discussion on the various possible theories that may be applicable to LrLs

[EE THr]

Re: discussion on the various possible theories that may be applicable to LrL's

If I ever do get serious about finding the big one,I will go all out to find it, leaving no stone unturned. But there are many decisions involved in a venture like that,more than just packing up and heading into the wild blue yonder. Research is the most time consuming part of the entire process.You need to be within range of your instrument to find it,and that is the biggest problem.Sorry for the long post,but those who have not been involved in treasure hunting think they can walk out in the back yard and dig up a pirates treasure chest full of gold,If they only had one that works.Won't happen. Rockhound

They all think that treasure is everywhere..they do not understand that it is your decision what tools, when and where you go to enjoy your hobby..You are correct about the dowsing rods..I have made and used most diameter and materials available to me. That includes rods made of wood, round plastics and even soda straws…They all work but some are just so much better..It all depends on the methods that you chose to us.Art

Show who the "they" is that you have fantasized, and quote where it was said.







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?

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

Family Maps of Hinds County, Mississippi, Deluxe Edition - Grab it through Amazon!

[aarthrj3811]

Re: discussion on the various possible theories that may be applicable to LrL's

Show who the "they" is that you have fantasized, and quote where it was said.

Just pick a thread and read and comperend it..Art

 

[Real de Tayopa Tropical Tramp]

Re: discussion on the various possible theories that may be applicable to LrL's

good afternoon finally getting caught up and reading the past posts

A) Hi rock hound: interesting posts keep them up. As for the post of one needing to be over
the dowsed object, shucks when I performed that successful 9 out of 10 tries for my wedding
ring, at no time was it under me, it always was on a shelf, as high as the rod or higher.

B) I have seen some nice, acceptable, explanations of how it may be possible to devise an
instrument to measure some of the 'still undefinable energies' using conventional lines of thought.

Unfortunately, we still have not defined just what we are attempting to measure. We probably never
will, but perhaps we will learn to substitute.

For this I was starting to attempt to show how the body could trained do this without knowing just
what was being measured in the meanwhile.

Don Jose de La Mancha

p.s. for just nothing in particular, Join me in -->http://forum.treasurenet.com/index.php/topic,403112.0.html

 

[rockhound]

Re: discussion on the various possible theories that may be applicable to LrL's

I have been experimenting with dowsing rods, and other related items for many years. I have purchased several types over the years and used them extensively to evaluate their potential. Some seemed to outperform others,which led me to try and establish a base line,so as to study the differences in material makeup and establish the maximum sensitivity of a particular geometrical shape as compared to other geometrical shapes. after years of experimenting, I found a common denominator with all the best designs. There are probably even better designs out there,which I am not familiar with.I have never sold or attempted to sale any of my dowsing rods,although, I did make a pair for a couple of my close friends. I have had many people at my house at a time and demonstarted their use, and let each one who wanted, try and get a response from them. Some can and some can't. One thing that I have not seen addressed here is the use of a pendulum. These, most people use for special purposes,
such as map dowsing,which I also do,but I also use them in the field. Once familiar with their operation, you can attain a high degree of accuracy with them. Although not a long range instrument as such, they can detect some matter at a fair distance.There are even other designs out there,which I have not tested,that may work as good or even better than what I currently use. When someone finds a design or type of instrument that they like, it may not become available for sale,therefore some designs are never seen in public. Inventors,like myself, are sometimes overly protective of our designs and inventions. Some of the theories proposed here are very likely close to being fact, whether they can be proven scientifically or not. A farmer need not have a BS in agriculture to grow good crops. His theory is give them enough water, and sunshine and they will produce crops.Although there is much more involved in the process,it's all they need to know.Good luck. rockhound

 

[EE THr]

Re: discussion on the various possible theories that may be applicable to LrL's

I have been experimenting with dowsing rods, and other related items for many years. I have purchased several types over the years and used them extensively to evaluate their potential. Some seemed to outperform others,which led me to try and establish a base line,so as to study the differences in material makeup and establish the maximum sensitivity of a particular geometrical shape as compared to other geometrical shapes. after years of experimenting, I found a common denominator with all the best designs. There are probably even better designs out there,which I am not familiar with.I have never sold or attempted to sale any of my dowsing rods,although, I did make a pair for a couple of my close friends. I have had many people at my house at a time and demonstarted their use, and let each one who wanted, try and get a response from them. Some can and some can't. One thing that I have not seen addressed here is the use of a pendulum. These, most people use for special purposes,
such as map dowsing,which I also do,but I also use them in the field. Once familiar with their operation, you can attain a high degree of accuracy with them. Although not a long range instrument as such, they can detect some matter at a fair distance.There are even other designs out there,which I have not tested,that may work as good or even better than what I currently use. When someone finds a design or type of instrument that they like, it may not become available for sale,therefore some designs are never seen in public. Inventors,like myself, are sometimes overly protective of our designs and inventions. Some of the theories proposed here are very likely close to being fact, whether they can be proven scientifically or not. A farmer need not have a BS in agriculture to grow good crops. His theory is give them enough water, and sunshine and they will produce crops.Although there is much more involved in the process,it's all they need to know.Good luck. rockhound

The difference between your claims for LRLs, and the farmer growing crops, is that everyone can plainly see that the crops are produced.

Nobody has ever seen an LRLer actually find treasure, except in the fantasies of the LRL promoters on this board, and on the manufacturers' Web sites.

Big, big, difference. What you did there with your example is called, in the Marketing world, "positioning." The position their product along side something which is known to be successful, in hopes that people will automatically associate the two things, and thus consider the advertised product to be successful.

Cute little trick, but everyone has seen it before, and we are all wise to it.

Sorry, again.



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]

Re: discussion on the various possible theories that may be applicable to LrL's

Show who the "they" is that you have fantasized, and quote where it was said.

Just pick a thread and read and comperend it..Art

No, conartie. "Comprehension" does not mean reading into something things which aren't there. No matter how much you click your heels together, cross your fingers, or hold your breath, it just doesn't mean that.

You can't quote where it was said, because it was never said. Deal with it.



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?

 

[rockhound]

Re: discussion on the various possible theories that may be applicable to LrL's

I was merely pointing out that you needen't need to be a rocket scientist to do these things. Even a nuclear physicist can't explain everything that happens in the universe. There arejust too many variables. It has taken me years to come to where I am now completely comfortable with the unseen and unexplained things that happen on our planet. Things I can't see like gravity,magnetism and electricity, I accept, because I can see the effects of them,so I find myself confirmed that they must exist. Other things,which I will not go into detail about, I have seen also, and have the same assurance that they are in fact,reality. A scientist performs an experiment several times then averages the results. Anything over 50% is called a theory, anything 90-100%, is always accepted as a fact. Only when a different scenario is injected, does he then question whether or not it is a fact. Throughout history, many accomplished scientists have made claims, that they had proven to themselves and other colleges, only to find later that their declaration was,either not complete, or that there were too many variables to calculate the final verdict. His one pronounced law now has been religated back to a theory. Although I have proven these theories to myself, I have not declared them a law.,they are still just a theory.It is this rigorous testing and research and development that has brough me to the reality that what I use works. When its all said and done, it is still only a theory,but one I can live with. I have seen things which would amaze most people,and which I can't even begin to explain. I have seen experiments with ELF waves,scalar waves,and other phenomena which I can't explain. But these things did manifest themselves in a way to make their presence known.I am not here to promote anything, and am not selling anything. I have no ties to any metal detector or LRL manufacturer. I am not telling anyone to try anything or to buy anything. rockhound

 

[EE THr]

Re: discussion on the various possible theories that may be applicable to LrL's

Even a nuclear physicist can't explain everything that happens in the universe.

I just posted the problem with your attempted positioning, and here you are throwing out the same stuff.


You said it, in the above quote. Things that actually happen.


LRLs finding treasure has never happened, so your trying to associate it with things, although strange, which actually have happened, is of no value whatsoever. Slick trick, though. Again.




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]

Re: discussion on the various possible theories that may be applicable to LrL's

LRLs finding treasure has never happened, so your trying to associate it with things, although strange, which actually have happened, is of no value whatsoever. Slick trick, though. Again.

http://www.rangertell.com/testimonials.html
http://forum.treasurenet.com/index.php/topic,305970.msg2228873.html#msg2228873

 

[EddieR]

Re: discussion on the various possible theories that may be applicable to LrL's

Rockhound, I enjoy your posts. However, there are those here that will not or cannot believe anything that wasn't in their school books. They are called "pseudo-skeptics", because they do not follow true skeptical reasoning. There are several here that just like to start a ruckus. Email and PM's are the best method of transferring pertinent info.

Now, a skeptic wouldn't have a problem with the content of this post. But pseudo skeptics will..

 

[rockhound]

Re: discussion on the various possible theories that may be applicable to LrL's

Since most of my posts have more to do with dowsing instruments than LRL's, I will post the rest of the information I wish to convey on that section. I have no problem with belief systems,if that is what they believe,then to each his own. I will not try to persuade anyone to try or buy anything they believe to be bogus. Moving on over. rockhound

 

[EE THr]

Re: discussion on the various possible theories that may be applicable to LrL's

Rockhound, I enjoy your posts. However, there are those here that will not or cannot believe anything that wasn't in their school books. They are called "pseudo-skeptics", because they do not follow true skeptical reasoning. There are several here that just like to start a ruckus. Email and PM's are the best method of transferring pertinent info.

Now, a skeptic wouldn't have a problem with the content of this post. But pseudo skeptics will..

Sorry, but neither schooling nor skepticism have anything whatsoever to do with the fact that no LRL has ever been proven to work.


All of your insults, and side stories, and phony excuses, are merely your weak attempts to divert away from that fact. Because there is nothing you can do about it.

The rest of the proven facts, like the so-called electronic circuits being totally phony and non-functional, are merely corroborating evidence.

You just can't "explain away" the fact that your LRLs just don't work.



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]

Re: discussion on the various possible theories that may be applicable to LrL's

Since most of my posts have more to do with dowsing instruments than LRL's, I will post the rest of the information I wish to convey on that section. I have no problem with belief systems,if that is what they believe,then to each his own. I will not ry to persuade anyone to try or buy anything they believe to be bogus. Moving on over. rockhound

The fact that no LRL has ever worked, has nothing to do with your lame conjecture of "belief systems."





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?

 

[Real de Tayopa Tropical Tramp]

Re: discussion on the various possible theories that may be applicable to LrL's

OOOH oooh EE you posted --> no LRL has ever been proven to work
**********
Now 'that' was a very unscientific post. How can you possibly begin to know of
every test ever made and their results, so you are making an unscientific, unbacked supposition
based entirely upon personal, prejudged, opinion..

Shame !!

Don Jose de La Manahca

 

[aarthrj3811]

Re: discussion on the various possible theories that may be applicable to LrL's

~EE~

The fact that no LRL has ever worked, has nothing to do with your lame conjecture of "belief systems."

Please explain How if they do not work that in the case of Quadro Corporation Officers Vs the USA they were all acquitted of all charge?..art

 

[EE THr]

Re: discussion on the various possible theories that may be applicable to LrL's

OOOH oooh EE you posted --> no LRL has ever been proven to work
**********
Now 'that' was a very unscientific post. How can you possibly begin to know of
every test ever made and their results, so you are making an unscientific, unbacked supposition
based entirely upon personal, prejudged, opinion..

Shame !!

Don Jose de La Manahca

Then show me.





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]

Re: discussion on the various possible theories that may be applicable to LrL's

~EE~

The fact that no LRL has ever worked, has nothing to do with your lame conjecture of "belief systems."

Please explain How if they do not work that in the case of Quadro Corporation Officers Vs the USA they were all acquitted of all charge?..art

Please clarify, by stating exactly what the charges were in that case.





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?

 

[EddieR]

Re: discussion on the various possible theories that may be applicable to LrL's

Rockhound, I enjoy your posts. However, there are those here that will not or cannot believe anything that wasn't in their school books. They are called "pseudo-skeptics", because they do not follow true skeptical reasoning. There are several here that just like to start a ruckus. Email and PM's are the best method of transferring pertinent info.

Now, a skeptic wouldn't have a problem with the content of this post. But pseudo skeptics will..

Sorry, but neither schooling nor skepticism have anything whatsoever to do with the fact that no LRL has ever been proven to work.


All of your insults, and side stories, and phony excuses, are merely your weak attempts to divert away from that fact. Because there is nothing you can do about it.

The rest of the proven facts, like the so-called electronic circuits being totally phony and non-functional, are merely corroborating evidence.

You just can't "explain away" the fact that your LRLs just don't work.



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?

Like I said....pseudo skeptics will have a problem with my post. Thank you for clarifying your position.

 

[aarthrj3811]

Re: discussion on the various possible theories that may be applicable to LrL's

~EE~

Please clarify, by stating exactly what the charges were in that case.

So you admit that you have not done any research on this website..Poor boy is lost again..Art

 

[EE THr]

Re: discussion on the various possible theories that may be applicable to LrL's

Rockhound, I enjoy your posts. However, there are those here that will not or cannot believe anything that wasn't in their school books. They are called "pseudo-skeptics", because they do not follow true skeptical reasoning. There are several here that just like to start a ruckus. Email and PM's are the best method of transferring pertinent info.

Now, a skeptic wouldn't have a problem with the content of this post. But pseudo skeptics will..

Sorry, but neither schooling nor skepticism have anything whatsoever to do with the fact that no LRL has ever been proven to work.


All of your insults, and side stories, and phony excuses, are merely your weak attempts to divert away from that fact. Because there is nothing you can do about it.

The rest of the proven facts, like the so-called electronic circuits being totally phony and non-functional, are merely corroborating evidence.

You just can't "explain away" the fact that your LRLs just don't work.



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?

Like I said....pseudo skeptics will have a problem with my post. Thank you for clarifying your position.

My position has always been totally clear.

Too bad you are just now figuring it out.

Like I and others have said, I am not a skeptic (nor your contrived pseudo version, either), but if you haven't been able to understand that, given all the times that we have said it, then there is no use in repeating it to you now.

Prove your claims, like everyone else does.




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?