redeem yourself, after flaking out on the Lost Dutchman treasure.

Any popular metal detector could do it easily, within it's own published specifications, so surely your Super Duper Secret Locator (SDSL) can make quick work of it, within it's published specifications, no sweat.

It is here.


Write when you have found all the silver coins.

 

[aarthrj3811]

~EE~

The people you mention are, as you have admitted on several occasions, in the food and/or drug industry, and thus they test groups of people. Group testing has no bearing on testing one person with one LRL, which is what is required to prove that you can make your LRL work, and win the $25,000.00. But no, you want a "group" to be tested, which is totally illogical. LRLs are neither a food nor a drug. That's just another of your nonsensical lame excuses for not taking Carl's test.

Furthermore, why would you care if there is a "group" or not? It's your big chance to prove that your LRL works, and you would get 25K to boot! Anyone can see that you are just grasping at straws to avoid taking the test!

The more you make this silly claim about double-blind testing, the more you expose yourself as a fraud. So, keep up the good work of being your own best skeptic!

No..One was in the Food industry (Campbell Soup) and the other was a VP for Proctor and gamble both big companies.

Group testing has no bearing on testing one person with one LRL, which is what is required to prove that you can make your LRL work,

Unless it is a group test it is not a double blind test. Carl's test will prove nothing about LRL's

Furthermore, why would you care if there is a "group" or not? It's your big chance to prove that your LRL works, and you would get 25K to boot! Anyone can see that you are just grasping at straws to avoid taking the test!

I have already proved with photo’s and movies http://forum.treasurenet.com/index.php/topic,305970.0.html
So I have already proved that I know how to locate and recover treasure with my LRL...Art

 

[EE THr]

~EE~

The people you mention are, as you have admitted on several occasions, in the food and/or drug industry, and thus they test groups of people. Group testing has no bearing on testing one person with one LRL, which is what is required to prove that you can make your LRL work, and win the $25,000.00. But no, you want a "group" to be tested, which is totally illogical. LRLs are neither a food nor a drug. That's just another of your nonsensical lame excuses for not taking Carl's test.

Furthermore, why would you care if there is a "group" or not? It's your big chance to prove that your LRL works, and you would get 25K to boot! Anyone can see that you are just grasping at straws to avoid taking the test!

The more you make this silly claim about double-blind testing, the more you expose yourself as a fraud. So, keep up the good work of being your own best skeptic!

No..One was in the Food industry (Campbell Soup) and the other was a VP for Proctor and gamble both big companies.

OK. Proctor and Gamble makes consumer goods. They test to see how people like those goods. So would you like a test to see how people like LRLs? Is that what you are saying?

Then make your own test, and give your own reward. But who would you give it to? The people tested, if they like your LRL? That doesn't make any sense, but go ahead and do it if you want to.

Carl has offered his reward to anyone who can prove, in his scientifically controlled, random double-blind test, that an LRL works. One person, one LRL. That's his offer. And you can't pass the test, because your LRLs don't work. Too bad.

I suppose you don't want an extra $25,000.00. If you think anyone would believe that, you also believe in the tooth fairy.

Group testing has no bearing on testing one person with one LRL, which is what is required to prove that you can make your LRL work,

Unless it is a group test it is not a double blind test. Carl's test will prove nothing about LRL's

Furthermore, why would you care if there is a "group" or not? It's your big chance to prove that your LRL works, and you would get 25K to boot! Anyone can see that you are just grasping at straws to avoid taking the test!

I have already proved with photo’s and movies http://forum.treasurenet.com/index.php/topic,305970.0.html
So I have already proved that I know how to locate and recover treasure with my LRL...Art

You have never proved anything. All of your fake photos and fake videos have been debunked. You are a phony.

 

[EE THr]

You are mistaken! I have never claimed to have patented anything!

No, you are the one who is mistaken---I never said that you patented anything.

Let's summarize, shall we?

1. You can't read.
2. You don't know electronics.
3. You claim to have designed a Super Duper Locating Device.
4. You want to protect it, but you don't want to patent it.
5. You are busy running a business, but you have time to make phony posts.
6. You try to make yourself believable by saying that other LRLs don't work, but yours does.
7. You make challenges, then fail to back them up, and try to blame it on others.
8. You try to say the conditions of your challenge were different than they really were.
9. You claim on your site that you have passed blind tests, yet you can't pass Carl's or Randi's tests.
10. When you're caught in a lie, you turn to pure insults, with no factual data, as a reply.

My fingers are getting tired, but I think everyone gets the picture here.





Don't be a doof---show the proof! And quit complaining about the truth, the facts, and reality!

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]

Nice try,but,I am not my brother!

If you say so, Puffy-Rocky-fenix!

 

[EddieR]

You're grasping at straws,because you're a chicken.
The Long Ranger

You asked for a "treasure lead"
When one was offered, you turned tail so fast you
twisted your neck, you are clearly the "chicken"

If the Lost Dutchman is too tough for ya, there are
plenty more "treasure leads" in the Treasure Legends
and Cache Hunting sections of this forum, as well as
many more in the state specific sections, pick one and
find it. You won't, because you can't, your LRL is a fraud,
you'll cackle like the rest of the
LRL believers who get caught in there own lies.

Like the other LRL believers,
you are nothing but...... puff, daddy.

Chicken Little,

I asked Heckel if we could pursue one of his personal leads--that he felt confident was still there,even though,conventional metal detectors had not proven successful--so he could witness the result. When he exibited trepidation over this offer,I stated,that he could hide a hundred silver dollars in a field,and that I would only keep one of them,for a memento.

Carl and Randi both,are shaking their heads,at your absurd Superstition posturing. Get honest man!

Tell me Chicken Little--Will your sky truely fall,when someone comes along,who truely has achieved Long Range Detection--Or,are you going to celibrate,with the rest of the honest world...?!

The Long Ranger

Guess what Long Ranger....You made a minor slip, and you will at this time start to back peddle. Read carefully above... Do you see it.. No? Let me make it bolder and larger.

Tell me Chicken Little--Will your sky truely fall,when someone comes along,who truely has achieved Long Range Detection--Or,are you going to celibrate,with the rest of the honest world...?!

Do you see it.. No?

Will your sky truely fall,when someone comes along,who truely has achieved Long Range Detection--

How about now? You just admitted that no one has come along and truely achieved long rage detection!! Not EVEN YOU!!!

Actually, that wording can also be taken exactly as written....meaning "what will your reaction be when a person who has achieved long range detection comes along".

 

[EddieR]

Sigh

Art, those schematics were posted as a reference to what I was asking for. Kind of like this picture I am posting now. Here is a real electronic schematic for a FM bug transmitter aka a wireless microphone. I am looking for one of these made by the manufacture of their equipment. Or since these others like Puff and that other guy claim they have made their own that are not fradulent, but refuse to put up here because we are closed minded skeptics is just a sad excuse of they really don't got it. It is just like kids on a playground. They claim to have something then you ask to see it and they are like no you can't. The reason is that kid dose not have what they claim they have.

Now will you so called inventors please post an electronic diagram? Or how about this post a picture of your LRL put together, not open. Post something other than this childish BS. Pretending to have something but stating our minds cannot handle it or that we will just throw it out is obserd. Yes we will look for things to find out if it truly works or not.


Also who the heck is Randi? I keep seeing his GD name but have no clue who the heck he is.

Randi is the LRL believers worst nightmare, he lives in
their dreams and makes them screams

He'll pay for proof, they have only poooooooof.

They attack him behind his back with smack?

His prize they can't win, many years it has been.

The money they can't claim, their devices, too lame.

It's Amazing how the mere mention of his name
makes them squirms like worms.

You left one out:

You'll drive him wild
If you are a child

 

[woof!]

http://www.terrafirmaassayers.com/long-range-locators.pdf

Great find, SWR! Great piece of LRL literature, which like nearly all such literature inadvertently explains why LRL's don't work. A classic "read the advertisement".

PuffDaddy, if what you've got is the same thing as what that "brother" has got, your LRL doesn't work. Your "brother" explained why it doesn't work, and he even explained why people like him and yourself believe it works even when it doesn't. The "advertisement" spills the beans.

People who delude themselves usually get there by faulty reasoning, and the subconscious mind usually knows the trick that the ego played. Therefore when a person is deluded, there is usually a mental split, the subconscious knowing the truth and the conscious mind not knowing it. The result is that the subconscious mind kicks in and causes behavior that reveals what it knows.

I'm not suggesting that you're schizophrenic, but if you've ever had to deal with a person who's schizophrenic you've probably noticed this about them. Typically they'll have a first-class delusion that is demonstrably objectively false, and nothing you can say will convince them that their delusion is not true. But with many delusions, ordinary everyday survival requires that a part of the mind not fall victim to the delusion, and in certain moments and circumstances you can see that the person speaks and acts in a way contrary to the delusion. A schizophrenic's ability to live something like a normal life often depends on their ability (usually with the help of a skilled therapist) to tap into the part of their mind that knows what is real, and to recognize and ignore the delusion even though the delusion itself is still there.

That same principle explained in somewhat different wording is what scientific thinking is, practiced as an intentional mental discipline. It is human nature to follow the path of delusion, and to reject that path and listen to what the Universe has to say let the chips fall where they may, is described in several major religions as the path to the divine.

--Toto

 

[EE THr]

Now you're taking refuge behind Carl's skirts again! Wasn't the Superstitions a big enough place to hide?! Can't you scrape up a hundred silver dollars?! Poor Heckel!

If you think for one single moment, that I would go out of my way to assist you, you're nuts!

You said you wanted a real treasure---I gave you one.

You said you wanted a real test---you've got one.

Better make the next one good, because three strikes and your out!

 

[EE THr]

Puffy-Rocky-Fenix---

By the way, since you are bragging about all the major treasure you have found, how about backing up those statements with some photos?

I can haredly wait!

P.S. This is your last chance for a hit.

 

[werleibr]

You're grasping at straws,because you're a chicken.
The Long Ranger

You asked for a "treasure lead"
When one was offered, you turned tail so fast you
twisted your neck, you are clearly the "chicken"

If the Lost Dutchman is too tough for ya, there are
plenty more "treasure leads" in the Treasure Legends
and Cache Hunting sections of this forum, as well as
many more in the state specific sections, pick one and
find it. You won't, because you can't, your LRL is a fraud,
you'll cackle like the rest of the
LRL believers who get caught in there own lies.

Like the other LRL believers,
you are nothing but...... puff, daddy.

Chicken Little,

I asked Heckel if we could pursue one of his personal leads--that he felt confident was still there,even though,conventional metal detectors had not proven successful--so he could witness the result. When he exibited trepidation over this offer,I stated,that he could hide a hundred silver dollars in a field,and that I would only keep one of them,for a memento.

Carl and Randi both,are shaking their heads,at your absurd Superstition posturing. Get honest man!

Tell me Chicken Little--Will your sky truely fall,when someone comes along,who truely has achieved Long Range Detection--Or,are you going to celibrate,with the rest of the honest world...?!

The Long Ranger

Guess what Long Ranger....You made a minor slip, and you will at this time start to back peddle. Read carefully above... Do you see it.. No? Let me make it bolder and larger.

Tell me Chicken Little--Will your sky truely fall,when someone comes along,who truely has achieved Long Range Detection--Or,are you going to celibrate,with the rest of the honest world...?!

Do you see it.. No?

Will your sky truely fall,when someone comes along,who truely has achieved Long Range Detection--

How about now? You just admitted that no one has come along and truely achieved long rage detection!! Not EVEN YOU!!!

Actually, that wording can also be taken exactly as written....meaning "what will your reaction be when a person who has achieved long range detection comes along".

But no one has!!!!! Key word is WHEN and IF EVER.

Also Puff, You cannot even keep your name calling straight. You cannot even stick to one person having one nickname, you interchange them. Sad. You are backpeddling and running from your statement.

 

[EddieR]

You're grasping at straws,because you're a chicken.
The Long Ranger

You asked for a "treasure lead"
When one was offered, you turned tail so fast you
twisted your neck, you are clearly the "chicken"

If the Lost Dutchman is too tough for ya, there are
plenty more "treasure leads" in the Treasure Legends
and Cache Hunting sections of this forum, as well as
many more in the state specific sections, pick one and
find it. You won't, because you can't, your LRL is a fraud,
you'll cackle like the rest of the
LRL believers who get caught in there own lies.

Like the other LRL believers,
you are nothing but...... puff, daddy.

Chicken Little,

I asked Heckel if we could pursue one of his personal leads--that he felt confident was still there,even though,conventional metal detectors had not proven successful--so he could witness the result. When he exibited trepidation over this offer,I stated,that he could hide a hundred silver dollars in a field,and that I would only keep one of them,for a memento.

Carl and Randi both,are shaking their heads,at your absurd Superstition posturing. Get honest man!

Tell me Chicken Little--Will your sky truely fall,when someone comes along,who truely has achieved Long Range Detection--Or,are you going to celibrate,with the rest of the honest world...?!

The Long Ranger

Guess what Long Ranger....You made a minor slip, and you will at this time start to back peddle. Read carefully above... Do you see it.. No? Let me make it bolder and larger.

Tell me Chicken Little--Will your sky truely fall,when someone comes along,who truely has achieved Long Range Detection--Or,are you going to celibrate,with the rest of the honest world...?!

Do you see it.. No?

Will your sky truely fall,when someone comes along,who truely has achieved Long Range Detection--

How about now? You just admitted that no one has come along and truely achieved long rage detection!! Not EVEN YOU!!!

Actually, that wording can also be taken exactly as written....meaning "what will your reaction be when a person who has achieved long range detection comes along".

But no one has!!!!! Key word is WHEN and IF EVER.

Also Puff, You cannot even keep your name calling straight. You cannot even stick to one person having one nickname, you interchange them. Sad. You are backpeddling and running from your statement.

Maybe they have and it wasn't documented. Do you have proof otherwise?

I know, I know....if it were real the world would know, right? Not necessarily. Only if it were made public, and only if the person searching for it knew where to look.

I'll use Randi as an example. I've been involved in the paranormal field since the early 90's, and I had never heard of him until I got on this forum. Then I did the research.

Let me tell you what Randi is: He is a sick old doddering fool that has found the "hot button" of supposedly learned people and is fleecing them left and right. He begs for donations, and even has his own credit card that benefits his organization of "sheep". He has been accused of having some horrible interests (pedo----ia). He tells everyone to use common sense, then wants them to send him a donation for telling them!!! And people do it!!!!!

Now based on all that, guess what I think of people who support his "cause"?

 

[EE THr]

Maybe they have and it wasn't documented. Do you have proof otherwise?

I know, I know....if it were real the world would know, right? Not necessarily. Only if it were made public, and only if the person searching for it knew where to look.

I'll use Randi as an example. I've been involved in the paranormal field since the early 90's, and I had never heard of him until I got on this forum. Then I did the research.

Let me tell you what Randi is: He is a sick old doddering fool that has found the "hot button" of supposedly learned people and is fleecing them left and right. He begs for donations, and even has his own credit card that benefits his organization of "sheep". He has been accused of having some horrible interests (pedo----ia). He tells everyone to use common sense, then wants them to send him a donation for telling them!!! And people do it!!!!!

Now based on all that, guess what I think of people who support his "cause"?

I've never researched any of that, so I can't speak on it one way or the other.

However, in the way that Randi's offer to people claiming paranormal powers, pertains to the topics of this forum, what would matter is whether or not his offer is real, and if it is conducted fairly.

I haven't participated in his paranormal testing offer, but all the printed material seems to me to indicate that it's fair. furthermore, I don't know of anyone who has complained of being cheated.

Rather than speculating about "the messenger," how about sticking to the facts?

If you have some real evidence that Randi's test is bogus, I would certainly like to know about it, and I think others on the forum would too.

So, do you?