Do The Math!

[fenixdigger]

Looks ancient. I'd scan a 50 ft circle and see if any relics are around.

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

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

[aarthrj3811]

~EE~

Wrong thread, con-artie.

Why is it in the wrong Thread ? If they use your Math of flipping a coin they have a 50-50 chance of locating a treasure. If they follow the map in scan 2 what does your math tell them? Just wondering what an expert non-treasure has to say about their find…
fenixdigger..My opinion is that the rocks were placed there by the Spanish..Art

 

[fenixdigger]

While chasing Indian artifacts, I found petrographic symbols the were referred to by the indians as language of the "old ones"

There were believed to inhabit North America before the Indians. They moved West and into Mexico according to legends. I have

seen an alter in Georgia they left. They left carvings and glyphs that the Indians held sacred. These rocks could be over 25,000 yrs

if this is the source.

 

[aarthrj3811]

While chasing Indian artifacts, I found petrographic symbols the were referred to by the indians as language of the "old ones"
There were believed to inhabit North America before the Indians. They moved West and into Mexico according to legends. I have
seen an alter in Georgia they left. They left carvings and glyphs that the Indians held sacred. These rocks could be over 25,000 yrs if this is the source.

Yes they could..Man has been wondering around the USA for many more years than history tells us..Art

 

[EE THr]

~EE~

Wrong thread, con-artie.

Why is it in the wrong Thread ? If they use your Math of flipping a coin they have a 50-50 chance of locating a treasure. If they follow the map in scan 2 what does your math tell them? Just wondering what an expert non-treasure has to say about their find…
fenixdigger..My opinion is that the rocks were placed there by the Spanish..Art

The thread, as the Original Post states, is about the average success percentage of LRLs (which has been shown to be zero, by the way), not about pictures of rocks.

So that's the only way you can try to divert the discussion off-topic, huh? Just post random stuff that nobody asked about, right out of the blue.

Like nobody would ever notice.

Typical of your style, con-artie! What a complete doofus!





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]

~EE!

The thread, as the Original Post states, is about the average success percentage of LRLs (which has been shown to be zero, by the way), not about pictures of rocks.
So that's the only way you can try to divert the discussion off-topic, huh? Just post random stuff that nobody asked about, right out of the blue.
Like nobody would ever notice.
Typical of your style, con-artie! What a complete doofus!

Thank you for telling us that you have no answers to the questions. Could you answer if you were told that the map they were following was Dowsed from 1000’s of miles away?.No you can’t because Ransom Chance has nothing to do with Treasure Hunting..If your math can not answer questions about simple treasure hunting then the entire thread is just another Skeptic SCAM..Art

 

[EE THr]

~EE!

The thread, as the Original Post states, is about the average success percentage of LRLs (which has been shown to be zero, by the way), not about pictures of rocks.
So that's the only way you can try to divert the discussion off-topic, huh? Just post random stuff that nobody asked about, right out of the blue.
Like nobody would ever notice.
Typical of your style, con-artie! What a complete doofus!

Thank you for telling us that you have no answers to the questions. Could you answer if you were told that the map they were following was Dowsed from 1000’s of miles away?.No you can’t because Ransom Chance has nothing to do with Treasure Hunting..If your math can not answer questions about simple treasure hunting then the entire thread is just another Skeptic SCAM..Art

Ah, the old False Premise fallacy trick. At least you are consistant in your illogic, con-artie.





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]

Thank you for telling us that you have no answers to the questions. Could you answer if you were told that the map they were following was Dowsed from 1000’s of miles away?.No you can’t because Ransom Chance has nothing to do with Treasure Hunting..If your math can not answer questions about simple treasure hunting then the entire thread is just another Skeptic SCAM..Art

 

[aarthrj3811]

Sure ya did....whilst the general population is laughing hysterically...here is a picture of a real treasure tree

So you can’t answer the questions..Art

 

[EE THr]

Sure ya did....whilst the general population is laughing hysterically...here is a picture of a real treasure tree

So you can’t answer the questions..Art

You didn't even answer it yourself. You admittedly guessed.


But I did answer you. I said you were merely spamming this thread with an off-topic diversion, which is true.

And the reason you did is because you can't face the reality of the issues presented in the actual topic. It's as simple at that.





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]

You didn't even answer it yourself. You admittedly guessed.
But I did answer you. I said you were merely spamming this thread with an off-topic diversion, which is true.
And the reason you did is because you can't face the reality of the issues presented in the actual topic. It's as simple at that.

If stating that your Math does not apply to those who find treasure with these LRL’s Treasure Hunting devises I am correct..Art

 

[EE THr]

You didn't even answer it yourself. You admittedly guessed.
But I did answer you. I said you were merely spamming this thread with an off-topic diversion, which is true.
And the reason you did is because you can't face the reality of the issues presented in the actual topic. It's as simple at that.

If stating that your Math does not apply to those who find treasure with these LRL’s Treasure Hunting devises I am correct..Art

Well, con-artie, let's see how things add up for you, then.

You say that reality doesn't count.
You say that math doesn't count.
You say that tests don't count.
You say that lack of proven treasures recovered doesn't count.
You say that your failure to rationally answer logical questions doesn't count.
You say that just because you post altered images and fake videos, it doesn't mean you're a liar.

Oh, to heck with it...just read the links below---



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]

I see again that your answer comes from your personal insult thread..Art

 

[EE THr]

I see again that your answer comes from your personal insult thread..Art

No, con-artie, it comes from what sane people call "reality." Get used to 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?

 

[Real de Tayopa Tropical Tramp]

Yep, but I have forgotten what it was? instead?

Don Jose de La Mancha

 

[aarthrj3811]

Now we can express the value of, for example, a RangerTell LRL, by comparing it's cost ratio to it's success ratio.
No insults, no opinions, no bias. Just pure, simple math. Just the data, folks!

Fair enough?
If that is the truth Please tell us what the cost ratio to success ratio is ?..Art

 

[fenixdigger]

Here's a math problem. 2 targets were found in this picture. No empty holes, no missed signals. Straight to the targets. What is the % as far as your math? If you understand probability, what were the odds? And lastly, how many spots would have been considered
as possible locations?

Thank you for telling us that you have no answers to the questions. Could you answer if you were told that the map they were following was Dowsed from 1000’s of miles away?.No you can’t because Ransom Chance has nothing to do with Treasure Hunting..If your math can not answer questions about simple treasure hunting then the entire thread is just another Skeptic SCAM..Art

Want to try to answer the question or are we back to cute little replies and insults?? Prove Art right again. SHO-NUFF

 

[EE THr]

Now we can express the value of, for example, a RangerTell LRL, by comparing it's cost ratio to it's success ratio.
No insults, no opinions, no bias. Just pure, simple math. Just the data, folks!

Fair enough?
If that is the truth Please tell us what the cost ratio to success ratio is ?..Art

Since no LRL has ever been proven to actually work, the cost would be a total loss.

And add to that the loss of time and energy of traipsing all over the countryside on a wild goose chase, and possibly digging empty hole after empty hole, and whatever dangers might be out in the wild.

All that while some con artist is sitting in his nice air conditioned house, counting all his money from you and the other suckers.





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]

~Art~

If that is the truth Please tell us what the cost ratio to success ratio is ?..Art

~EE~

Since no LRL has ever been proven to actually work, the cost would be a total loss.And add to that the loss of time and energy of traipsing all over the countryside on a wild goose chase, and possibly digging empty hole after empty hole, and whatever dangers might be out in the wild.
All that while some con artist is sitting in his nice air conditioned house, counting all his money from you and the other suckers.

Are you telling us that Ransom Chance odds can not be used to figure the success ratio of LRL’s?..then this whole thread is just a joke to you?..Art

 

[aarthrj3811]

~SWR~

Ransom Chance...cute hehe
The "random chance" odds are not a factor.

Thank You..he was told that early in this thread,
~Carl~
With LRLs and dowsing, "random chance" applies to randomized blind tests, not to field use. A randomized blind test does 2 things that a field test cannot do. First, it eliminates outside influences that might alter performance results, such as observable clues. Second, it provides a baseline from which to compare results, namely guessing.

Despite intentional attempts to mislead people, random chance doesn't apply to field use. You can't ask, "What are the odds of digging 10 holes in a park and recovering a gold coin?" There is no way to calculate that, because there is not enough information*. But in a randomized blind test, it is quite easy to calculate the odds. Depending on the design of the test those odds can vary, so it is not a fixed number that applies to every test, but it's not a "moving target" either.