Why skeptics doesnt show proof?

[aarthrj3811]

Re: Why skeptics doesn't show proof?

Make up your minds. Do you want proof they are fraudulent, or do you want to be shown a conviction?

Can not find any convictions SWR ?

There are various threads within this section with ample proof of fraud. For some reason or the other, you believe a PERSON has to be convicted of a crime to prove the product is fraudulent. That isn't so

If the fraud is happening One would assume that someone would be convicted .,.Logic 101

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

Minelab PRO-FIND 35 Waterproof Pinpointer Metal Detector for Experts with Tone ID & Adjustable Sensitivity - Grab it through Amazon!

[GuyinWH]

Re: Why skeptics doesn't show proof?

[mod]TERMS VIOLATION

http://www.treasurenet.com/terms/[/mod]

 

[aarthrj3811]

Re: Why skeptics doesn't show proof?

Oh and I repeat, bogus claims require legitimate proof. You STILL fail to prove anything. We are the ones that have nothing to prove, we just do so to tick you all off. :-D (and to read your crap rebuttals and laugh ourselves to sleep at night)

A confliction of fraud may help you..Art

 

[GuyinWH]

Re: Why skeptics doesn't show proof?

Oh and I repeat, bogus claims require legitimate proof. You STILL fail to prove anything. We are the ones that have nothing to prove, we just do so to tick you all off. :-D (and to read your crap rebuttals and laugh ourselves to sleep at night)

A confliction of fraud may help you..Art

And again we begin the process of going around in circles thanks to you.
Heres more..

http://prod.sandia.gov/techlib/access-control.cgi/1998/980977.pdf
http://www.ih2000.net/ira/quad0422.htm
http://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2007/03/the_doghouse_sn.html
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/somerset/8634349.stm

Look up;
ADE 651, Alpha 6, GT200, Sniffex, Quadro Tracker, DKL lifeguard.
That's not to mention the DoD blanket ban on LRLs of any/all kind for ALL being found to be frauds; you can find that link in one of my older posts. (One of my posts before I got banned LAST time since the mods are heavily biased for LRLs).
Look up these companies owners, look up their track records, look up their education.
All of these people who make these products do not have the proper education to MAKE/INVENT (etc)
a device that can do what they claim they can do. You'll also find a few using false names and fake addresses, not to mention foreign addresses and IDs to cover up for when the poop hits the fan. The only reason you don't see MORE lawsuits and why YOU aren't in jail is because we make sure to let people know that these devices have been found to be a fraud 100% of the time. Most people aren't --deleted-- or dumb, most DO ask, but I assure you most do not bother touching the subject of LRLs after speaking with me. I've made a good deal of money PROVING they do not work to engineering firms that try to use these for finding cavities underground or certain minerals, trust me, they are happy to have seen me disprove these machines by not using anything at all (dumb luck wins every time), its really not hard at all. So far I'm about 34/34 on companies that have asked me to prove/disprove these and have been successful every single time without a hitch. Out of these, I only know of about 3 that are/have filed lawsuits and last I heard one of there lawyers just outright told them it's not even worth the effort because the owner is broke and will go to jail before paying up, and even getting him jailed would be an issue. (I'm no lawyer so I don't mess with the legal aspects.) I have been lucky to be able to obtain some of these devices from these companies after they have realized they're a fraud and been able to oversee them getting taken apart in the company of 3-4 geotechnical engineers, electrical engineers, computer engineers, aeronautical engineers, etc... you name it. All reach a definite conclusion every single time, NONE of these devices can do what they claim to do.

You can claim these devices use a NEW science all you want, you can claim it's a field of science no one else knows about, you can make all these BOGUS and absurdly ridiculous claims all you want, but you cannot fool an educated person putting years of experience into this to see if these are legitimate or not, there's no way. You try to fool the unknowing... I'm not here to convince you, you know the truth, you're a part of the fraud!!! I'm here to show, not convince anyone, that these devices are an OUTRIGHT fraud, and so are the people behind them promoting them and trying to shove them down our throats. If I reach a point where I WOULD have to convince someone (like Art for instance) I don't bother trying to convince them because they're either too ----deleted--, uneducated, or just plain dumb; or they're part of the fraud.
Anyways in regards to those links; There's plenty more but I'm not going to waste my time when theres so many others in these forums that the LRL kooks CHOOSE to ignore.
Don't bother with your worthless rebuttals, read those and weep.

 

[GuyinWH]

Re: Why skeptics doesn't show proof?

Trust me, I am weeping, my sides hurt from laughing so hard.

You still got nothin'.

Bring me a Conviction and we'll talk.

Don't sing it...Bring it.

Oh I've sung it and brung it already, you still choose to ignore all the posts/links. That's still your problem.

 

[aarthrj3811]

Re: Why skeptics doesn't show proof?

http://prod.sandia.gov/techlib/access-control.cgi/1998/980977.pdf

 

[GuyinWH]

Re: Why skeptics doesn't show proof?

http://prod.sandia.gov/techlib/access-control.cgi/1998/980977.pdf

Congratulations on posting irrelevant information from a relevant link.
The point was they found it to be useless not that they were going to sue or anything; that was "SANDIA LABS" research for the US government, it wasn't a legal wing of the government obviously so you're going to get their legal jargon there. Also, that notice is on just about everything they research whether legitimate or not-legitimate, in this instance, if you see their research, its been completely found to be a fraud. Defending it is a waste of time and just shows your tendency to follow the scams and support them. Not that we don't know that you do that already...
http://www.sandia.gov/media/hudet.htm
More on DKL http://www.justnet.org/Lists/JUSTNET Resources/Attachments/1299/Dklanalysis.pdf

http://www.pitt.edu/~kconover/dkl.htm#Threatening Letter
The above is a compilation of information about the DKL and their dirty tactics to try to save their own hides.

Yeah keep defending those... You cannot possibly get less respect from me or any other honest person.

Heres another link for another device DEEMED A FRAUD and where they WERE convicted, arrested, and punished from the looks of it.
http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2010/01/22/a-double-military-victory/
http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2009/11/04/when-antiscience-kills-dowsing-edition/
Not exactly sure which device they're talking about but I think its the ADE651.

NOTE THE ABOVE IS A REHASH OF OTHER (OLD) INFORMATION. But there is a conviction in that case, which I have also posted before multiple times. This device was ALSO marketed as a TREASURE FINDING device not just a bomb sniffer.
Just a little read through Sandia labs research can give you a really good explanation of why these devices CLAIM to work and why they do not.

I want to see you refute any of this just for kicks and giggles and to further prove to everyone else you're a fraud.


Don't sing it.. Bring it!

 

[aarthrj3811]

Re: Why skeptics doesn't show proof?

http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2009/11/04/when-antiscience-kills-dowsing-edition/
« Mars is sublime
HiRISE spots Phoenix once again »
When antiscience kills: dowsing edition
.
494diggsdigg
I am no fan of pseudoscience, as you may have guessed. Dowsing is a practice that falls squarely in that field. It’s the idea that you can detect an object — usually water, but sometimes gold, or people, or whatever — using a y-shaped branch, or copper tubes, or some other simple device. Dowsers never really have a good explanation of how their devices work, but they tend to claim 100% accuracy.
However, James Randi has tested dowsers many, many times as part of the JREF’s Million Dollar Challenge. Not to keep you in suspense, but the money still sits in the bank. In other words, time and again, the dowsers fail. When a real, double-blind, statistical test is given, dowsers fail. Every single time.
I also can find bias web sites
http://www.cfpf.org.uk/articles/background/nicholls.html
A Self-Confessed Liar
To be fair, he has never claimed to be anything other than a showman, best expressed by his own remark,
'I am a charlatan, a liar, a thief and a fake altogether.'
However, those he has maligned find it less amusing and persistent rumours of forthcoming libel cases would seem to be entirely justified. Perhaps more importantly still, the mischief caused by his unsupported explanations can be profound; the effect is to cloud the issues as his 'debunkings' become part of the public lore. It is thus particularly unfortunate that so many top-ranking scientists, desperate to ignore evidence to the extent that they will believe almost anyone who opposes the paranormal, still appear to take his views seriously, quoting his research as if it were really credible.

 

[aarthrj3811]

Re: Why skeptics doesn't show proof?

Thank You for all your proof...Art

 

[GuyinWH]

Re: Why skeptics doesn't show proof?

Thank You for all your proof...Art

whoa!!... is that a legitimate admission that you've all been defrauding everyone on here or
more charlatanry to derail an argument you all lost a long time ago ?

 

[EE THr]

Re: Why skeptics doesn't show proof?

Guy---

Artie is not beyone misquoting, at all. He even quoted one of my posts, and added a link within the quote box, and then claimed that I posed the link!

It appears that all of his activity on this site directly coincide with the Predictable Pattern shown in the link below.








Are LRLs More Than Just Dowsing?

 

[aarthrj3811]

Re: Why skeptics doesn't show proof?

whoa!!... is that a legitimate admission that you've all been defrauding everyone on here or
more charlatanry to derail an argument you all lost a long time ago ?

Whoa!!....Wow..Just pointing out that your post proves that you guys do not have a leg to stand on..As for losing an argument the simple fact that LRL and MFD sales have almost doubled in the past year tells me that your facts are being rejected by Treasure Hunters..Just keep up the good work…Art

 

[EE THr]

Re: Why skeptics doesn't show proof?

artie---

...LRL and MFD sales have almost doubled in the past year tells me that your facts are being rejected by Treasure Hunters..Just keep up the good work…Art

Hmmm. Companies don't usually release their financials to outsiders. It would appear that you are very "close" to these manufacturers, huh?

Like, on their payrolls, for example?



Oh yeah, I almost forgot. Statistics are easy to claim, but unless you have documented proof of the LRL sales receipts or income tax forms, it's just more hot air. Unproven statements can't be used as proof of anything.

Again, you are using an unproven premise to form a conclusion. That don't fly. Sorry.

You have again performed a #6 on the Predictable Patterns list, in the link below.

Thanks for another validation of the list.


Are LRLs More Than Just Dowsing?

 

[aarthrj3811]

Re: Why skeptics doesn't show proof?

Hmmm. Companies don't usually release their financials to outsiders. It would appear that you are very "close" to these manufacturers, huh?
Like, on their payrolls, for example?
Oh yeah, I almost forgot. Statistics are easy to claim, but unless you have documented proof of the LRL sales receipts or income tax forms, it's just more hot air. Unproven statements can't be used as proof of anything.
Again, you are using an unproven premise to form a conclusion. That don't fly. Sorry.
You have again performed a #6 on the Predictable Patterns list, in the link below.
Thanks for another validation of the list.

Did I mention anything about Companies Financials.? Wow..you want sales receipts or income tax forms. Just maybe if I used your screwed up logic I could not obtain the information I have..You not only keep proving that your knowledge of LRL’s is very limited but you know nothing about how Company operations…Art

 

[EE THr]

Re: Why skeptics doesn't show proof?

OK, artie, I'll play along.

How do you know the sales doubled?










Are LRLs More Than Just Dowsing?

 

[aarthrj3811]

Re: Why skeptics doesn't show proof?

It has already been explained at least 3 times how I track 15 of the manufactures sales numbers..I feel that I don’t need to explain it again to all the new Randi Cult members that are assigned to this board..Art

 

[EE THr]

Re: Why skeptics doesn't show proof?

artie---

You know about how long I have been participating in the LRL section. I've read just about everything since then. You may have posted that information sometime before that, or I just missed it.

If you have time to make that claim now, then you have time to post the proof now.

Without that, if it really is actual proof, I can only assume that you "track 15 of the manufactures sales numbers" with your Ranger Tell or something like that.





Are LRLs More Than Just Dowsing?

 

[aarthrj3811]

Re: Why skeptics doesn't show proof?

~GuyinWH~
Hold your horses you one-legged cowboy....
I'm in no way a James Randi fan (or CULT member as you claim), theres some things I totally disagree with him on and could give a hoot about him. But differences aside, hes got you all pegged for what you are, con-men; and he's definitely got more legitimacy than every single one of you LRL kooks. That's the only reason YOU CHOOSE to ignore him and demean/slander/libel him in every way. He is a threat to your fraud, of course you're going to hate him (duh).
More unsubstantiated BS and drivel to try to derail an argument.
You cannot possibly prove anything you claim yet you demand we believe it.
What makes matters worse is, its probably an outright lie that they're doubling sales or even increasing sales.....
But if that were true, it wouldn't surprise me one bit considering how you people act like a CULT and just try to RAM this crap
into peoples brains no matter what. Sometimes it's easier to sell something when you're deceiving someone than when you're being honest; you guys prove that point (and only that point) real well.

So YOU DO admit defeat in the argument by CONTINUING to attempt to derail it. The proof of convictions and fraud VS LRL is accepted on your behalf since you have no defense. Fight or flight kicks in and you've been flying in circles along with your fraudulent buddies.

... Continue your obsessive ramblings on here to further prove my point I'll be back tonight or tomorrow maybe if I'm not too busy to see how you try to derail this thread or ignore it completely.

and yet again i repeat....

Don't sing it...bring it!!!

Thank You very much.. there is no argument to derail…We are trying to help others who use LRL’s and MFD’s..we do not see ourselves as saviors of the world…You guys are just like a bump in the road..Have a nice day…Art

 

[EE THr]

Re: Why skeptics doesn't show proof?

artie---

You know about how long I have been participating in the LRL section. I've read just about everything since then. You may have posted that information sometime before that, or I just missed it.

If you have time to make that claim now, then you have time to post the proof now.

Without that, if it really is actual proof, I can only assume that you "track 15 of the manufactures sales numbers" with your Ranger Tell or something like that.

I see you've been here to make a reply, a while ago. So you must have seen the above question.


So do you have proof or not?






Are LRLs More Than Just Dowsing?

 

[aarthrj3811]

Re: Why skeptics doesn't show proof?

Sorry that your reading comprehension is poor…did you not see the claim made by the Randinites that there is only 20 LRL’s in use in the world ? Did you not read the posts of over 60 LRL uses on this board?..Get with it because your psycho babble is really boring..Art