aarthrj3811
Gold Member
~EE~
Just another claim..Art
When Ordinary Science Fails to Explain
- Thread starter hung
- Start date
- Status
EE THr
Silver Member
aarthrj3811 said:
A Dozen Points Proving LRL Fraud These points have never been rationally refuted.
All this evidence that LRLs don't work....And no proof that they do.
Not a very encouraging scoreboard for you, Art.
P.S. Will you please tell us the fairy tale about why no LRLers ever post in the "Finds" section again? Or appear in the newspaper articles of found treasures? I haven't heard that one in a long time.
aarthrj3811
Gold Member
~EE~
Those are not points or proof..they are you personal opinions with not facts at all
The proof that they work is all over this board in the form of testimonials, photo’s and movies..
What scoreboard are you talking about?
Why should we post in the “finds section” and give you skeptics another place to post your nonsense. I would guess that you don’t read the right newspaper....Art
EE THr
Silver Member
aarthrj3811 said:~EE~
Those are not points or proof..they are you personal opinions with not facts at all
They have never been rationally refuted. All you can do is call them "opinions," while anyone reading them recognizes them as facts, as demonstrated by you LRL promoters, right here on this forum.
The proof that they work is all over this board in the form of testimonials, photo’s and movies..
You just post stories and twisted attempts at logic. Don't be a Doof---Show the proof!
Oops, I almost forgot---you can't show any proof, because there isn't any!
What scoreboard are you talking about?
The scoreboard of life, Art. Lies always lose, and truth always wins.
Why should we post in the “finds section” and give you skeptics another place to post your nonsense. I would guess that you don’t read the right newspaper....Art
Oh yeah! I really like that one! Please go on with it---you know, the parts about you can't show all the huge treasures you have found, because it's a big secret from the government and all that malarkey? Let us hear it all again! You tell it so well! The way you make stuff up as you go along, just can't be beat! It's even better than TV, these days!
ref: Predictable Pattern of Con Artists
Attachments
aarthrj3811
Gold Member
~EE~
We have rationally refuted them all..You just don’t have the knowledge to understand the truth.
~Art~
Why should we post in the “finds section” and give you skeptics another place to post your nonsense. I would guess that you don’t read the right newspaper....Art
We have rationally refuted them all..You just don’t have the knowledge to understand the truth.
Our stories are the truth about using a LRL and our twisted logic is stuff that you are not capable of understanding
Are you blind?
Yes..you are a loser
Good answer to
~Art~
Why should we post in the “finds section” and give you skeptics another place to post your nonsense. I would guess that you don’t read the right newspaper....Art
EE THr
Silver Member
Art---
Thanks for reiterating the same junk, over and over. That confirms my #33 in the link below, which is a prediction I made seven months ago, and you have proven that it is true many, many times since.
ref: Are LRLs More Than Just Dowsing?
Keep up the good work!
Thanks for reiterating the same junk, over and over. That confirms my #33 in the link below, which is a prediction I made seven months ago, and you have proven that it is true many, many times since.
ref: Are LRLs More Than Just Dowsing?
Keep up the good work!
aarthrj3811
Gold Member
~EE~
If you think that Dowsing uses electronics you would be correct...But when Dowsing it is just you and a Dowsing rod..
So I will ask the same question again....If I can get all the information about a target where I first find the target how could it be Dowsing?..When dowsing You can not determine the depth of the object until you reach it..that is all you can learn...With my LRL I know the distance to the target, depth of the target, If it is a coin, bar or ring and the approximant weight..the options you have are...Answer the the question, Spin and twist an answer or you duck and dodge the whole post
More re-runs..Thank You...Art
Are LRLs More Than Just Dowsing?
If you think that Dowsing uses electronics you would be correct...But when Dowsing it is just you and a Dowsing rod..
So I will ask the same question again....If I can get all the information about a target where I first find the target how could it be Dowsing?..When dowsing You can not determine the depth of the object until you reach it..that is all you can learn...With my LRL I know the distance to the target, depth of the target, If it is a coin, bar or ring and the approximant weight..the options you have are...Answer the the question, Spin and twist an answer or you duck and dodge the whole post
More re-runs..Thank You...Art
Are LRLs More Than Just Dowsing?
EE THr
Silver Member
aarthrj3811 said:
Please think of some new BS---you are getting boring.
aarthrj3811
Gold Member
~Art~
~EE~
Looks like you used all the options except for answering the question..Art
EE THr
Silver Member
aarthrj3811 said:
You didn't ask a question.
aarthrj3811
Gold Member
~Art~
..
~EE~
It must be terrible not to know when your spinning and twisting or just plain old ducking and dodging..Art
EE THr
Silver Member
aarthrj3811 said:
If you are referring to that multiple choice you offered me, it was not a question.
It is an "interrogative statement."
Use your dictionary.
aarthrj3811
Gold Member
~EE~
If I can get all the information about a target where I first find the target how could it be Dowsing?..
No need to use a dictionary..It is clear that you understood the question as you are still trying to spin and twist you way out of answering it..
If I can get all the information about a target where I first find the target how could it be Dowsing?..
EE THr
Silver Member
aarthrj3811 said:
Art, when will you learn? A statement is not a question.
I already posted a link to the definition of "loaded question," but you conveniently ignored that. You also ignored the information about the interrogatory statement. Both show how your question is invalid. Yet you continue with your silliness.
You continue to be your own best debunker.
Thanks for your help, and keep up the good work.
"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."
Real de Tayopa Tropical Tramp
Gold Member
howdy ya'all spec. Ee: You posted -->Actually, you have been saying, by inference of your statements, just the opposite.
*************
Is inference a viable scientific term??
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
You posted --> You have continually made statements based upon mere ideas
*************
and just what IS a theory? hmmm hmmm
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
You posted -->You seem to have no regard for proof or testing of these previous concepts on which you base your conclusions of possibilities.
************
for example??
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
You posted --> You also try to disjointedly connect some successful experiments with other unrelated suppositions
***********
Isn't that the basic block of science?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
You posted -->And your complaint about werleibr's information being too wordy, is a common one for you
***********
Wasn't it a bit? not his fault though.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
You posted --> If you could have said it in fewer words, then why haven't you before now?
***********
Did
Don Jose de La Mancha
*************
Is inference a viable scientific term??
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
You posted --> You have continually made statements based upon mere ideas
*************
and just what IS a theory? hmmm hmmm
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
You posted -->You seem to have no regard for proof or testing of these previous concepts on which you base your conclusions of possibilities.
************
for example??
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
You posted --> You also try to disjointedly connect some successful experiments with other unrelated suppositions
***********
Isn't that the basic block of science?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
You posted -->And your complaint about werleibr's information being too wordy, is a common one for you
***********
Wasn't it a bit? not his fault though.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
You posted --> If you could have said it in fewer words, then why haven't you before now?
***********
Did
Don Jose de La Mancha
EE THr
Silver Member
Real de Tayopa Tropical Tramp said:howdy ya'all spec. Ee: You posted -->Actually, you have been saying, by inference of your statements, just the opposite.
*************
Is inference a viable scientific term??
It's a word in the American English dictionaries. Look it up.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
You posted --> You have continually made statements based upon mere ideas
*************
and just what IS a theory? hmmm hmmm
That was pretty much covered in the post which you were just whining about.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
You posted -->You seem to have no regard for proof or testing of these previous concepts on which you base your conclusions of possibilities.
************
for example??
I've mentioned this to you before. I'm not going to jump through hoops for you now.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
You posted --> You also try to disjointedly connect some successful experiments with other unrelated suppositions
***********
Isn't that the basic block of science?
Nope.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
You posted -->And your complaint about werleibr's information being too wordy, is a common one for you
***********
Wasn't it a bit? not his fault though.
It gave information from several different perspectives. That usually makes something more clear. However, due to your question about his subject matter, above, you are indicating that it didn't work for you.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
You posted --> If you could have said it in fewer words, then why haven't you before now?
***********
Did
If you did, I've never heard it from you. And you don't practice it when posting, that's for sure.
Don Jose de La Mancha
In addition, you have offered no coffee recently. I'm starting to think that you are a bit miffed or something.
Real de Tayopa Tropical Tramp
Gold Member
good morning EE mi 
slurping buddy: You posted -->your last post was a classic example of posting nothing of value on the body of the post referred to ??.
**************
Side thingy, an interesting post by a physician from a family of multi generations of Physicians about Electrical / Electronic engineers etc, snicker, the emphasis are mine -->
"Training-- which is what 'scientists and engineers' get-- is not true 'education;' it is more of an apprenticeship. Higher education entails 'mastering ' --> 'critical and analytical thinking', <-- both of which are --> anathema <-- to the craft of engineering-- and arguably that of all but perhaps research science. I come from a multi-generational family of physicians-- all of whom began their academic career with a liberal arts education, by the way-- and I can assure you that there is nothing right brain or intellectually expansive about what any of them do. They are, essentially, --> human computers and robots. <-- That is what the job requires of them. The old family money, however, came from those who honed their skills in the creative arts-- and yes, at university".
Hmmm, I will say that the author suffers from the common superiority complex that is all too common to / in many Physicians. But that isn't truly their fault since it is beat into their conscious in med school almost from day one.
Don Jose de La Mancha
slurping buddy: You posted -->your last post was a classic example of posting nothing of value on the body of the post referred to ??.**************
Side thingy, an interesting post by a physician from a family of multi generations of Physicians about Electrical / Electronic engineers etc, snicker, the emphasis are mine -->
"Training-- which is what 'scientists and engineers' get-- is not true 'education;' it is more of an apprenticeship. Higher education entails 'mastering ' --> 'critical and analytical thinking', <-- both of which are --> anathema <-- to the craft of engineering-- and arguably that of all but perhaps research science. I come from a multi-generational family of physicians-- all of whom began their academic career with a liberal arts education, by the way-- and I can assure you that there is nothing right brain or intellectually expansive about what any of them do. They are, essentially, --> human computers and robots. <-- That is what the job requires of them. The old family money, however, came from those who honed their skills in the creative arts-- and yes, at university".
Hmmm, I will say that the author suffers from the common superiority complex that is all too common to / in many Physicians. But that isn't truly their fault since it is beat into their conscious in med school almost from day one.
Don Jose de La Mancha
Real de Tayopa Tropical Tramp
Gold Member
Howdy EE , you are gonna get a coffee jag if this keeps up.
you posted -->You posted -->Actually, you have been saying, by inference of your statements, just the opposite.
*************
Jose - Is inference a viable scientific term??
It's a word in the American English dictionaries. Look it up.
***************
So is XXXL XXXX, snicker.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
You also posted-->You have continually made statements based upon mere ideas
*************
Jose - and just what IS a theory? hmmm hmmm
That was pretty much covered in the post which you were just whining about.
***************
Jose -- Not really .
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
You alss posted -->You have continually made statements based upon mere ideas
*************
and just what IS a theory? hmmm hmmm
That was pretty much covered in the post which you were just whining about.
***************
Jose -- not really, I suggest that you go read it again with an open mind for the rest of your post..
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Wer lieber posted -->Every "good" scientific theory is a prohibition: it forbids certain things to happen. The more a theory forbids, the better it is.
***********
Jose - Interesting, so a good scientific example is 'it is imposible for life to evolve right'?
don Jose d e L aMancha
p.s don't forget my coffee, no sugar, but yes, cream.
, you are gonna get a coffee jag if this keeps up.you posted -->You posted -->Actually, you have been saying, by inference of your statements, just the opposite.
*************
Jose - Is inference a viable scientific term??
It's a word in the American English dictionaries. Look it up.
***************
So is XXXL XXXX, snicker.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
You also posted-->You have continually made statements based upon mere ideas
*************
Jose - and just what IS a theory? hmmm hmmm
That was pretty much covered in the post which you were just whining about.
***************
Jose -- Not really .
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
You alss posted -->You have continually made statements based upon mere ideas
*************
and just what IS a theory? hmmm hmmm
That was pretty much covered in the post which you were just whining about.
***************
Jose -- not really, I suggest that you go read it again with an open mind for the rest of your post..
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Wer lieber posted -->Every "good" scientific theory is a prohibition: it forbids certain things to happen. The more a theory forbids, the better it is.
***********
Jose - Interesting, so a good scientific example is 'it is imposible for life to evolve right'?
don Jose d e L aMancha
p.s don't forget my coffee, no sugar, but yes, cream.
EE THr
Silver Member
RDT---
Those were, in my opinion, a couple of your better posts in this section.
I agree that "education" has become more a matter of memorisation, than understanding of subjects. But let's face it, education is being run by those who profess that printing up huge amounts of additional worthless paper money, is somehow going to make that very same money become worth more, and thus "solve the inflation problem." And people who memorize that mantra are in for big problems!
When I first started posting in this section, I saw that people who were engaged in arguments were each using the same words, but they had different definitions for those words. And I made a couple of posts pointing out that without first defining key terms, understanding each other was impossible.
In this thread, and the other active one in this section, there are some good definitions of the word "theory." Of course, there is the everyday definition, and there are the scientific definitions. Each is valid in it's own usage, depending on the circumstances. But when people try to interchange the two, nothing makes any sense.
I think that if someone really wants to discuss something like LRLs, they should be aware of both definitions, and use the proper terminology accordingly. Unless they are intentionally trying to confuse an issue.
Actually, "It is impossible for life to evolve right," is a very good scientific example. Because, if you define evolution as a totally random occurrence, it is mathematically impossible. As you have stated before, our abilities are apparently unlimited---which is true on a spiritual level, and the spiritual abilities are causative over the physical universe. As usual, I'm just offering my observations, rather than trying to convince, so, while willing to discuss it, I have no interest in debating that particular subject. But that is why I have always stated that I have "no reason" to doubt that some people can find stuff with dowsing rods or LRLs. However, the same statement holds true for using a roadkill skunk, or anything else. 8)
Those were, in my opinion, a couple of your better posts in this section.
I agree that "education" has become more a matter of memorisation, than understanding of subjects. But let's face it, education is being run by those who profess that printing up huge amounts of additional worthless paper money, is somehow going to make that very same money become worth more, and thus "solve the inflation problem." And people who memorize that mantra are in for big problems!
When I first started posting in this section, I saw that people who were engaged in arguments were each using the same words, but they had different definitions for those words. And I made a couple of posts pointing out that without first defining key terms, understanding each other was impossible.
In this thread, and the other active one in this section, there are some good definitions of the word "theory." Of course, there is the everyday definition, and there are the scientific definitions. Each is valid in it's own usage, depending on the circumstances. But when people try to interchange the two, nothing makes any sense.
I think that if someone really wants to discuss something like LRLs, they should be aware of both definitions, and use the proper terminology accordingly. Unless they are intentionally trying to confuse an issue.
Actually, "It is impossible for life to evolve right," is a very good scientific example. Because, if you define evolution as a totally random occurrence, it is mathematically impossible. As you have stated before, our abilities are apparently unlimited---which is true on a spiritual level, and the spiritual abilities are causative over the physical universe. As usual, I'm just offering my observations, rather than trying to convince, so, while willing to discuss it, I have no interest in debating that particular subject. But that is why I have always stated that I have "no reason" to doubt that some people can find stuff with dowsing rods or LRLs. However, the same statement holds true for using a roadkill skunk, or anything else. 8)
Quote Edited to answer the one question.
Don, a Theory: A theory is what one or more hypotheses become once they have been verified and accepted to be true. A theory is an explanation of a set of related observations or events based upon proven hypotheses and verified multiple times by detached groups of researchers.
Read below about posting about Theorys, Hypothysis, and Laws in scientific terms.
Real de Tayopa Tropical Tramp said:
Don, a Theory: A theory is what one or more hypotheses become once they have been verified and accepted to be true. A theory is an explanation of a set of related observations or events based upon proven hypotheses and verified multiple times by detached groups of researchers.
Read below about posting about Theorys, Hypothysis, and Laws in scientific terms.
werleibr said:
- Status
Top Member Reactions
-
3334 -
1928 -
1922 -
1192 -
1094 -
865 -
821 -
818 -
814 -
787 -
777 -
533 -
501 -
477 -
425 -
E
419
-
418 -
418 -
395 -
387
