Can You Scientifically Prove to the World That LRLs Work?

[EE THr]

Can You Scientifically Prove to the World That LRLs Work?​

While we are all waiting for the answer, and since it will obviously be a long time, I'll go first by saying---

"No, they can't."

...And I'll post a few links proving my point---

A Dozen Points Proving LRL Fraud

Are LRLs More Than Just Dowsing?

Do The Math!

The Questions LRLers Refuse to Answer

Known Facts About LRLs

Maybe We Can Agree

Different Ways of Testing LRLs

Random Double-Blind Tests for LRLs

The above discussions demonstrate that LRLs simply don't work.

They also show the type of nonsense that the LRL promoters post, in order to divert away from directly discussing the subject of scientific proof, which they must avoid like the plague!

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

Agony and Death on a Gold Rush Steamer: The Disastrous Sinking of the Side-Wheeler Yankee Blade - Grab it through Amazon!

[aarthrj3811]

Why should we reply to this thread again?..Randi is the one that knows how to make things disappear without people knowing it... Art

 

[EE THr]

Don't blame me---I didn't do it.

 

[werleibr]

Did it get deleted because of my Ad Hominem comment or was it things said after it? I didn't see anything posted after my comment. If it was that comment, sorry guys.

 

[aarthrj3811]

It is sad that you skeptics will never get to enjoy the pleasure of treasure hunting with a LRL...I have went to sites that I researched for gold nuggets..After being there a !/2 hour and having located and marked 50 signal lines the work begins..Checking each line for distance, depth and size of the target is time consuming. After eliminating the targets I feel are too deep or small in size or just too far away it is time to take my equipment and go and recover the targets I have chosen..This spot is 7 miles from my house. I return to it when I feel like climbing the mountain and getting the thrill of knowing that I am the first person who has ever saw the shinny pieces of gold that I recover...Art

 

[humble]

This was last years find with an MFD. Located and recovered from under 6 1/2 feet of Beach sand. This is the best multi blind test any Skeptic can possibly dream up. Results speak for themselves. I don't need any pompous Skeptic with Zero experience telling me how to determine if LRL's work, or don't work. humble

 

[humble]

Nice going. I could add a long list of LRL finds and Archaeological discoveries to this website but with the probability of deletion, I won't waste my time.

I hope you have a great New Year! humble

 

[EE THr]

Talk about sweeping the elephant under the carpet. You are some kind of bully picking on your targets you feel you are superior to. Then when you don't like what someone says you delete the evidence against you. I guess you are trying to save face. I recall a guy who crapped his underwear and buried them. Someone saw him. Must be embarassing. You are a coward just like every other bully. People who were bullied at a young age many times end up bullying others when they come of age. Many of them never get over it, never get the chip off their shoulder.

Nice going---you just insulted the Moderator.

And even after I told you that I didn't do it.

 

[EE THr]

As usual, when asked for Scientific Proof, the LRL promoters respond with anecdotal non-proof.

All they have is stories and insults---which they keep confirming over and over again.

So sad.

 

[aarthrj3811]

~EE~

As usual, when asked for Scientific Proof, the LRL promoters respond with anecdotal non-proof.

All they have is stories and insults---which they keep confirming over and over again.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_evidence
Evidence is information, such as facts, coupled with principles of inference (the act or process of deriving a conclusion), that make information relevant to the support or negation of a hypothesis[citation needed]. Scientific evidence is evidence where the dependence of the evidence on principles of inference is not conceded, enabling others to examine the background beliefs or assumptions employed to determine if facts are relevant to the support of or falsification of a hypothesis.[1]
A person’s assumptions or beliefs about the relationship between alleged facts and a hypothesis will determine whether that person takes the facts as evidence.[1] Consider, for example alternative uses of the observation that day and night alternate at a steady rate. In an environment where the observer makes a causal connection between exposure to the sun and day, the observer may take the observation of day and night as evidence for a theory of cosmology. Without an assumption or belief that a causal connection exists between exposure to the sun and the observance of day, the observation of day will be discounted as evidence of a cosmological theory.
I believe that what we are posting is Scientific Proof....Art

 

[humble]

According to EE's logic every Scientific statement that has ever been made is anecdotal. It's a sad thing to waste a mind on prejudice. Very Sad! humble

 

[EE THr]

According to your logic every Scientific statement that has ever been made is anecdotal. It's a sad thing to waste a mind on prejudice. Very Sad! humble

LRL promoters use only verbage as Social Proof, because they can never produce any Real Proof. But there actually are many Known Facts About LRLs, which they always ignore. Yet they continually demand proof from debunkers, while also ignoring A Dozen Points Proving LRL Fraud, even though they are fully aware that these points have never been rationally refuted.



Jeeeez, Dell---Why do you try to substitute tall tales, for actual proof, especially under a topic such at this particular one? The topic is about Scientific Proof! Do you get it now?

 

[DigginThePast]

Talk about sweeping the elephant under the carpet. You are some kind of bully picking on your targets you feel you are superior to. Then when you don't like what someone says you delete the evidence against you. I guess you are trying to save face. I recall a guy who crapped his underwear and buried them. Someone saw him. Must be embarassing. You are a coward just like every other bully. People who were bullied at a young age many times end up bullying others when they come of age. Many of them never get over it, never get the chip off their shoulder.

[mod]EE did not pull the thread, I did. I did so with the initial intent of putting it back after pulling out all the name calling and insults that were contained in it. With this new thread up I'll probably just let the other sit, at least for the time being.

After receiving many reports of insults and name calling I placed the sticky at the top of this Board. Two members that engaged in such activity in that thread have been dealt with, hopefully we don't have further such activity. [/mod]

 

[humble]

Jeeeez, Dell---Why do you try to substitute tall tales, for actual proof, especially under a topic such at this particular one? The topic is about Scientific Proof! Do you get it now?

Haven't you got it yet? There are no Scientist on this forum to give you a Scientific report. Why do you keep harassing and filling up the threads with stupid questions with inferences that we are liars about what has been found with LRL.? It's a wonder your antics haven't caught the attention of the moderator.

If you want a Scientific report, go to a forum where there are Earth Scientist. If you are interested in learning methods used by Treasure Hunters, this is the forum.

If you want to conduct your own Scientific tests on LRL, then simply pay for the services of a skilled operator and conduct all the Scientific tests you want. It's that simple. We have tried to show you information about various types of LRL. You aren't listening. All evidence shows they do work in many cases.

It is your claim that there is no LRL that works scientifically. Prove it, or stop complaining. humble

 

[EE THr]

Jeeeez, Dell---Why do you try to substitute tall tales, for actual proof, especially under a topic such at this particular one? The topic is about Scientific Proof! Do you get it now?

Haven't you got it yet? There are no Scientist on this forum to give you a Scientific report. Why do you keep harassing and filling up the threads with stupid questions with inferences that we are liars about what has been found with LRL.? It's a wonder your antics haven't caught the attention of the moderator.

If you want a Scientific report, go to a forum where there are Earth Scientist. If you are interested in learning methods used by Treasure Hunters, this is the forum.

If you want to conduct your own Scientific tests on LRL, then simply pay for the services of a skilled operator and conduct all the Scientific tests you want. It's that simple. We have tried to show you information about various types of LRL. You aren't listening. All evidence shows they do work in many cases.

It is your claim that there is no LRL that works. Prove it, or stop complaining. humble

You have it all backwards, Dell.

When I refer to Scientific Method, I simply mean some kind of real, public, proof. Something more than only tall tales.

Everyone else in the World, who makes valid claims, is happy to step up and prove what they say. While LRL promoters hate the mention of the word "proof." What's wrong with that picture?

A person doesn't need to be a Scientist to provide real proof of something. It only requires common sense.

Real proof is not an anecdotal story, or someone saying that they "proved" it to their friend. That is another common sense aspect which is lacking with the LRL promoters.

There is no real evidence that any LRL on the market has ever actually found anything.

Yes, LRL promoters have tried to explain how they work, but it seems that each LRLer has a different "expert" explanation! With the LRL promoters contradicting each other, it is obvious that none of their ideas are correct, because none of them have ever worked!

If you would like to be the first to step up and publically perform A REAL Scientific Test for LRLs, then simply go ahead and do so. And all of your frustration will be alleviated!

With any issue like this, there is an implicit burden of proof on the person asserting the claim. If you keep insisting that LRLs work, then you are making that claim, and the burden of proof is upon you, and not the challenger to your claim.

Since LRL promoters have consistently refused to even try to prove their claims to the World, it certainly appears that they simply cannot. And the reason they cannot is because their LRLs don't work. That's just more common sense.

Do you get it now?

 

[aarthrj3811]

~EE~

LRL promoters use only verbage as Social Proof, because they can never produce any Real Proof. But there actually are many Known Facts About LRLs, which they always ignore. Yet they continually demand proof from debunkers, while also ignoring A Dozen Points Proving LRL Fraud, even though they are fully aware that these points have never been rationally refuted.

Yes..we have all read and answered your Personal Opinion threads where you make all your claims..

Jeeeez, Dell---Why do you try to substitute tall tales, for actual proof, especially under a topic such at this particular one? The topic is about Scientific Proof! Do you get it now?

What you call tall tales are real facts about treasure hunting.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Real_evidence
actual proof
This is a discussion board and not a legal court..
http://www.digipac.ca/chemical/proof/index.htm
First let's get this straight. Proof, as we mean it when we say "prove me wrong", has nothing to do with science. While we might use the word "proof" in science, it is not a scientific idea. Proving is an exercise in logic. The other meaning of the word "proof", as it is used when we refer to whiskey – "this is 90 proof" – actually has its origin in the meaning of the word as we use it in science, but that's a whole different story!

Sorry that you can not understand what we are trying to tell you..Art
"The door to Knowledge & Understanding, is never open to a closed, or prejudiced mind”

 

[EE THr]

Sorry that you can not understand what we are trying to tell you..Art

I understand perfectly what you are trying to "tell" people. But the fact that you are trying to tell people certain things, is not evidence that they are actually true.

Using the definitions which you, yourself, have provided above, you have only alleged that your LRLs can find stuff. You have never provided any properly documented, Scientifically derived, direct evidence that your LRLs can find anything.

And regardless of all your silly excuses for not providing any proper direct evidence, the real reason is simply because your can't. And the reason you can't is because your LRLs don't work.

If your LRLs really did work, you would avoid the necessity for all of your diversions and insults, by stepping up and proving it to the World, with A Scientific Test for LRLs.

Obviously, this will never happen.

Sorry.

 

[EE THr]

Went out to a city park today in balmy 56 degrees F. Was using my new gold leaf sample in the X-Scan and found a white gold band. It took me a couple tries before I got the pinpoint. I hit three or four hotspots all from the same transmitter spot. I hit some can slaw and figured that was not the spot. I walked out another fifteen or twenty feet and found the hot spot. Not easy digging in partially frozen ground. Ended up putting a nick in the ring.

That would make a nice little fairy tale, but it doesn't belong under this particular topic. (Duh!)

 

[aarthrj3811]

~EE~

I understand perfectly what you are trying to "tell" people. But the fact that you are trying to tell people certain things, is not evidence that they are actually true.

Using the definitions which you, yourself, have provided above, you have only alleged that your LRLs can find stuff. You have never provided any properly documented, Scientifically derived, direct evidence that your LRLs can find anything.

And regardless of all your silly excuses for not providing any proper direct evidence, the real reason is simply because your can't. And the reason you can't is because your LRLs don't work.

If your LRLs really did work, you would avoid the necessity for all of your diversions and insults, by stepping up and proving it to the World, with A Scientific Test for LRLs.

Obviously, this will never happen.

Sorry

.
Yes I would bet that you are sorry for not being logical..After 70 plus owner/operators have put their story on here it is not logical for you to keep claiming that they are all fraudulent and that none of the devices will find treasure...

So...Please tell us why we should spend ½ million dollars on a Double Blind Test (that would be excepted by the Scientific community)to prove that your claims are all false?..Art

 

[EE THr]

~EE~

I understand perfectly what you are trying to "tell" people. But the fact that you are trying to tell people certain things, is not evidence that they are actually true.

Using the definitions which you, yourself, have provided above, you have only alleged that your LRLs can find stuff. You have never provided any properly documented, Scientifically derived, direct evidence that your LRLs can find anything.

And regardless of all your silly excuses for not providing any proper direct evidence, the real reason is simply because your can't. And the reason you can't is because your LRLs don't work.

If your LRLs really did work, you would avoid the necessity for all of your diversions and insults, by stepping up and proving it to the World, with A Scientific Test for LRLs.

Obviously, this will never happen.

Sorry

.
Yes I would bet that you are sorry for not being logical..After 70 plus owner/operators have put their story on here it is not logical for you to keep claiming that they are all fraudulent and that none of the devices will find treasure...

So...Please tell us why we should spend ½ million dollars on a Double Blind Test (that would be excepted by the Scientific community)to prove that your claims are all false?..Art

You've claimed the 70 LRLers on here several times before, but when asked, you were never able to show who they are. It seems they actually are: "non-existant."

How you prove your claims to the World is your problem. If I wanted to prove that a metal detector worked, I know I wouldn't have any trouble doing that, for free.

I have already given you many suggestions on how to go about it---all of them at no expense to you. But I suppose you have a silly excuse for each one of them. So you figure it out. It's not my problem.

But if you want to keep making unbelievable claims about LRLs, you will need to prove it to the World before anyone is going to believe you.

Currently, all the evidence says that LRLs don't work.

More of your tall tales isn't going to change that.

Sorry.