Is there a Long Range Locator capable of this?

[indystiles]

No problem any two-boxed detector would "Find" those Ghost Chests? Dream on..alas...NO LONG RANGE DETECTORS WORK! Period! all are money holes! alas.

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

A Handbook of Civil War Bullets and Cartridges - Grab it through Amazon!

[aarthrj3811]

indystiles

No problem any two-boxed detector would "Find" those Ghost Chests? Dream on

You are correct..But..Have you every tried to search 300 acres?... If so, how many months did it take you..Art

 

[shoot]

As a newbie to this forum this thread is the BEST for seeing who is a WACKO and who has LOGIC. Plus pointing out all the scammers and people who admit to know nothing about things yet have strong options with out doing any research themselves. Plus manufactures admitting they don't know what they are selling, to create some sort of voodoo plausible deny-ability. GREAT THREAD! As someone with a VERY strong electronics background this a great subject.

 

[woof!]

Two-box, maybe. PI with a monster searchcoil, maybe. VLF metal detector with monster searchcoil, maybe. Geophysical VLF apparatus, maybe. Mag, might detect iron metal associated with the cache if not the gold itself. Underground radar, it "all depends". All these might detect the soil profile disturbance associated with the burial of the cache, even if not detecting the cache itself.

That's what made Marc's proposal a tempting "LRL" proposal. If the problem were to find an iron manhole cover a foot deep, it wouldn't have been an interesting problem.

* * * * *

If it were my challenge, I'd get some decent (less than $100) dowsing rods and dowse the site; and would also do a map dowse. All as blinded as I can figure out how to do it. Early in the game, before forming too many opinions about where the caches could or "should" be located since that kind conscious selection can adversely influence dowsing. If I knew someone experienced in successful cache locating who works for cheap or for free, I'd drag them into it, and if they dowse I'd ask them dowse it non-blinded to take advantage of the knowledge that's buried in their subconscious.

I'd do the dowsing stuff early on because dowsing is a simple shortcut method requiring little investment. Dowsing "evidence" is pretty flimsy stuff, proving nothing; therefore it is the kind of "evidence" that's not likely of much use late in the game when you are trying to analyze the meaning of factual observations.

Dowsing and other early results should be followed up with more plain old site research, and research and critique of the stories that led to all this interest. Then instrumented field work not just to "find the cache" (which may require shovel work to actually locate), but to establish insofar as possible the pattern of human activity that prevailed at the time of the supposed cache. And save the hard work of digging until last, unless earlier on in the project there is a very promising spot worth going ahead and digging.

You can bet there would be no LRL's involved in the project. The damn things are fraudulent, and to the extent they can be used for dowsing, all the evidence indicates that they impair both dowsing ability and the ability to reason about what happens when you're using them. The evidence to which I refer is the posts of LRL users in this very forum.

You may notice that in this entire thread, not one LRL fan has described how to go about locating a cache of this kind. Reason is simple: once the subject is LRL, their interest in reality and ability to reason anything through vanishes, and all that's left is vague claims of what they could do if. They know they ain't got squat. Trust what they know, they vindicate the critique of "skeptics"-- that is, people who aren't so gullible as to be suckered by their fairy tale claims. ....... Carl early on posted a list of questions that anyone searching for such a cache should ask, and LRL'ers got upset about it! Every time their bluff is called, they whine about "skeptics". Since skepticism is specifically what they whine about dang near every time, they prove with their own words what critics say: LRL's are lipstick on a pig, and the LRLers know it just as surely as the "skeptics" do. It's only their pride in how well their denial system works for them, that keeps the LRL'ers in the game. Like Carl says, they suck at poker.

--Toto

 

[aarthrj3811]

Two-box, maybe. PI with a monster searchcoil, maybe. VLF metal detector with monster searchcoil, maybe. Geophysical VLF apparatus, maybe. Mag, might detect iron metal associated with the cache if not the gold itself. Underground radar, it "all depends". All these might detect the soil profile disturbance associated with the burial of the cache, even if not detecting the cache itself.

That's what made Marc's proposal a tempting "LRL" proposal. If the problem were to find an iron manhole cover a foot deep, it wouldn't have been an interesting problem.

* * * * *
~EE~
If it were my challenge, I'd get some decent (less than $100) dowsing rods and dowse the site; and would also do a map dowse. All as blinded as I can figure out how to do it. Early in the game, before forming too many opinions about where the caches could or "should" be located since that kind conscious selection can adversely influence dowsing. If I knew someone experienced in successful cache locating who works for cheap or for free, I'd drag them into it, and if they dowse I'd ask them dowse it non-blinded to take advantage of the knowledge that's buried in their subconscious.

I'd do the dowsing stuff early on because dowsing is a simple shortcut method requiring little investment. Dowsing "evidence" is pretty flimsy stuff, proving nothing; therefore it is the kind of "evidence" that's not likely of much use late in the game when you are trying to analyze the meaning of factual observations.

Dowsing and other early results should be followed up with more plain old site research, and research and critique of the stories that led to all this interest. Then instrumented field work not just to "find the cache" (which may require shovel work to actually locate), but to establish insofar as possible the pattern of human activity that prevailed at the time of the supposed cache. And save the hard work of digging until last, unless earlier on in the project there is a very promising spot worth going ahead and digging.

Not to bad woof...then you fell off the deep end

You can bet there would be no LRL's involved in the project. The damn things are fraudulent, and to the extent they can be used for dowsing, all the evidence indicates that they impair both dowsing ability and the ability to reason about what happens when you're using them. The evidence to which I refer is the posts of LRL users in this very forum.

You may notice that in this entire thread, not one LRL fan has described how to go about locating a cache of this kind. Reason is simple: once the subject is LRL, their interest in reality and ability to reason anything through vanishes, and all that's left is vague claims of what they could do if. They know they ain't got squat. Trust what they know, they vindicate the critique of "skeptics"-- that is, people who aren't so gullible as to be suckered by their fairy tale claims. ....... Carl early on posted a list of questions that anyone searching for such a cache should ask, and LRL'ers got upset about it! Every time their bluff is called, they whine about "skeptics". Since skepticism is specifically what they whine about dang near every time, they prove with their own words what critics say: LRL's are lipstick on a pig, and the LRLers know it just as surely as the "skeptics" do. It's only their pride in how well their denial system works for them, that keeps the LRL'ers in the game. Like Carl says, they suck at poker.

 

[woof!]

Art was right: the question was answered in this thread! Check out the answer:

I'll answer his question: Yes. Every LRL ever made can find treasure IF the operator learns how to use it properly.

Mike, every CHOPSTICK ever made can find treasure IF the operator learns how to use it properly.

At least chopsticks aren't fraudulent.

So, whaddaya got, lipstick on a chopstick? This is your opportunity for show and tell! Go for it!


--Toto

 

[aarthrj3811]

~woof~

Art was right: the question was answered in this thread! Check out the answer:

Yes ...I can find the same treasure with a LRL that I find with a set of Dowsing Rods...the LRL will provide me with more information than I can get by Dowsing..that means less time used and more money...Plus...You can learn how to use a LRL much easier than learning to dowse..Art

 

[woof!]

Yeah, Art, but Mike's defense of LRL's reveals that he thinks they're as effective as a chopstick. I suspect what he's got is actually less useful than a chopstick, but let's see what he's got for show and tell. The world impatiently awaits his Revelation.

--Toto

 

[woof!]

Ancient sages called this "The Great Deceiver". Others referred to it as the devil or the serpant that tempted Eve with the forbidden fruit. The fruit that would allow them to know good from evil--comparative knowledge. The Great Deceiver is the mind.

It is the human brain that "makes sense of the senses". What you think you see hear, etc. is not real. What you see is not what is "out there". Your brain conjures up the images. This is why the ancient sages warned people not to trust the five senses. Of course this is opposite of what is known as "direct perception".

Montana 1:1 As it is written, "But in the fulness of time, Micah the Holy One came down from the Montana, and Revealed his Mighty Rod unto the Nations."

Montana 1:2 And with one accord the people said, On this day the Mighty Rod has been revealed to us by Micah the Holy One, that we may discover the treasures which our forefathers took to their graves. From this day forever it shall be called the "Revelation Rod".

--Toto

 

[signal_line]

They talk about some signs of people being "possessed" and one of them is when they go postal if they see something religious. In your case, you didn't even see anything religious and yet you act like that girl on the "Exorcist". God help you.

 

[woof!]

If you thought it could outshoot a chopstick, Mike, you'd want to make a case for it, which you refuse to do. Therefore we all know the same thing: it can't outshoot a chopstick. The difference between you and "skeptics" (people who use the brains God gave 'em the way they were intended to be used), is that you're trying to earn a few bucks off your little fraud, and that puts you in the position of declaring to be horribly evil anyone who tells the truth about it. Heck, if someone thinks my products suck, that's just a difference of opinion, it doesn't make them evil. Do you realize how extreme your position is?

You're absurdly transparent, Mike. The only one here who can't read your mind is Art. Even Dell and Hung are staying out of this one, have you noticed? You make them look really bad!

And the heck of it is, if what you've got is a well built dowsing rod, you could sell it as such without any fraud being necessary! It's the fraud, Mike, and not the rod, whereby you publicly back yourself into an indefensible corner from which all that's left is to rant how everyone who doesn't suck up to your fantasy is evil.

If you want advice on how to design a good dowsing rod and to sell it honestly without fraud, I have given that advice already on both the LRL and the dowsing forums. But you don't need my advice, all it takes is for you to stop demanding the rest of the world to accept your fantasy, and let what you say in public work with what's real.

* * * * *

And since that probably didn't register with you on the first read, I'll explain it again.

The last few days here you've taken a real beating. And your own ridiculous posts were what brought it on! Don't expect ridiculous nonsense on a public forum to pass without comment!

And the irony of it is, it was never necessary in the first place. You didn't have to do it.

If you hate what has happened, learn from the experience and don't repeat it. Don't do it any more. Don't do what? Don't put yourself into a position of having to claim your product is something that it's not! Your bluff will be called, and it'll be deja vu all over again.

Mike, it's entirely possible to be honest about dowsing and about dowsing rod design. I predict that if you take that road, your obsession with "evil skeptics" will evaporate. There will still be people who say that dowsing doesn't work, but you don't even have to argue that point: after all, a few posts back you yourself came within an inch of saying that dowsing doesn't work, you just didn't realize what you'd said.

If you decide you want to go the honesty route where skeptics are a minor problem at worst, and can even be your allies, we can continue the discussion over on the dowsing forum. Meanwhile this is the "Mark Austin Challenge" thread, and that's a challenge regarding which you've had nothing whatsoever useful to say.

--Toto

 

[woof!]

Sadly, this is hypothetical...

I know 3 chests of gold are buried - somewhere within 300 acres... at 8 feet deep. There is no (or very little) iron buried with the cache.

How do I locate them?

This is the official re-opening of the TreasureNet Long Range Locator Forum.


PLEASE NOTE: As the administrator, creator and owner of this site, I HAVE SEEN PEOPLE GET RIPPED OFF (defrauded) by people selling so-called "long range locators" (devices, that supposedly, can find precious metals at a distance). I HIGHLY recommend consulting a geophysicist ($100 in consulting fees could save you thousands, and you'll learn something!), before spending ONE DIME ON ANY "long range locator" . With that, I open this forum to the discussion of said devices.

Forgive me for speaking for someone else, but it sure looks like Marc Austin started this thread for the purpose of giving LRL proponents enough rope to hang themselves. In any case, that's what LRL proponents have used this thread for -- to reveal that they ain't got squat.

LRL's are frauds, the evidence comes straight from the manufacturers thereof, and that's why manufacturers of locating stuff that isn't fraudulent don't represent their stuff as being in the "LRL" category.

--Toto

 

[Nevada Dan]

I have looked at a few of these 'long range jobs',and the experts demonstrating them failed miserably. Not one worked.
If I was covering this type of real estate, I would survey with a gradiometer first to find potential target sites.

 

[woof!]

Nevada, as was pointed out a couple pages back, to cover 300 acres with a gradiometer is a lot of work and therefore the wrong place to start. Early on the most important piece of work is to research the site and the story behind the site using information media. If dowsing or other "magical" methods are used, that should also be in the early phase and results treated with the same level of skepticism that everything else should be treated with. If a person is not willing to be skeptical of the results of "magical" methods, it is better not to use such methods: likewise if a person regards such methods as having no value at all then they should not be used. The situation that Marc proposed is a major project involving lots of time and money and therefore should be approached in a businesslike manner.

Results from LRL's are inferior to those from dowsing and I would argue worse than worthless. Therefore they have no place in rational treasure hunting. There is no better way to substantiate this opinion than to read the things that LRL proponents themselves post. Skeptics don't have to make it up, the LRL'ers themselves furnish the material.

--Toto

 

[aarthrj3811]

1. 
   Originally Posted by Marc

Sadly, this is hypothetical...

I know 3 chests of gold are buried - somewhere within 300 acres... at 8 feet deep. There is no (or very little) iron buried with the cache.

How do I locate them?

This is the official re-opening of the TreasureNet Long Range Locator Forum.


PLEASE NOTE: As the administrator, creator and owner of this site, I HAVE SEEN PEOPLE GET RIPPED OFF (defrauded) by people selling so-called "long range locators" (devices, that supposedly, can find precious metals at a distance). I HIGHLY recommend consulting a geophysicist ($100 in consulting fees could save you thousands, and you'll learn something!), before spending ONE DIME ON ANY "long range locator" . With that, I open this forum to the discussion of said devices.


Forgive me for speaking for someone else, but it sure looks like Marc Austin started this thread for the purpose of giving LRL proponents enough rope to hang themselves. In any case, that's what LRL proponents have used this thread for -- to reveal that they ain't got squat.

LRL's are frauds, the evidence comes straight from the manufacturers thereof, and that's why manufacturers of locating stuff that isn't fraudulent don't represent their stuff as being in the "LRL" category.

And Marc also posted this..

Re: When Science shouts to the deaf Reply To This Topic #35 Posted Jun 16, 2010, 04:00:20 PM

Quote

This is ME. Marc Austin... the administrator and owner of this site. I am the one who warns people against fraudulent devices.

I have never said "there is not a device capable of locating gold and silver from a distance".

I have only stated the FACT... that >I< have seen people ripped off by fraudulent devices... and I recommend spending money to chat with a geophysicist BEFORE spending ONE dime on ANY LRL. Just get a second opinion before making your purchase. The wad you save just might be your own! HMM, a new header for the LRL forum!

Now - if you have a problem running your potential purchase past someone educated in things like locating things.... well say so... so we can cut to the chase.

 

[Nevada Dan]

I do agree with you woof,and walking or even towing a mag would be a lot of work. What dowsing and "other magical" methods, in my observations have not been productive,especially LRL devices, yet to put forth the work with "proven" methods effectively produces results.
If just 'one' of these LRL detectors consistently performed as advertised, my 'money' would have been invested in it instead of the equally expensive magnetometer, which has paid for itself teamed with my metal detectors. This has been an entertaining thread,and I have just been avoiding the 'feeding frenzy'
but just wanted to drop my two cents worth. Dan

 

[signal_line]

Only in your mind Sam Woof. You skeptics remind me a little of Jeff Dunham's "Walter". I just love locating and some miserable skeptic is not about to change that. From your rhetoric, it is quite obvious to me that I have hit a nerve. I told you to stay away from the Ouija Boards. Maybe you ARE possessed and you are responding to something religious. Maybe what I do has some religious base hidden there somewhere, I don't know. Some poeple say their guardian angel helps them. I have never thought that so for locating, but I guess I should not rule it out. And there is talk about it in religious books, but not in a way you can understand it with your left-brain (skeptic) thinking. The skeptic mantra is "If you can't measure it, it does not exist."

 

[aarthrj3811]

~Nevada Dan~

I do agree with you woof,and walking or even towing a mag would be a lot of work. What dowsing and "other magical" methods, in my observations have not been productive,especially LRL devices, yet to put forth the work with "proven" methods effectively produces results.
If just 'one' of these LRL detectors consistently performed as advertised, my 'money' would have been invested in it instead of the equally expensive magnetometer, which has paid for itself teamed with my metal detectors. This has been an entertaining thread,and I have just been avoiding the 'feeding frenzy'
but just wanted to drop my two cents worth. Dan

It is your decision to use any tool that you want. The "other magical" methods” you speak of do find treasure and for some of us and consistently...I will use any and all tools to locate and recover treasure. You can read all the advertisements and web sites that you want and you will still not be an informed consumer...Art

 

[woof!]

Mike, this is an LRL forum where Marc asked if there was any LRL that could locate gold caches under a specified set of conditions. You have repeatedly made it plain as day that whatever your gizmo is, it has nothing to do with locating gold caches. And whatever it is that it actually does do, a chopstick would probably do it better. Furthermore the subject of locating gold caches seems to be one in which you have neither knowledge nor interest.

But wait! You do have word-salad shape-shifting pseudomoralistic pseudopsychology, lots of it! It's been fun ridiculing it, but it does get old quick. Maybe Tnet can start a new forum for that subject, and nominate you the moderator so you can ban those horrible people who keep on calling your bluff.

--Toto

 

[aarthrj3811]

~woof~

Mike, this is an LRL forum where Marc asked if there was any LRL that could locate gold caches under a specified set of conditions.

That has been answered..It was yes.

You have repeatedly made it plain as day that whatever your gizmo is, it has nothing to do with locating gold caches. And whatever it is that it actually does do, a chopstick would probably do it better. Furthermore the subject of locating gold caches seems to be one in which you have neither knowledge nor interest.

Could you please tell us where “Mikes” sales pitch can be found?

But wait! You do have word-salad shape-shifting pseudo moralistic pseudopsychology, lots of it! It's been fun ridiculing it, but it does get old quick. Maybe Tnet can start a new forum for that subject, and nominate you the moderator so you can ban those horrible people who keep on calling your bluff.

Sorry woof...we leave the pseudo moralistic pseudo psychology stuff for the skeptics to use...Art,