Re: I'm going to build an LRL (seriously)
PuffDaddy said:
woof! said:
PuffDaddy, if you're still interested in locating a gold coin in 15 minutes on a less than 1 acre site, I suppose we could discuss that. I'm not interested in a discussion of the technology you've got, although if it is not something that can be used with a reasonable degree of safety, I wouldn't want it to be used to locate my gold coin, let it find someone else's.
--Toto
Toto,
When I get into your area this Fall,I shall be more than happy,to give you a demonstration of my LRL,with no risk to you of losing your test-target;simply because you have the correct attitude. You do not already "know" that it's going to fail. Those who do "know" that it is going to fail,are in flagrant violation,of The Scientific Method--and,are inherently dishonest.
Like your-self,Carl M,has allowed for the possibility,that it may one day be successful--But James R does not--and it is that class that I detest. And I would donate his prize-gold to the Wounded Warrior Project,where it could be properly sanctified.
David
PuffDaddy, we're almost on opposite sides of a fence on this thing, but at least you're willing to take seriously people's skepticism and also to take seriously the possibility of a "demo" (I hate that word, it sounds so Chuckie, but can't think of a better one at the moment) in which the apparat is expected to do what a "long range locator" should reasonably be expected to do. You say you're not in the Chuckie and Fenix league and it's obvious that whether or not your gizmo works, at least you have confidence that it does, and the other guys are full of alabis why their stuff can't do something that a basic LRL ought to be able to do to warrant being taken seriously. My level of confidence in whatever you've got certainly doesn't match yours at this point, but my confidence in what the other guys have equals theirs, which is zero, you've already seen their posts. They ain't got squat.
I suppose you've been lurking here long enough to notice that of the most active forum denizens on
both sides of the aisle, it's all about prove this! prove that! You get very little of that out of me.
My proposal to lose an ounce of gold to an LRL that works, is that. The conditions emphasize functionality of the LRL, both in ways I have already mentioned and in ways that I won't disclose but will become evident during the event itself. I'm not trying to prove that your gizmo doesn't work (that would be a waste of my time and yours) nor am I interested in proving that it does "work". As I presently envision it, it won't even be double-blinded: I'll know where the target is in advance, and one of the problems I face is how to prevent information leakage. If you locate the coin under the conditions I've proposed, it proves that you located the coin under the conditions I proposed. It may have been sheer luck or there may have been information leakage or even outright but undetected fraud, I won't know and either you won't know or won't tell, and for everyone else it all comes out the same. If your attempt to locate the coin under the conditions I proposed fails, it does not prove that your gizmo doesn't work, only that in that particular circumstance it didn't do the job, possibly for reasons known to nobody. I either lose the coin or I don't, and although the results may point in one direction or another, they "prove" very little. I'm willing to lose an ounce of gold to an LRL that seems to work under moderately well controlled conditions, something that to my knowledge has never happened before in history. To my knowledge nobody's ever lost an ounce of gold to an LRL at all, other than while paying the invoice.
I do insist that you have some skin in the game, and the reason is simple: not having any skin in the game is too great a temptation to waste both our times. If we go through with this and you don't find the coin according to the protocol which is quite reasonable, my time and effort in setting the whole thing up is a waste other than just another hard learning experience. I don't expect you to have the whole ounce of gold as your skin in the game, since your gizmo will be facing search conditions which although they seem reasonable, may have unexpected difficulties. But if you're gonna be generous and return the coin to me if you find it, heck, if Art lived in El Paso even he could waste my time with that. If you haven't got skin in the game, you don't believe that your gizmo can do the job, and I don't want to bother with a gizmo the user of which doesn't believe can do this simple job.
To put it another way, I am not interested in risking an ounce of gold to embarrass an LRL, that's a waste of time, LRL's have already been embarrassed themselves to death as you yourself have pointed out. By going to the trouble of risking the coin under reasonably carefully controlled conditions, I want to see the damn coin located successfully.
--Toto
