EddieR said:
EE THr said:
aarthrj3811 said:
~EE~
OK. So what, exactly, is your version of "ideal conditions"?
Treasure is where you find it..any Treasure Hunter knows that..So the idea condition would be to put yourself in the right location by using research , common sense, and your knowledge of what you are seeking..Art

Trouble is, con-artie, a person can do all that,
without any magic, fantasy, LRL!
And for the gazillionth time, you failed to answer the question, and used your usual
Straw Man Fallacy tactics, which by now is totally obvious, and you don't even care anymore that you are exposing yourself as a con-man.
You pulled the same BS when whining about the double-blind tests, and I asked you to write a procedure for one which you felt was fair. That never happened, did it. Because your whining was all fake. You know that the tests are fair, but that you can't make your fantasy LRL find
anything, under
any circumstances. Well, that is unless you already know where it is because you put it there!
And now, when you are whining about "ideal conditions" being a bad thing (how dumb can you get?), you just try to skip over the "conditions" like I never mentioned it.
Artie, you are so phony, I'm surprised that you can look at yourself in the mirror. I guess you are proud of being a crook. Oh well, at least now everybody knows it, because you have shown that to us all. Thanks.
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?
Why do you keep calling Art a con man? To my knowledge he isn't selling anything on here. And now you are calling him a crook. Tell us...what has he stolen?
I'll tell you what I'm seeing. You don't agree with Art, so you resort to calling him names. All because you don't believe what he says. Well, whoop de doo.... I don't believe you (and never have) when you claim to be an EE. That is a load of mushroom dirt, most definitely. And the way you carry on about videos
not being proof, and then
post videos (denouncing psychology) as proof of
your little beliefs is laughable at best. I'm inclined to think that Fenix is right. You had a bad experience with a psychologist at some point in the past.....or perhaps....in the present.
For crying out loud...if you don't believe in LRL's, if the topic offends you so much, then just turn off the computer or go to another website. But my guess is you won't, because you enjoy starting arguments too much.
And now everybody knows it, because you have shown that to us all.
Thanks.
BTW...there are two questions in this post. Will you answer them?
Eddie---
I have said so many times on here why I call artie a con man, that only a moron would ask. But if you insist on my stating it once again, it's because he has done everythin on the list of con artists. If you disagree with the list I made, then which ones do you think
aren't among the traits of a scammer? You can take each one individually, and say that it doesn't mean the person doing that is a con artist, and you would be right. However, the more things a person does, that's on the list, the more they are behaving like one, until at a certain point, they simply are one. If if walks like a duck....
About my "crook" remark, you should have looked up the definition of the word before you went spouting off about that, because your question is irrelevant. If you already know the definition, then you are trying to pull a
Straw Man Fallacy, just like con-artie tried.
Videos showing someone supposedly locating something with phony device, wouldn't hold up as proof in any fair court in the World, and if you don't know that, then you need to grow up.
The video I posted lists all the proof: Names, dates, institutions, and documents. These can all be checked, and proven to be either true or false. I wouldn't post a video that would show false information, exactly because of that. But you are claiming it to be false, even though you never bothered to check any of the references which are given throughout that video. That makes you a
real slimeball.
You were doing pretty good at being rational and honest, there for awhile, since you gave real answers to the questions LRLers won't answer. But now you are going off the deep end. Sorry, but it is what it is.
Like I have said many times before, and keep having to repeat (so please get this, and get it straight), I have never insulted anyone on here
first. If you think I have, just go back and quote it, then. Just because these twerps can dish it out, but can't take it, is not my fault. So they have no reason to keep whining about that. To prove my point, just start a topic of, "No Insults Discussion of LRLs," and see what happens. Otherwise stuff it.
And I have never started an argument on here. If anyone cares to look back to my first posts in the LRL section, you will see that I began by simply asking a few questions. When the LRLers saw how illogical they were being, they began their substitution of insults for answers, and have continued that pattern ever since. So who's fault is that?
This section is for the discussion of LRLs. That's what I'm doing, except when the LRLers turn the discussions into childish nonsense, of which there is plenty to quote, but you can just review any thread in this section to see it for yourself.
And I don't see you complaining that con-artie didn't answer
my last question.
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?