Art, yer gonna love this...

[Carl-NC]

Carl, my whole point about that is, these LRL users don't come here to fight with skeptics.

Of course they do! Read the threads! Read this thread! Read your own responses to my initial post... why would you choose to argue about the whole concept of testing an LRL claimant? Had you not done so, I would have had nothing else to say on the matter, and that would have been the end of it.

As it is, I have nothing else to say on the matter.

 

[EE THr]

KK---

There is an obvious pattern to it.

First someone says that a box with do-nothing electronics inside, which is actually a dowsing rod, will locate treasure. Eventually they encourage others to get such a device.

Then a second guy says that the electronics don't even connect, and it's impossible for it to locate treasure or anything else.

That's when the first guy (LRLer) insults the second guy.

Then the second guy says the pointer is not powered by the device, it just flops around any way you tilt your hand.

Then the LRLer insults him again.

So now the second guy, seeing that logic has no place in the LRLer's reality, simply says, "OK, then prove it."

And the LRLer either gives completely nonsensical excuses to not prove his claims, or just insults the second guy again.

After that, it gets to be pretty much of a petty free-for-all.

Do you see any other pattern to it?

 

[Kentucky Kache]

Carl, my whole point about that is, these LRL users don't come here to fight with skeptics.

Of course they do! Read the threads! Read this thread! Read your own responses to my initial post... why would you choose to argue about the whole concept of testing an LRL claimant? Had you not done so, I would have had nothing else to say on the matter, and that would have been the end of it.

As it is, I have nothing else to say on the matter.

No, you are looking at this backwards. LRL proponents go back and forth with you guys because you choose to come on here and disrespect and even harass them and what they do. No one invited you to do that.

 

[Kentucky Kache]

KK---

There is an obvious pattern to it.

First someone says that a box with do-nothing electronics inside, which is actually a dowsing rod, will locate treasure. Eventually they encourage others to get such a device.

Then a second guy says that the electronics don't even connect, and it's impossible for it to locate treasure or anything else.

That's when the first guy (LRLer) insults the second guy.

Then the second guy says the pointer is not powered by the device, it just flops around any way you tilt your hand.

Then the LRLer insults him again.

So now the second guy, seeing that logic has no place in the LRLer's reality, simply says, "OK, then prove it."

And the LRLer either gives completely nonsensical excuses to not prove his claims, or just insults the second guy again.

After that, it gets to be pretty much of a petty free-for-all.

Do you see any other pattern to it?

EE, I think you need to go into politics. Spin it your way, no matter what has actually happened.

 

[aarthrj3811]

~EE~
There is an obvious pattern to it.

First someone says that a box with do-nothing electronics inside, which is actually a dowsing rod, will locate treasure. Eventually they encourage others to get such a device.

Why ..Just because you say that the electronics do-nothing..How are people finding so much treasure? Then you say that they are a Dowsing Rod..I will ask the question again that you have refused to answer..How come the do-nothing electronics will tell me the depth of the target, the distance to the target, a estimate of the targets weight and if it is a coins, bars or a ring from the spot where I first encounter the signal? I know of no dowsing rod that will do that

Then a second guy says that the electronics don't even connect, and it's impossible for it to locate treasure or anything else.

Yes the skeptics say that

That's when the first guy (LRLer) insults the second guy.

If disagreeing with you is an insult then yes it happens

Then the second guy says the pointer is not powered by the device, it just flops around any way you tilt your hand.

I have only used one unit that you call a pointer. The only power that makes it swing is the connection with the target.

Then the LRLer insults him again.

OK..I agree that I just insulted you because your statement is false.

So now the second guy, seeing that logic has no place in the LRLer's reality, simply says, "OK, then prove it."

Your statement is is illogical

And the LRLer either gives completely nonsensical excuses to not prove his claims, or just insults the second guy again.

I see 4 claims by you so far...When does you turn to put up proof happen.

After that, it gets to be pretty much of a petty free-for-all.


Do you see any other pattern to it?

No I don’t...Could be because the skeptics can not prove their statements..Art

Yes I am loving this...

 

[Ted Groves]

For the average Joe LRL user, no one needs to authenticate anything to me. If someone says they found a gold ring with a LectraSearch, I say bollocks. I've seen the inside of a LectraSearch, and I'm absolutely certain that it has no ability to locate a gold ring. How certain am I? $25,000 certain, that's how. And I'll lay it down for anyone who wishes to show me the LectraSearch can locate a gold ring. They don't have to if they don't want to, but I'll still say bollocks on their claim*.


*Am I saying they didn't find a gold ring? No, only that the LectraSearch played no role in the find other than make-believe.

Hello?

Eddie? are you listening?

Take your head out of the oven long enough to realize "you been called out".

Now the ball is in your court.

 

[EE THr]

Art and KK---

Regardless of any "debate" over the electronic circuits, it has merely been pointed out that you cannot prove your claims. That's a polite way of putting it.

When this is pointed out, you only respond with excuses or insults.

Then you claim that you are the victims.

That is the pattern predicted a long time ago, see #27 at---

Are LRLs More Than Just Dowsing?

 

[EE THr]

Actually, this section is supposed to be about the devices, themselves. It doesn't say anything about stories of treasure, found or not found. It says LRLs.

So, since the LRLers have said, over and over, that they don't know how they work, there really isn't much reason for you guys to be posting, is there?

When the people who do understand, and work with electronics, professionally, post information about their scientific testing, of both the LRL devices and the LRL electronics, that qualifies as discussing the LRL devices themselves. And when other electronics people comment on the evaluation of the circuitry, that also qualifies as discussing the LRL devices.

And when we ask a simple question, such as, "If you clamp the handle in a vise, will the LRL pointer move to track a target in motion?"---That is also discussing the LRL devices. Yet all we get is insults in response.

It appears that about 99% of the LRLers posts are not on topic, and don't belong here.

And the posts by those knowledgeable in electronics do belong here.

So, you have it all backwards.

 

[aarthrj3811]

~EE~

Regardless of any "debate" over the electronic circuits, it has merely been pointed out that you cannot prove your claims. That's a polite way of putting it.
When this is pointed out, you only respond with excuses or insults.

No..We try to point out the errors that you are posting..If you think our answers are excuses you are wrong...we know that you claim that ever answer is an insult

Then you claim that you are the victims.

Victims of what?

That is the pattern predicted a long time ago, see #27 at---

Do you mean #27 in one of your personal opinion threads?

Actually, this section is supposed to be about the devices, themselves. It doesn't say anything about stories of treasure, found or not found. It says LRLs.

Wrong again...the title is Art, yer gonna love this...

So, since the LRLers have said, over and over, that they don't know how they work, there really isn't much reason for you guys to be posting, is there?

You post here so what is the difference?

When the people who do understand, and work with electronics, professionally, post information about their scientific testing, of both the LRL devices and the LRL electronics, that qualifies as discussing the LRL devices themselves. And when other electronics people comment on the evaluation of the circuitry, that also qualifies as discussing the LRL devices.

Who is the judge for the statements that are made..You claim to work with electronics, professionally..So...what is the brands of LRL’s that you have professional tested...

And when we ask a simple question, such as, "If you clamp the handle in a vise, will the LRL pointer move to track a target in motion?"---That is also discussing the LRL devices. Yet all we get is insults in response.
There you go again being insulted because we answer your questions

It appears that about 99% of the LRLers posts are not on topic, and don't belong here.

The LRL’s for the most part are people who us LRL’s to treasure hunt..they are posting on a Treasure Hunting Web Site in a board that discusses LRL’s..You are someone that has never used a LRL and have never saw a real LRL..so..who does not belong here?

And the posts by those knowledgeable in electronics do belong here.

Wow..what an ego...So if you are a treasure hunting that is not knowledgeable in electronics and enjoys hunting with any kind of treasure hunting device we should go away..I think Marc would go broke if 50, 0000 treasure hunters could not post here

So, you have it all backwards.

Sorry to insult you again..We have it right...Art

 

[EddieR]

For the average Joe LRL user, no one needs to authenticate anything to me. If someone says they found a gold ring with a LectraSearch, I say bollocks. I've seen the inside of a LectraSearch, and I'm absolutely certain that it has no ability to locate a gold ring. How certain am I? $25,000 certain, that's how. And I'll lay it down for anyone who wishes to show me the LectraSearch can locate a gold ring. They don't have to if they don't want to, but I'll still say bollocks on their claim*.


*Am I saying they didn't find a gold ring? No, only that the LectraSearch played no role in the find other than make-believe.

Hello?

Eddie? are you listening?

Take your head out of the oven long enough to realize "you been called out".

Now the ball is in your court.

Yes, Ted. We see you.

I had my head in the oven to see if you were done yet....

Evidently you still have that memory problem, as I said loooong ago that it didn't matter to me if anyone believed me or not. But, just for the record, due to some recent happenings....I've changed my position on the LectraSearch.

Now pick up your string, tie some more "knotz", and "play it again, Sam".

 

[EE THr]

Then you claim that you are the victims.

That is the pattern predicted a long time ago, see #27

Do you mean #27 in one of your personal opinion threads?

That list was posted seven months ago, so it's not an opinion but a prediction which has continually come true ever since.

Actually, this section is supposed to be about the devices, themselves. It doesn't say anything about stories of treasure, found or not found. It says LRLs.

It appears that about 99% of the LRLers posts are not on topic, and don't belong here.

...in a board that discusses LRL’s....

Now you have the distinction of refuting your own statement, and in your same post no less! Congratulations! And thanks for saving me the trouble of explaining it to you!

So, you do have it all backwards. And thanks again for proving it!

 

[Ted Groves]

Gee Eddie... You mean you've come to your senses? Naaaaa you're just saying that because Carl called you out and you have no other way to respond to it without looking like the fool you are. It's okay Lil Eddie, you got a lot to learn and this was just the first lesson. Maybe the next one won't be as embarrassing, or maybe it will.

 

[EddieR]

Gee Eddie... You mean you've come to your senses? Naaaaa you're just saying that because Carl called you out and you have no other way to respond to it without looking like the fool you are. It's okay Lil Eddie, you got a lot to learn and this was just the first lesson. Maybe the next one won't be as embarrassing, or maybe it will.

Gee Ted... If you could read beyond "Sam I Am" ( ) you would see that SEVERAL DAYS AGO I posted that I had performed some informal tests with exact same LectraSearch that I used before. Of course, with your "history" of stretching the truth and being generally useless in the memory department I shouldn't expect much from you, should I?

The tests proved to my satisfaction that the LRL doesn't work as advertised. HOWEVER....the tests were not witnessed by anyone, were not reviewed by scientists, and were not double-blind. So maybe I'm wrong and it DOES work.....(that seems to be the criteria that is generally accepted for results to be accepted, right?)

Now, crawl back into Randi's closet. It's nap time.

 

[aarthrj3811]

~EE~

That list was posted seven months ago, so it's not an opinion but a prediction which has continually come true ever since.

What are you claiming now ...that you are paranormal, pseudoscientific or supernatural?..I ask again...With your 41 prediction claims you should have some proof that LRL treasure hunters are Con-artist..Please put it on the board?

It appears that about 99% of the LRLers posts are not on topic, and don't belong here.
And the posts by those knowledgeable in electronics do belong here.

So, you have it all backwards.
So, you do have it all backwards. And thanks again for proving it!

What ever your opinions is..

 

[Ted Groves]

Well, Carl... another all-mouth-and-no-brains advocate side-steps your challenge. Big surprise. This time it is a washed-up disbarred lawyer turned pizza delivery man.

Dance delivery man, dance.....

 

[Carl-NC]

Well, Carl... another all-mouth-and-no-brains advocate side-steps your challenge. Big surprise. This time it is a washed-up disbarred lawyer turned pizza delivery man.

Sounds like Eddie did his own testing, and maybe got results that suggest he don't need no stinkin' challenge. Instead of derision, I'll offer Eddie an attaboy.

 

[EddieR]

Well, Carl... another all-mouth-and-no-brains advocate side-steps your challenge. Big surprise. This time it is a washed-up disbarred lawyer turned pizza delivery man.

Dance delivery man, dance.....

I know you want to see me dance....I told you before "to quit peeking in my windows"!!!

All mouth and no brains side steps the challenge, eh? I wasn't aware that you had been asked to take it...

Oh, just for the record, Ted aka "Knotzi"...I'm willing to bet 50,000.00 cash that you cannot provide proof of my disbarment. Will you be a man ( ) and take me up on my challenge? Or will you chicken out like you did last time I challenged you? You seem to be dead-set on making everyone think that I was disbarred, but yet cannot provide the proof. Hmmm....I think you are trying to "con" people into believing your senile mutterings....that makes you a CON MAN....and a Randi worshiper to boot. But with all that's come to light about your hero, it doesn't surprise me in the least.

Dance chicken little, dance......

 

[EddieR]

Well, Carl... another all-mouth-and-no-brains advocate side-steps your challenge. Big surprise. This time it is a washed-up disbarred lawyer turned pizza delivery man.

Sounds like Eddie did his own testing, and maybe got results that suggest he don't need no stinkin' challenge. Instead of derision, I'll offer Eddie an attaboy.

I'm sure that Ted will somehow try to take credit for me doing my own testing.....what a cream-puff.

 

[Ted Groves]

Well, Carl... another all-mouth-and-no-brains advocate side-steps your challenge. Big surprise. This time it is a washed-up disbarred lawyer turned pizza delivery man.

Sounds like Eddie did his own testing, and maybe got results that suggest he don't need no stinkin' challenge. Instead of derision, I'll offer Eddie an attaboy.

My "derision" was targeted solely in response to his blatant and unwavering defense mechanisms of fraudulent LRL devices and the con artists that foist them off on the G&T-C. He did this for a good many months (perhaps years), while all the time knowing full-well they were bogus indicators of gravity, sold by those practicing willful deception.

Yes, he's starting to sing a slightly different tune now - whether it's because he has actually had a revelation or your challenge cornered him into a position that forced him to make said response; is anyone's guess. If I was a gambler, I know where I'd put my money.

 

[EddieR]

Well, Carl... another all-mouth-and-no-brains advocate side-steps your challenge. Big surprise. This time it is a washed-up disbarred lawyer turned pizza delivery man.

Sounds like Eddie did his own testing, and maybe got results that suggest he don't need no stinkin' challenge. Instead of derision, I'll offer Eddie an attaboy.

My "derision" was targeted solely in response to his blatant and unwavering defense mechanisms of fraudulent LRL devices and the con artists that foist them off on the G&T-C. He did this for a good many months (perhaps years), while all the time knowing full-well they were bogus indicators of gravity, sold by those practicing willful deception.

Yes, he's starting to sing a slightly different tune now - whether it's because he has actually had a revelation or your challenge cornered him into a position that forced him to make said response; is anyone's guess. If I was a gambler, I know where I'd put my money.

So con man, I knew full well, eh? Now you can read minds? Or better yet, now you can read at all? Howzabout reading (if you can) my challenge to you above. $50,000.00 dollars...... are you gonna be a man and take me up on it? Or just ignore it and prove by default that you are making up slanderous stories?


Hello?