QUESTIONS CRITICS ARE AFRAID TO ANSWER

[EE THr]

Kentucky;

You should realize you are dealing with some uncontrollable issues here. The truth will play no part in most conversations. He has now classed you as "one of them" although you don't use a LRL. He is at war with you now. The compulsions will now take over
and the conditioned responses will flow along with insults, demands, and challenges. Pay them no attention, have fun and keep posting. Just consider the source.

Yeah, that's sort of what I'm doing. Just giving him a small taste of his own medicine.

Actually, I wish I were an LRL user. Maybe if all goes well...

More nonsense insults, more Trolling.

Can you prove that?

Oh jeeze, is broom hilda back?

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

Diving for Pleasure and Treasure - Grab it through Amazon!

[Kentucky Kache]

Kentucky;

You should realize you are dealing with some uncontrollable issues here. The truth will play no part in most conversations. He has now classed you as "one of them" although you don't use a LRL. He is at war with you now. The compulsions will now take over
and the conditioned responses will flow along with insults, demands, and challenges. Pay them no attention, have fun and keep posting. Just consider the source.

Yeah, that's sort of what I'm doing. Just giving him a small taste of his own medicine.

Actually, I wish I were an LRL user. Maybe if all goes well...

More nonsense insults, more Trolling.

Can you prove that?

Oh jeeze, is broom hilda back?

Go to bed now, EE, you need the rest. Trust me.

 

[EE THr]

Kentucky;

You should realize you are dealing with some uncontrollable issues here. The truth will play no part in most conversations. He has now classed you as "one of them" although you don't use a LRL. He is at war with you now. The compulsions will now take over
and the conditioned responses will flow along with insults, demands, and challenges. Pay them no attention, have fun and keep posting. Just consider the source.

Yeah, that's sort of what I'm doing. Just giving him a small taste of his own medicine.

Actually, I wish I were an LRL user. Maybe if all goes well...

More nonsense insults, more Trolling.

Can you prove that?

Oh jeeze, is broom hilda back?

Go to bed now, EE, you need the rest. Trust me.

Trust you? I don't think so.

The cigar and hairy legs has nut case written all over them.

 

[Kentucky Kache]

Kentucky;

You should realize you are dealing with some uncontrollable issues here. The truth will play no part in most conversations. He has now classed you as "one of them" although you don't use a LRL. He is at war with you now. The compulsions will now take over
and the conditioned responses will flow along with insults, demands, and challenges. Pay them no attention, have fun and keep posting. Just consider the source.

Yeah, that's sort of what I'm doing. Just giving him a small taste of his own medicine.

Actually, I wish I were an LRL user. Maybe if all goes well...

More nonsense insults, more Trolling.

Can you prove that?

Oh jeeze, is broom hilda back?

Go to bed now, EE, you need the rest. Trust me.

Trust you? I don't think so.

The cigar and hairy legs has nut case written all over them.

I guess that's your fantasy. Whatever, to each their own, I guess.

 

[EE THr]

Kentucky;

You should realize you are dealing with some uncontrollable issues here. The truth will play no part in most conversations. He has now classed you as "one of them" although you don't use a LRL. He is at war with you now. The compulsions will now take over
and the conditioned responses will flow along with insults, demands, and challenges. Pay them no attention, have fun and keep posting. Just consider the source.

Yeah, that's sort of what I'm doing. Just giving him a small taste of his own medicine.

Actually, I wish I were an LRL user. Maybe if all goes well...

More nonsense insults, more Trolling.

Can you prove that?

Oh jeeze, is broom hilda back?

Go to bed now, EE, you need the rest. Trust me.

Trust you? I don't think so.

The cigar and hairy legs has nut case written all over them.

I guess that's your fantasy. Whatever, to each their own, I guess.

Sorry, nut cases aren't my fantasy. But don't worry, you have enough fantasies of your own to make up for it, I'm sure.





Oh nos, the wicked witch is back, the wicked witch is back!

 

[fenixdigger]

So other people are mentioning your little psychosis's?? And then you insult them. Special, very special. Is the sun coming up it your fantasy world yet. Let me guess, not the first time you have been shown the psychiatrist's door. Really, tell us why you have that aversion to shrinks. What happened?

 

[EE THr]

So other people are mentioning your little psychosis's?? And then you insult them. Special, very special. Is the sun coming up it your fantasy world yet. Let me guess, not the first time you have been shown the psychiatrist's door. Really, tell us why you have that aversion to shrinks. What happened?

More nonsense Trolling.

The Big Four Proofs of LRLs Fraud

1. There is no standard electronics explanation for the devices ever working.
2. The movement of the swivel pointer or rods is not powered by the devices.
3. Makers and owners of these devices refuse to take a double blind test.
4. The proponent's only rebuttal is that they find what they are looking for. This, however is not being contested by items #1-3. The statement of this list is that the electronics add-ons, to what is merely a dowsing device, are not necessary, and are only there to charge high prices. This makes their reports of finding stuff a total Straw Man type of fallacy, and thus void as rebuttals to this list.



Don't be a doof---show the proof! And quit complaining about the truth, the facts, and reality!

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?

 

[fenixdigger]

Great answer. I bet you have been on more couches that most secretaries.

I guess me and Art are the reason for the reduction of posters on this thread also. Maybe I should post some of the emails I

get about this thread. If I thought it would help you, I would. But I do know how deep that river runs. You know which one I'm

talking about. Sounds like the one in Egypt, de Nile.

 

[EddieR]

This is a good thread!

 

[fenixdigger]

Thanks Eddie. I'm in hopes that somewhere we get back to discussions on LRLs, not arguments, insults, challenges, and demands.

We have made some huge jumps, but they were made in private. Had we been able to do it here with the posters that have been run off, it would have been a lot better.

I know everyone has an opinion, but if you are not involved in LRLs, why not state your opinion and sit back and watch?

If you intend to get involved, seek info. If you have info, jump in and help. Have I ever asked you, Art, Hung, or any LRL user to furnish "proof"? That's argumentative right off the bat. If I want to prove it, I go outside and do it.

The obvious nature of the "critics" runs off a lot of people. Getting attacked is not how this is supposed to work.

I feel sorry for those that have not seen the things that a lot of us have, but that is no excuse to be mad at us.

 

[aarthrj3811]

If you intend to get involved, seek info. If you have info, jump in and help. Have I ever asked you, Art, Hung, or any LRL user to furnish "proof"? That's argumentative right off the bat.

If I want to prove it, I go outside and do it.

That is correct..Hey LT and hung…Some how in my move I lost the freq 8-----. Could you e-mail it to me?...Art

 

[Saturna]

I don't know why it's considered so politically incorrect to question certain claims made on a public forum.

If one went on a golfing forum and claimed repeatedly they could get 18 holes in one in a row at will, but refused to do this in front of anyone, and refused to show any video of same, what kind of response do you think they would receive from other members ?

Do you think the other members would be completely out of line questioning this ?

If the poster continued making this claim, can't you not understand why he may be ridiculed ?

 

[Kentucky Kache]

I don't know why it's considered so politically incorrect to question certain claims made on a public forum.

If one went on a golfing forum and claimed repeatedly they could get 18 holes in one in a row at will, but refused to do this in front of anyone, and refused to show any video of same, what kind of response do you think they would receive from other members ?

Do you think the other members would be completely out of line questioning this ?

If the poster continued making this claim, can't you not understand why he may be ridiculed ?

After the first few insults, that golfer would probably be largely ignored. So why not ignore the "nuts"?

Nothing wrong with questioning the claims, but there's everything wrong with harassing people after you've already made your point.

 

[EddieR]

I don't know why it's considered so politically incorrect to question certain claims made on a public forum.

If one went on a golfing forum and claimed repeatedly they could get 18 holes in one in a row at will, but refused to do this in front of anyone, and refused to show any video of same, what kind of response do you think they would receive from other members ?

Do you think the other members would be completely out of line questioning this ?

If the poster continued making this claim, can't you not understand why he may be ridiculed ?

After the first few insults, that golfer would probably be largely ignored. So why not ignore the "nuts"?

Nothing wrong with questioning the claims, but there's everything wrong with harassing people after you've already made your point.

Exactly!

 

[fenixdigger]

That would be the case on that. But if they asked the caddy and he said yes things would be different. Anybody here take the word of someone on a hunt with me? I don't think so. Only the LRL users and they take my word for it anyway.

However, if the golfer said "I have a club that puts you on the green a lot faster" what would be the first thing EVERYONE would say? Can I try it? Not prove it. May be the golfer had developed a style he did not want to share.

We are not saying it is our "special' selves, only that we have spent the time working this out. I never say I did that without a device. Some things I don't share, and I dam sure are not giving it to a bunch of do-nothings.

Art; sent you a p/m and an update.

 

[aarthrj3811]

I object to People making incorrect assumptions about our hobby.. When we question his assumptions he posts that as proof that he is right and accuse us of insulting him. He then reposts his opinions as if they were facts just like he did on post 110.
Thanks for the PM..That is what foums are for..Art

 

[fenixdigger]

You'll be shocked on that one. Hope it works out there. We haven't tried it out West. You'll be the tester on that end.

Humidity does not bother it. The dry conditions there may make it too much.

Sat. did that make sense to you?

 

[aarthrj3811]

Hey LT..Be careful where you step,, EE’s stuff will get on your feet and you will track it all over the house….Now that is an insult EE..Art

 

[EE THr]

You gotta be kidding me. Sorry Prong, compared to this, you did a great job.

Well lets see if we can clear up the mystery of some of these posts.

After countless demands and even more meaningless and unimportant questions from the naysayers let's see what they seem afraid to clarify.


1) Since you do not have hours of experience, why do you ask questions that you cannot comprehend the answers?

First of all, this is a loaded question, because it assumes that I cannot comprehend answers, and is thus a covert insult.
****There is no assumption, it has been proved by 10,000 post it is a fact, and is not an insult but a proven fact.

Absolutely wrong. Your pseudoscience BS has nothing to do with whether or not I have handled an LRL. BS is BS, no matter what. You are living in a fantasy world, and insist that others believe in it with you. And if not you insult them like this.

I have asked questions like, "Does the device move the pointer by itself." Why would anyone need to have used one to understand the answer to that?

***Twisting the answer***There is no way to answer your question due to the variables. If you were a user you would know that.

There is no twist. I answered the question, and gave examples. That is a normal method of answering. Your "variables" statement is just a generalization, used as a smoke screen to hide the fact that LRLs are no better than bent coat hangers.


2) When you get an response, why do you object to the answer?

This, too, is a loaded question, because it infers that I object to all answers.

I don't object to all answers. Straightforward answers are fine. But answers like, "You don't understand," aren't real answers.

****Most of your questions are worded so that is the only answer possible. If you were a user, you would know that.

Nope, a simple question can be answered by a simple answer. You are hiding behind your phony excuse of someone not being an LRL "believer," because you know that there are many simple, straightforward, common sense questions which you can't answer rationally without admitting that LRLs don't work.


3) Why do you believe your opinion is all important?

This is also a loaded question, because it states that I believe that my opinions are all important, which is obviously false.

if I have an opinion, I state that it is only an opinion, and not necessarily fact. I have made that perfectly clear where applicable.

*** With all the demands you make I find this hard to believe.

Demands have nothing to do with my opinions. And my questions do not depend on the validity or non validity of my opinions. The simple fact is that you fail to rationally answer many simple, straightforward, common sense questions.

The only things that I have demanded is answers to simple have been questions which are all related to your fantastic fantasy claims about LRLs. If you choose to make these wild claims, then you make yourself open to questioning. When you fail to answer these questions rationally, your credibility fails as well. Your credibility has disappeared, and that's not surprising, seeing that LRLs have already been proven over and over again, to be a hoax.

4) What gives you the right to call people liars based on your "opinion"?

This is another loaded question, because it states that I call people liars based only on my opinion.

**** Sorry Charlie, You call people liars on a regular basis. And it is a fact that you state your opinion and call people liars, when I know they are telling the truth.

Like I already said, I don't expose liars bases only on opinion. If you can quote an instance of that, please do so. I very seldom call someone a liar, because I require of myself to be able to prove it if I do. And I will include the proof in my statement, so I don't have to go back and find a quote to prove it. So you have lied right there. I may have forgotten to include the proof, once in awhile, although I don't think I have, but your statement about "regular basis" makes you a liar on that account. I may state my opinion, but not in conjuction with exposing a lie. What you "know" has nothing to do with it, if they commit a lie in writing on this forum, it is documented right there, usually by them contradicting what they have said before on the forum.

I have stated that "evidence shows that not to be true," and "According to what you posted before, you are now lying, with documented proof in your previous post." Or, if a persons says that I said something which I didn't say, they are thus factually lying, and I will tell them that fact. There is a difference between fact and opinion. Some people on here have tried to say that opinions are facts. and also that facts are only opinions; but not me.

***If you believe this, wellll,,,hmmm, ok I guess.

And there is another uncalled for pure insult.

5) Why are you afraid to try the Sho-Nuff experiment or any others presented here?

This is another loaded question because it assumes that I don't do your test because I'm afraid to.

I won't do your test because, firstly it was using coat hangers, which are not LRLs; secondly I don't want to procure an LRL in order to do it; and thirdly I wouldn't bother doing it if I did have an LRL available, because it would be like trying to make a cow fly. They don't work, because if they did, someone would have proven it publically by now, and collected that $25,000.00 reward, and don't even try to push any of those phony excuses off on me because there isn't any reason why many people wouldn't have passed that test by now. In fact, Carl wouldn't even have offered that reward, if they actually had any chance of really working---he would be crazy to. Use some common sense, for cripe's sakes! And I don't mean that as an insult, I just mean use some common sense about that. The excuses are simply rediculous.

*****Twisting the answer. Did I mention anything about Carl's test?***

Again, there is no twisting. I answered and gave normal examples for clarity. You call normal communication, "twisting" if you don't like the answer. Too bad. Deal with it.

**** This uses coat hangers to show the LRL effect. You have been told this by more than me. You have your mind made up without even trying it. This is why you will never understand. This is a condition YOU made in your mind not me. And yes your excuses are ridiculous.

Nope, again, whichever one of the fenix brothers you are. Coat hangers are dowsing. And I don't have an LRL, and wouldn't use one if I did. And there you go with the "never understand" BS again. Predictable. LRLs don't work. And the childish flipping around the excuses thing---grow up.

6) Why do you not post photos of ANYTHING you have found with any device?

That is a loaded question because it assumes that the facts about the functionality of LRLs depends on something that I do.

**** This is a loaded nothing. Post photos of ANYTHING you have found using ANYTHING to do it. Prove you are a Th'er

I have made no claims, so I have nothing to prove. Once again you try to divert attention off the topic, because you know that your claims about LRLs just won't hold water. Once again you obsess about ME, rather than the topic. Your intention is obvious.

The workability of LRLs has nothing to do with me. It's all about them, and the known facts. And all the known facts show that they simply do not work. And all of the insults that you guys come up with will never help them work. It's about the LRL devices, not about me.

7) Why are the same questions asked over and over after a response has been given?

Loaded question again, because it's not true.

*** Sorry again it is true. Proved by many posts from several posters.***

Then show it. Show where you have rationally answered a question which I then kept asking. You can't.

When I ask a simple, common sense question, and get a direct straight answer, I don't keep asking it over and over. But when you people keep insisting that something is a certain way, and I ask a question which would expose your statements as false, and you give me a diversion away from my question, I press for an answer to prove that you can't answer it without contradicting your claims. I would rather ask logical questions than throw insults at you. If someone can't answer my common sense questions, without exposing themselves as a liar, whose fault is that?

****Simple, Common sense?? I just can't respond to this, and you know why.

Because common sense is something you lack?

****That's your problem . You are constantly looking to prove something false, not find why it could be true, back to you having you mind made up to the answer and being hateful when it is not what you wanted. Proved again by many posts.

Wrong again, FB. I only look for the truth. I look for why it could be either true or false. It's not my fault that your LRLs are a hoax.

I could make a guess on the responses to this, but I will refrain.

****This is exactly what I would have guessed you would pull
if you answered.

I said REAL answers, not contrived ones to make you feel good about your inquisition on LRL users.
Now, Want to try again with REAL answers??

Maybe when you figure out how to ask REAL questions, instead of trying to fool people with your sneaky loaded ones.

Are you happy now?

You seem to think you have been singled out to be lied to.

Nope. I hadn't thought about the "singled out" part. I just know that I have been lied to.

The same answers I have given you, I give to people I help. They are the truth, they just don't make sense to you.

Oh, I understand what you are saying all right---total BS.

That is not my fault. You are the one with the preconceived answers.

Nope. All my answers are based on known facts. You are grasping for straws.

Sorry the little experiment DOES work. I have used it to train more than a few people. It works. It works. Do you hear that?

Great. So now go collect Carl's $25K, and you might as well snatch up Randi's $1,000,000.00 prize money, while you are at it.

But you just can't make yourself try it can you?

I'm not trying to "make myself" try it. They are hoaxes. What kind of proof would you like. Whatever it is, you have already been provided it, over and over, but you insist on continuing your fantasy game.

Done it 100's of times. Those excuses keep popping up right? Maybe a little justification for not doing it comes up too? You see I REALLY do understand.

Then why is it you still can't understand what a loaded question is, even when I provided you with a LINK? That's about as lame is it can get!

Throughout your post, your focus seems to be on me, rather than on LRLs. That is a common diversionary tactic, to obscure the truth of the topic.

You need to stop obsessing about me (and other people who expose the LRL hoax), and return focus to the devices of topic in this forum.

Trying to invalidate people, does nothing to prove anything about LRLs, one way or another.



P.S. I knew that you would deny all the answers that I gave. That's the only reason you asked them in the first place. It's obvious they serve no real purpose, but are just random, argumentative questions. After all, you have already admitted that you are just here to fight.

At leasy my question list had an organized purpose.

P.S.S.

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]

fenix brothers---

I see what is happening here. All of your questions, answers, and statements are all based on one major premise---that LRLs actually work.

Your problem is, that it is not a known, and generally agreed upon, proven fact.

Until you can produce valid proof that your LRL devices actually work, all of your questions and statements will be invalid.

So, if you are so anxious to use this premise (as shown by your continual, insistant use of it), you should also be just as anxious to prove that your LRLs really work. The fact that you do not want to do anything which would prove LRLs one way or the other, is significant evidence that you know they don't work.

If you weren't certain that your LRLs won't work, you would surly take Carl's test and win the $25,000.00, plus prove your point at the same time. But you won't take his test, will you. Or Randi's for $1,000,000.00, or perform your own test down at your local metal detector club, or at your local high school or college science department.

You won't make the slightest effort to prove yourself at any of those venues, because you can't succeed, and you know it. Period. No silly excuses puleeeeeeze---we have heard them all, and they are all bogus.

But you will have to either stop trying to use the premise that LRLs work, or you will be faced with those horrible facts which prove LRLs false. That's life. Deal with it.

The Big Four Proofs of LRLs Fraud

1. There is no standard electronics explanation for the devices ever working.
2. The movement of the swivel pointer or rods is not powered by the devices.
3. Makers and owners of these devices refuse to take a double blind test.
4. The proponent's only rebuttal is that they find what they are looking for. This, however is not being contested by items #1-3. The statement of this list is that the electronics add-ons, to what is merely a dowsing device, are not necessary, and are only there to charge high prices. This makes their reports of finding stuff a total Straw Man type of fallacy, and thus void as rebuttals to this list.




Don't be a doof---show the proof! And quit complaining about the truth, the facts, and reality!

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?