Can You Scientifically Prove to the World That LRLs Work?

[GuyinWH]

You two know that the invitation is still open which I gave in the other thread... and it will always be open; of course I'm not keeping track of
time and neither am I expecting a mature response but heck it's still out there.

Provide some legitimate evidence/studies, from a reputable scientific source with a large background in the area of geology, electrical engineering,
physics, and/or geo-technology... that can ascertain without the shadow of a doubt that the pseudo-scientific jargon you guys spout out about LRLs
is legitimate. Heck ANY of it, doesn't have to be all of it. Oh and a scientific study or journal making a passing mention of something similar DOESN'T count unless it explains in detail that it is the same concept that you are talking about (and what LRL retailers claim).

Here i'll provide some sources. Try searching Deepwebtech, scirus, intute, and Techxtra (you can find those search engines via google; these are search engines specialized at pulling info from research/scientific/educational institutions and the most up to date science info gets on there first) for your
pseudo-scientific arguments.

And Eddie you are right, about the maturity thing... I'm not going to stoop to your level and anymore, thanks for the heads up. Also not going to use ad-hominem either since that's what you guys use when you have no argument. Attack the truth-bearer; natural response from a conman who is getting exposed. Also, I don't want an avatar, and as a matter of fact I had a Garret GTI detector (think that was it) on there for an avatar about a year ago; I very much know how to put one on there thank you, but i'd rather not have one now.

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

Upgraded Night Vision Monocular Digital Infrared Monocular Telescope for 100% Darkness with 8X Zoom - Grab it through Amazon!

[goldfinder]

This whole thread is a total waste of time. There is no way to "prove" LRLs work with our current scientific view. And besides, who gives a crap. LRL is an art - not a science. It works for some who have the ability mentally and emotionally. The rest don't and you will never prove it to the self appointed skeptics who are largely schooled in the "scientific Method".

So LRL uses who make it work - quit trying to prove something that is not provable scientifically. You are beating a dead horse!

And skeptics - leave the LRLer alone. You just making asses of yourselves.

Lets get on with LRL/MFD/Dowsing machines and discuss them.

Goldfinder

 

[GuyinWH]

This whole thread is a total waste of time. There is no way to "prove" LRLs work with our current scientific view. And besides, who gives a crap. LRL is an art - not a science. It works for some who have the ability mentally and emotionally. The rest don't and you will never prove it to the self appointed skeptics who are largely schooled in the "scientific Method".

So LRL uses who make it work - quit trying to prove something that is not provable scientifically. You are beating a dead horse!

And skeptics - leave the LRLer alone. You just making asses of yourselves.

Lets get on with LRL/MFD/Dowsing machines and discuss them.

Goldfinder

This post is full of EPIC win all over it. Thank you!!!

"So LRL uses who make it work - quit trying to prove something that is not provable scientifically."

IF you cannot prove something scientifically then DON'T claim it works unless you're speaking about something faith based!!!
Since we aren't talking about GOD, Buddah, or Muhammed, you are admitting to fairy tales at this point.
If you disregard the scientific method you step into the territory of pseudo-science... so basically you admit its a con for anyone
lacking the understanding and/or knowledge to realize they're being bamboozled...

Oh... hahaha. "There is no way to "prove" LRLs work with our current scientific view."
OK that's REALLY funny... nice try at subversion...
BUT!!! We can "prove" LRLs are all a fraud with our CURRENT knowledge in electronics, geology, and physics.

We aren't beating a dead horse (well technically we are since no one can prove LRLs to be anything but a fraud)...
We are beating a very much live horse and it needs to be shot between the eyes. Till LRL promoters stop it completely
with the subversive posts about their supposed treasure hunts and their promotion of these fraudboxes.... we have no need to stop;
we will (at least I will) continue to come here and tell people that these devices are nothing but a fraud.

 

[hung]

There is no way to "prove" LRLs work with our current scientific view.

Of course there is!
Look bellow.

IF you cannot prove something scientifically then DON'T claim it works unless you're speaking about something faith based!!!

Hey Guy... the only people having faith here, are the skeptics in this and other less famous forums who cross their fingers with faith in hopes LRLs don't work to threaten ordinary MD industries.
Instead, being completely incapable of providing the physics and scientific explanations on why they think LRLs do not work, they keep asking for scientific proof why it works. Nice way of twisting things eh?
Trully speaking, MFD types and rod types LRLs are so simple to explain even for the 'xientists' who think they know science enough.
Despite of us being in the 21st century, the 'xientists' still don't know what electricity or magnetism are. They only know how to use them.
Science is one and only. But 'xientists' are many still with thousands and thousands of questions to science. But as we grow up, we will learn in due time.

Since I will not speak about magnetism here because I would infer what I 'think' I know about it and so far it proved correct in my experiments but would raise a huge shock and debate, provided the 'xientists' also standardized some high controversial understanding, we can start with a simple and more precise definition.

A MFD LRL is said to work in the principle of an electromagnetic wave.
So, Guy, what is an electromagnetic wave?

In the past, in this same forum my scientific questions to skeptics remained unanswered. Even the most simple ones.
I believe you also will refrain from answer for whatever reasons that might be. So I will go up front and answer for you.

An electromagnetic wave is the result of rapid increase and decrease changes of a magnetic field which in turn is the result of alternate energizing and de-energizing of an oscillator element.

Nice and easy for everybody to understand, agree?
Now... in the case of buried, or even not buried conductive metals (even non conductive, but I will not go into this now) the Earth, our little planet, produces emissions and is an oscillator. Schumman resonances for instance are indications of emissions produced by the earth which in the past stood around 8 Hz but now has raised to almost 13Hz.
An oscilator needs an 'antenna' to put the emissions up in the atmosphere for instance. And you guessed right (I hope). Buried metals and metals all around act as antennae.
A simple electronic RF apparatus with antenna is not the apropriate tool to capture those emissions as the circuitry is prone to too much noise and higher RF polution all around us which makes them useless to receive the tiny signal emanations the metals are 'screaming' compared to the huge DB pollution we face nowadays.
So the L rods are the most apropriate antenna element to filter that noise produced by cell phone towers, TV stations, radio stations, etc. and etc.
By using magnetic law of charges in the frequency domain it can be done, tough the circuits are still somewhat primitive to be used with a 'pure antenna'.

Let's stop here for now and wait your true scientific input Guy. If you provide that, later when I have more time, I will discuss this with you.
But also for now, stop making bogus claims that we cannot prove LRLs scientifically.
Please.

 

[aarthrj3811]

Thank you goldfinder...We keep trying to discusss LRL’s...hung is correct and GuyinWH comments are just his personal opinions..Art

 

[werleibr]

There is no way to "prove" LRLs work with our current scientific view.

Of course there is!
Look bellow.

IF you cannot prove something scientifically then DON'T claim it works unless you're speaking about something faith based!!!

Hey Guy... the only people having faith here, are the skeptics in this and other less famous forums who cross their fingers with faith in hopes LRLs don't work to threaten ordinary MD industries.
Instead, being completely incapable of providing the physics and scientific explanations on why they think LRLs do not work, they keep asking for scientific proof why it works. Nice way of twisting things eh?
Trully speaking, MFD types and rod types LRLs are so simple to explain even for the 'xientists' who think they know science enough.
Despite of us being in the 21st century, the 'xientists' still don't know what electricity or magnetism are. They only know how to use them.
Science is one and only. But 'xientists' are many still with thousands and thousands of questions to science. But as we grow up, we will learn in due time.

Since I will not speak about magnetism here because I would infer what I 'think' I know about it and so far it proved correct in my experiments but would raise a huge shock and debate, provided the 'xientists' also standardized some high controversial understanding, we can start with a simple and more precise definition.

A MFD LRL is said to work in the principle of an electromagnetic wave.
So, Guy, what is an electromagnetic wave?

In the past, in this same forum my scientific questions to skeptics remained unanswered. Even the most simple ones.
I believe you also will refrain from answer for whatever reasons that might be. So I will go up front and answer for you.

An electromagnetic wave is the result of rapid increase and decrease changes of a magnetic field which in turn is the result of alternate energizing and de-energizing of an oscillator element.

Nice and easy for everybody to understand, agree?
Now... in the case of buried, or even not buried conductive metals (even non conductive, but I will not go into this now) the Earth, our little planet, produces emissions and is an oscillator. Schumman resonances for instance are indications of emissions produced by the earth which in the past stood around 8 Hz but now has raised to almost 13Hz.
An oscilator needs an 'antenna' to put the emissions up in the atmosphere for instance. And you guessed right (I hope). Buried metals and metals all around act as antennae.
A simple electronic RF apparatus with antenna is not the apropriate tool to capture those emissions as the circuitry is prone to too much noise and higher RF polution all around us which makes them useless to receive the tiny signal emanations the metals are 'screaming' compared to the huge DB pollution we face nowadays.
So the L rods are the most apropriate antenna element to filter that noise produced by cell phone towers, TV stations, radio stations, etc. and etc.
By using magnetic law of charges in the frequency domain it can be done, tough the circuits are still somewhat primitive to be used with a 'pure antenna'.

Let's stop here for now and wait your true scientific input Guy. If you provide that, later when I have more time, I will discuss this with you.
But also for now, stop making bogus claims that we cannot prove LRLs scientifically.
Please.

Hung , I do like how you try to use science to explain what you are talking about and to an someone who knows nothing of sorts you could fool them, but sorry you cannot fool everyone.

You asked what an electromagnetic wave is and your definition of one is that and I quote

An electromagnetic wave is the result of rapid increase and decrease changes of a magnetic field which in turn is the result of alternate energizing and de-energizing of an oscillator element.

Now here is my definition; an electromagnetic wave (EMW) consists of two transverse waves, one is an oscillating electric field, and the other is a corresponding magnetic field that is perpendicular to the electric field. The oscillating electric field is created by accelerating electrons. This oscillating electric field then in turn creates an oscillating magnetic field, which in turn creates an oscillating electric field. So this is a lot like yours, except I explain that the oscillator element is the oscillating electric field created by accelerating electrons. EMWs make up the electromagnetic spectrum (EMS). The EMS is a range of all possible frequencies of electromagnetic radiation (EMR). EMS extends from low frequencies (3 Hz) to high frequency (300 EHz {or > 10^19 Hz} which are gamma rays). Other examples of EMR are radio waves, microwaves, infrared radiation, visible light, x-rays. Etc etc….

Now that we have the EMR discussed let us discuss the Schumann resonances. Schumann resonance wave is part of the EMS at the extremely low frequencies side of the spectrum. They are found from 3Hz to 60 Hz. The nominal frequencies are 7.8 (the fundamental still today not 13), 14, 20,26,33,39, and 45 Hz ±0.5 Hz. These Schumann resonance waves are generated from the electrical activity in the atmosphere, most notably from lightning storms. In other words Schumann resonance waves are created from lighting. It is the monitoring of these frequencies that we see the meteorologists showing where lightning strikes are during storms on the TV. So no, Schumann waves do not need an ‘antenna’ to be sent to the atmosphere and in turn the buried metals do not act like an antenna sending Schumann resonance waves into the atmosphere.

 

[Dell Winders]

You claim MFD and Hid are fraud and cannot possibly work, yet you describe the physics under which they appear to operate, very well.

Do I sense a bit of hypocrisy, or is it just a mis-understanding of the science? Dell

 

[werleibr]

You are just misunderstanding everything.

It was claimed that Schumann resonance waves are sent into the atmosphere by metalic objects. I showed that they are not, but that the are created by lightning and not sent from inside the earth to the atmosphere by metalic objects.

 

[Dell Winders]

I understand, your intent was to explain that Schumann waves aren't being used, but perhaps without realizing it you partially explained my theory in which LRL's appear to apply.

So no, Schumann waves do not need an ‘antenna’ to be sent to the atmosphere and in turn the buried metals do not act like an antenna sending Schumann resonance waves into the atmosphere.
Posted on: Today at 07:2

Keep practicing critical thinking, and open mindfully entertain your current analysis of LRL with a different perspective. The answer is there waiting to be discovered, if you have the sincere interest? Dell

 

[EE THr]

The LRL promoters continually try to use the trick of attempting to substitute verbosity of pseudoscience for real proof.

When that fails, they then turn to attacking the "non believer" personally.

If that doesn't intimidate the debunker, they try to use pseudologic, by saying that nobody can prove that LRLs don't work.

They try to totally ignore the fact that it is the responsibility of the claimant to prove his own claims, in the first place.

When documented proof is provided that LRLs don't work, they simply attack those Scientific tests, in the same nonsensical way they make personal attacks.

When every type of BS has failed for them, they stoop to silly, childish, jibberish posts.

Dell even refuses to outright claim that his LRLs will find "anything for anyone."

It's obvious that the LRL promoters have nothing to support their fantastic claims, and it's obvious to anyone with any common sense, that LRLs just don't work at all.

Yet the LRL promoters continue to take "pleasure" in trying their hardest to convince everyone that LRLs will find treasure.

That is sick in so many ways....

 

[werleibr]

I understand, your intent was to explain that Schumann waves aren't being used, but perhaps without realizing it you partially explained my theory in which LRL's appear to apply.

So no, Schumann waves do not need an ‘antenna’ to be sent to the atmosphere and in turn the buried metals do not act like an antenna sending Schumann resonance waves into the atmosphere.
Posted on: Today at 07:2

Keep practicing critical thinking, and open mindfully entertain your current analysis of LRL with a different perspective. The answer is there waiting to be discovered, if you have the sincere interest? Dell

I like how you failed to see that TV meterolologists monitoring the wave lengths idetified with Schumann waves. It is the monitoring of these frequencys that they are able to graphically show the lightning strikes.

Watch this video and witness the little yellow lighting bolts (Best seen about1:28). Those were picked up due to Schumann waves. So then according to your logic the video should show treasure also since your LRL uses schumann waves because their antennas are monitoring all schumann wave frequencies.

 

[aarthrj3811]

~EE~

The LRL promoters continually try to use the trick of attempting to substitute verbosity of pseudoscience for real proof.

No...You are the with all the pseudoscience proof.

When that fails, they then turn to attacking the "non believer" personally.
If that doesn't intimidate the debunker, they try to use pseudologic, by saying that nobody can prove that LRLs don't work.

Gee EE...We have had 70 plus happy owner/operators tell us about different LRL’s that work. We have had a hand full of skeptics claim that none of them will find treasure..So tell us why you claim that they do not work?

They try to totally ignore the fact that it is the responsibility of the claimant to prove his own claims, in the first place.

Why is the statement that “none of them will find treasure” not a claim?

When documented proof is provided that LRLs don't work, they simply attack those Scientific tests, in the same nonsensical way they make personal attacks.

Could it be that none of what you claim to be documented proof is not about devices used by treasure hunters.

When every type of BS has failed for them, they stoop to silly, childish, jibberish posts.

Gee..that’s what we think about all your posts

Dell even refuses to outright claim that his LRLs will find "anything for anyone."

Yes..that is one of your claims

It's obvious that the LRL promoters have nothing to support their fantastic claims, and it's obvious to anyone with any common sense, that LRLs just don't work at all.

Your correct...We have nothing but 100’s of testimonials, photo’s of finds and movies of finds.

Yet the LRL promoters continue to take "pleasure" in trying their hardest to convince everyone that LRLs will find treasure.

You have admitted that we find treasure so what is your problem?

That is sick in so many ways....

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sick
Sick may refer to:
• Having a disease
• Experiencing illness
• Vomit

 

[EE THr]

You have admitted that we find treasure so what is your problem?

Your above statement is absolutely not true.

The rest of your post is merely more examples of your attempting to substitute verbosity for proof.

 

[aarthrj3811]

~EE~

Your above statement is absolutely not true.

The rest of your post is merely more examples of your attempting to substitute verbosity for proof.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Verbosity
Verbosity (also called wordiness, prolixity and garrulousness) in language refers to speech or writing which is deemed to use an excess of words. Adjectival forms are verbose, wordy, prolix and garrulous.
~Art~

You have admitted that we find treasure so what is your problem?

Did I use to many words that you can’t understand.
So are you now saying that no one has ever found treasure while using a LRL..Art

 

[hung]

Actually you are fooling yourself in the worst and being fooled by the wikipaedia scientific explanations you think you understood, in the best case.. Oh well... it's never too late to learn.

This post was intended to another Guy... But since you've jumped yourself in...
Let's filter out the babble and keep the facts straight.

Now here is my definition; an electromagnetic wave (EMW) consists of two transverse waves, one is an oscillating electric field, and the other is a corresponding magnetic field that is perpendicular to the electric field.

Ha,ha,ha,ha,ha. No wikiboy, no.
You're still stuck in the old hertzian definition, and worse, don't even know where the mistake lies.
There is no transverse magnetic field associated with an electromagnetic wave. Simply because there is no magnetic component prior to transduction from the coil or loop. A sensor, be it a coil or wire generates its own magnetic field from a static alternating potential or voltage. Also from the electromagnetic radiation itself.
Hertz tought the magnetic component was present already even before it was transduced. This is insane and wrong. Too hard for you to understand or you need simpler words?
We know that electromagnetic radiation is not a current of electrons propagating at the speed of light, so how do you think, could a prior radiated electromagnetic wave 'joint flow' with a transverse magnetic field associated to it, when no charge can flow or generate a magnetic field in a non existant circuit anywhere along the wave?
Ask this to your favorite scientist and see his eyes rolling around...

Now that we have the EMR discussed let us discuss the Schumann resonances.

Sure.

Schumann resonance wave is part of the EMS at the extremely low frequencies side of the spectrum.

Congratulations. That's correct.

The nominal frequencies are 7.8

Used to be.

(the fundamental still today not 13)

13 is the maximum. Given the level of stress Earth is going through, I believe we are very close to hit this value. Last time it was measured, was around 12Hz.

These Schumann resonance waves are generated from the electrical activity in the atmosphere, most notably from lightning storms. In other words Schumann resonance waves are created from lighting. It is the monitoring of these frequencies that we see the meteorologists showing where lightning strikes are during storms on the TV.

Sure but I was refering to the geomagnetic waves within Earth. We all have frequencies. All living, inanimate, every element you can think of is comprised of frequencies. Specially Earth being a living organism. Or you mischievously think that our planet is... sort to speak, inanimate and unable to emanate anything?

So no, Schumann waves do not need an ‘antenna’ to be sent to the atmosphere and in turn the buried metals do not act like an antenna sending Schumann resonance waves into the atmosphere.

Every emanation of radiated components need an antenna element to broadcast or receive accordingly. You, mr. werleibr is an antenna right now sitting in front of your computer!

Look, I am really busy these days. So, don't expect any aditional input soon.
But the bottomline and something that can end this for all is simply that as long as you keep stuck in the wikipedia way of life without thinking out of the box... not even in a hundred years you will be able to understand how a simple pair of L rods can locate magnetic emanations.
So simple... Only for those who understand the simplicity of scientific phenomena.

Ah.. before I forget. If you can get hold of a RT Examiner, just hit any number from 7.8 to 12 in the calculator and start walking. The telescopic aerial will start to spin for the Schumann resonances.

 

[aarthrj3811]

~hung~

Ah.. before I forget. If you can get hold of a RT Examiner, just hit any number from 7.8 to 12 in the calculator and start walking. The telescopic aerial will start to spin for the Schumann resonances.

Thank you hung...I had forgotten that fact...It seems that they know very little about what is happening with frequencies. They may want to talk to some of the technicians the next time they go to hospital...Art

 

[Dell Winders]

Watch this video and witness the little yellow lighting bolts (Best seen about1:28). Those were picked up due to Schumann waves. So then according to your logic the video should show treasure also since your LRL uses schumann waves because their antennas are monitoring all schumann wave frequencies.

WOW! You are in your own little world of non comprehension. I never stated, or implied any such thing. re read what I posted and try to figure it out. Dell

 

[EE THr]

So are you now saying that no one has ever found treasure while using a LRL..Art

Typical Straw Man diversion. You are trying to change what I actually said. But you stretched it too far, and so made it obvious to anyone what you tried to do.

You are thus your own best debunker. Keep up the good work.

 

[EE THr]

Actually you are fooling yourself in the worst and being fooled by the wikipaedia scientific explanations you think you understood, in the best case.. Oh well... it's never too late to learn.

This post was intended to another Guy... But since you've jumped yourself in...
Let's filter out the babble and keep the facts straight.

Now here is my definition; an electromagnetic wave (EMW) consists of two transverse waves, one is an oscillating electric field, and the other is a corresponding magnetic field that is perpendicular to the electric field.

Ha,ha,ha,ha,ha. No wikiboy, no.
You're still stuck in the old hertzian definition, and worse, don't even know where the mistake lies.
There is no transverse magnetic field associated with an electromagnetic wave. Simply because there is no magnetic component prior to transduction from the coil or loop. A sensor, be it a coil or wire generates its own magnetic field from a static alternating potential or voltage. Also from the electromagnetic radiation itself.
Hertz tought the magnetic component was present already even before it was transduced. This is insane and wrong. Too hard for you to understand or you need simpler words?
We know that electromagnetic radiation is not a current of electrons propagating at the speed of light, so how do you think, could a prior radiated electromagnetic wave 'joint flow' with a transverse magnetic field associated to it, when no charge can flow or generate a magnetic field in a non existant circuit anywhere along the wave?
Ask this to your favorite scientist and see his eyes rolling around...

Now that we have the EMR discussed let us discuss the Schumann resonances.

Sure.

Schumann resonance wave is part of the EMS at the extremely low frequencies side of the spectrum.

Congratulations. That's correct.

The nominal frequencies are 7.8

Used to be.

(the fundamental still today not 13)

13 is the maximum. Given the level of stress Earth is going through, I believe we are very close to hit this value. Last time it was measured, was around 12Hz.

These Schumann resonance waves are generated from the electrical activity in the atmosphere, most notably from lightning storms. In other words Schumann resonance waves are created from lighting. It is the monitoring of these frequencies that we see the meteorologists showing where lightning strikes are during storms on the TV.

Sure but I was refering to the geomagnetic waves within Earth. We all have frequencies. All living, inanimate, every element you can think of is comprised of frequencies. Specially Earth being a living organism. Or you mischievously think that our planet is... sort to speak, inanimate and unable to emanate anything?

So no, Schumann waves do not need an ‘antenna’ to be sent to the atmosphere and in turn the buried metals do not act like an antenna sending Schumann resonance waves into the atmosphere.

Every emanation of radiated components need an antenna element to broadcast or receive accordingly. You, mr. werleibr is an antenna right now sitting in front of your computer!

Look, I am really busy these days. So, don't expect any aditional input soon.
But the bottomline and something that can end this for all is simply that as long as you keep stuck in the wikipedia way of life without thinking out of the box... not even in a hundred years you will be able to understand how a simple pair of L rods can locate magnetic emanations.
So simple... Only for those who understand the simplicity of scientific phenomena.

Ah.. before I forget. If you can get hold of a RT Examiner, just hit any number from 7.8 to 12 in the calculator and start walking. The telescopic aerial will start to spin for the Schumann resonances.

OMG. The fine non-art of pseudoscience gibberish at it's worst!

And to top it all off, he admits that he treasure hunts with a "magic pocket calculator on an L-rod," the RangerTell!

Hung, you should try watching TV on a mirror. Just think of all the channels you would produce!

 

[aarthrj3811]

~EE~

OMG. The fine non-art of pseudoscience gibberish at it's worst!

And to top it all off, he admits that he treasure hunts with a "magic pocket calculator on an L-rod," the RangerTell!

Hung, you should try watching TV on a mirror. Just think of all the channels you would produce!

Thank You EE