Different Ways of Testing LRLs

[aarthrj3811]

pronghorn

Well that's odd, isn't it?
I thought these LRLs were LONG RANGE LOCATORS,
I thought they could detect targets buried ten feet deep or more,
and modern metal detectors that only detect down
6 inches or so, were long ago rendered obsolete
by the mighty LRL.*
You don't dig unless the detector goes beep?
You really don't believe in your LRL then, do you!
Your friend hung ain't gonna like this.

Gee Prong..It is LT’s hobby. He can hunt treasure and use any and all tools that he wants…He can change his methods and procedures any time that he feels it is necessary . I understand what he is talking about because I have been there and done that.. Sorry you arm-chair treasure hunts can not figure it out..Art

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

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

[EE THr]

artie---

Enough diversions!

Tell us how your public, random, double-blind test would work.

That is, would you have all 30 people try to locate the target at once? Or just one at a time?

And who would you like the judge of the test to be?




ref: Are LRLs More Than Just Dowsing?

 

[aarthrj3811]

Enough diversions!
Tell us how your public, random, double-blind test would work.
That is, would you have all 30 people try to locate the target at once? Or just one at a time?
And who would you like the judge of the test to be?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blind_experiment
A blind or blinded experiment is a scientific experiment where some of the persons involved are prevented from knowing certain information that might lead to conscious or unconscious bias on their part, invalidating the results.
For example, when asking consumers to compare the tastes of different brands of a product, the identities of the latter should be concealed — otherwise consumers will generally tend to prefer the brand they are familiar with. Similarly, when evaluating the effectiveness of a medical drug, both the patients and the doctors who administer the drug may be kept in the dark about the dosage being applied in each case — to forestall any chance of a placebo effect, observer bias, or conscious deception.
http://www.wisegeek.com/what-is-a-double-blind-test.htm
A double blind test is a scientific test in which neither test subjects nor administrators know who is in the control group and who is in the experimental group. The intent is to create an unbiased test environment, ensuring that the results of the testing are accurate and will stand up to analysis by other members of the scientific community. The concept of a double blind test is an excellent example of the scientific method, since it aims to be entirely objective and potentially repeatable.
And the best of all
http://skepdic.com/control.html....
A double-blind test is a control group test where neither the evaluator nor the subject knows which items are controls. A randomized test is one that randomly assigns items to the control and the experimental groups.
The purpose of controls, double-blind, and randomized testing is to reduce error, self-deception and bias. An example should clarify the necessity of these safeguards.
It sure seems that you do not know what a Double Blind Test is..
Persons... subjects…control group… consumers..
More than one person...Just like the big guys do it..
Some thing that would be excepted as a real double Blind test..Art

 

[EE THr]

artie---

It sure seems that you do not know what a Double Blind Test is..

Do you really find the childish insults to be necessary? I merely asked a civilized question.

Why don't you know off the insults, and just talk like normal people do?

More than one person...Just like the big guys do it..

OK, so you want 30 people to search for one target, all at the same time?

Is that correct?

 

[aarthrj3811]

~Art~

It sure seems that you do not know what a Double Blind Test is..

Do you really find the childish insults to be necessary? I merely asked a civilized question.
Why don't you know off the insults, and just talk like normal people do?

Sorry you feel that is an insult..Please read this post to learn what an insult is.. Are LRLs More Than Just Dowsing?

 

[fenixdigger]

Prong;

I trust my LRLs to give me a spot. I do not trust that it will be the intended target until I verify it. I could be between 2 targets, if in an area with a LOT of targets, it gets real confusing until you weed out the line crossings. I don't know where you got the depth thing, my Minelab will get a drink can at 4 ft, while the 2-boxes will really reach down.

 

[EE THr]

OK, so you want 30 people to search for one target, all at the same time?

Is that correct?

The topic, artie---try to remember the topic.

Do I need to quote it in every one of my posts to you, to help you remember? Because I will if it will help.

 

[pronghorn]

Prong;

I trust my LRLs to give me a spot. I do not trust that it will be the intended target until I verify it. I could be between 2 targets, if in an area with a LOT of targets, it gets real confusing until you weed out the line crossings. I don't know where you got the depth thing, my Minelab will get a drink can at 4 ft, while the 2-boxes will really reach down.

Very lame attempt at a rebuttal.
You LRL believers are falling behind on your corraboration
fantasies, time for a time out to get your stories straight.
You don't know where I got the depth thing?...............
Well let me help you out then, click on this link of one of
hung's posts and read it, please, read all of it!..........
http://forum.treasurenet.com/index.php/topic,341521.msg2790816.html#msg2790816

Such a simple solution to a simple question.....
what would you consider an acceptable test of an
LRL?

This topic is to allow all those who complain about Carl's test, to state How they would prefer their LRL to be tested.

no one will step up.......the song remains the same
waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa

 

[fenixdigger]

Well, bless your little heart. That was indeed a lame rebuttal, rebuttal you made. Each of us work differently. Duh

I guess you missed the point, and likely you don't care about the truth as you constantly dispute it.

I don't go out unless I have my detector. I am going to verify before I dig, and If I see a spot that may have relics that doesn't have a target I was looking for, I will scan it. I've said before, I'm not as good as the big boys, but I am having fun and bringing
finds home. How about you?

 

[aarthrj3811]

Different Ways of Testing LRLs

This topic is to allow all those who complain about Carl's test, to state How they would prefer their LRL to be tested.

We have not complained about Carl’s test..Just pointed out the flaws in the test

We have heard the LRL promoters say why they don't like Carl's test. All have either said, "I just don't like it," without stating any specific reason; or have offered various definitions of double-blind which were actually specific only to drug testing programs or cola tasting surveys, and were therefore totally irrational and incompatible with any meaningful LRL tests.

Sorry you can’t understand the definition of Double Blind Testing…Sorry that the only definitions of double blind testing include small examples from the drug and cola industry..Could that be that they are the only ones that use this method of testing?

So, having failed to find fault with Carl's test, here is their big chance to eliminate any possible misunderstandings, and tell what the really want a good test to be.

Even the Skeptic’s Bible agrees with what we have answered.
http://skepdic.com/control.html....
A double-blind test is a control group test where neither the evaluator nor the subject knows which items are controls. A randomized test is one that randomly assigns items to the control and the experimental groups.
The purpose of controls, double-blind, and randomized testing is to reduce error, self-deception and bias. An example should clarify the necessity of these safeguards.

 

[EE THr]

artie---

Yet another failure to answer the question.

Forgot the question? I hope this will help---

Different Ways of Testing LRLs

...here is their big chance to eliminate any possible misunderstandings, and tell what the really want a good test to be.

Nothing could possibly be more fair and unbiased than this!

I'm all ears....

So, can you actually answer please?

 

[EE THr]

6 Days since the last post asking for an answer, and no LRL promoters can do it.

They can't take Carl's double-blind test, and they can't come up with a better test, either.

Does anyone think that could possibly be because they don't want their fake claims to be exposed as fraud?

Duh.... Ya think?





Don't be a doof---show the proof!
P.S. When will you man-up and take Carl's double-blind test, and collect the $25,000.00?
ref: Are LRLs More Than Just Dowsing?

 

[EE THr]

13 days since the topic question was put to the LRL promoters, in my original post.

And not one has dared to reply with an answer that makes any sense!


Because they can't, without committing to taking their own test, and exposing their hoax when they fail!




Don't be a doof---show the proof!
P.S. When will you man-up and take Carl's double-blind test, and collect the $25,000.00?
ref: Are LRLs More Than Just Dowsing?

 

[aarthrj3811]

More claims...Do you stay up all night dreaming up more claims ?

 

[EE THr]

More claims...Do you stay up all night dreaming up more claims ?

Another, of hundreds, avoidance of the question, with an irrelevant comment.

Just answer up.

...Or take the test.





Don't be a doof---show the proof!
P.S. When will you man-up and take Carl's double-blind test?
ref: Are LRLs More Than Just Dowsing?

 

[EE THr]

I even asked artie what he would think a fair test would be, and he did tell me.

He wanted 30 people to participate.

So, just bring 30 people and take Carl's test!


But so far he hasn't. Big surprise, huh?


Jeez, just take the test, huh?








Don't be a doof---show the proof!
P.S. When will you man-up and take Carl's double-blind test?
ref: Are LRLs More Than Just Dowsing?

 

[aarthrj3811]

I think that Carl should have talk with you..a few days ago you raised the prize to 425,000 and today your raised it to $750000… $25,000 X 30 people =$750,000 big ones..Art

 

[EE THr]

I think that Carl should have talk with you..a few days ago you raised the prize to 425,000 and today your raised it to $750000… $25,000 X 30 people =$750,000 big ones..Art

So, why would you be whining about that?

Other than trying to change the subject, of course!






Don't be a doof---show the proof!
P.S. When will you man-up and take Carl's double-blind test, and collect the $25,000.00?
ref: Are LRLs More Than Just Dowsing?

 

[EE THr]

So, since you don't like Carl's test, for some reason, what different kind of test do you recommend?






Don't be a doof---show the proof!
P.S. When will you man-up and take Carl's double-blind test, and collect the $25,000.00?
ref: Are LRLs More Than Just Dowsing?

 

[aarthrj3811]

Different Ways of Testing LRLs

It’s your Tread and so far you have come up with only one test..We have rejected it that test has it has been submitted..You turn..Art