The deceitfulness of the LRLs

[aarthrj3811]

https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/178913-2.pdf
2.5.3.8 EXPRAY Field Test Kit
This report has been discussed...I see no reason to discuss this bogus subject again..Art

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

A Handbook of Civil War Bullets and Cartridges - Grab it through Amazon!

[EE THr]

https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/178913-2.pdf
2.5.3.8 EXPRAY Field Test Kit
This report has been discussed...I see no reason to discuss this bogus subject again..Art

Well, a few posts earlier, you asked where all that was posted, inferring that you had never heard of it.

Now you are saying that it's old news to you.

Logically speaking, one of your statements is totally untrue.

Again you have demonstrated your eagerness to post false and misleading statements, in order to promote your fraudulent devices to unsuspecting victims.

 

[aarthrj3811]

~EE~

Well, a few posts earlier, you asked where all that was posted, inferring that you had never heard of it.

No..I ask where your proof was...the discussion proved that your proof was out of place for a DOJ report about a report on how to use a 2.5.3.8 EXPRAY Field Test Kit

Now you are saying that it's old news to you.

It has been for many years

Logically speaking, one of your statements is totally untrue.

Which one of my statements is totally untrue?

Again you have demonstrated your eagerness to post false and misleading statements, in order to promote your fraudulent devices to unsuspecting victims.

Did I try to sell a fraudulent devices to a unsuspecting victims?..I just recommend that anyone that is thinking about investing in a LRL to go to the manufacture and do a hands on test of the device. Does that make them a unsuspecting victim?...Art

 

[EddieR]

Art, don't waste your time.

There are several possible reasons your questions aren't answered. One, the question is too hard for him to answer, because he actually has no idea what he's posting about. Two, and the most likely, he just wants to keep you riled up, so he makes nonsensical circular "answers" that don't make a lick of sense. And third, maybe the longer the "game" goes on, the bigger his paycheck gets.

Don't waste your time, as anything you post goes over his head like wind at a bean eating contest.

Notice how he makes all his claims, and when cornered, says that they aren't claims at all? That is typical pseudoskeptic diversionary tactics (according to sources online)...very amateurish, but still just tactics to try to scoot out of the corner.

By the majority of your posts, you are much more interested in me, than you are in LRLs.

I guess that since you have lost the battle of trying to convince gullible prospects to buy LRLs, all you have left is to insult people. That's pretty sick.

Tell ya what. Why not show the posts where I "try to convince gullible prospects to buy LRL's" Put up or shut up, and stop telling lies. You know good and well I have never done that.

You show the posts.

If you do not show them, I will consider it an admission of your guilt that your statement is false. All ya gotta do is show ONE posting where I try to convince anyone to buy an LRL. Simple, eh?

The ball is in your court to prove whether you told the truth or not.

No run around rhetoric will be accepted, no dumb questions, no double speak. Only the postings I have made "trying to convince others to buy an LRL".

So...we will see. Did you tell the truth or not?

Waiting........

Sorry, Eddie....You cannot define your own criterion for facts.

The truth of the matter, as I have explained to you before (but which doesn't need to be explained to you, because you are fully aware that you are doing it, and is totally obvious to everyone else), is that you consistantly attack anyone who posts documented facts which show LRLs and MFDs to be fraudulent, and you continually agree with and encourage those who actively promote LRLs and MFDs. Yes, I realize that a couple of times you have disagreed with them, but that's just a show, to maintain your self professed image as "only interested in the phenomenon." Your overall performance is clearly with the intention of promoting LRLs and MFDs. You wrote the stuff, not me. So who's fault is that?

Well, at least you have admitted it now. Thank you!

 

[EddieR]

~EddieR~

Don't waste your time, as anything you post goes over his head like wind at a bean eating contest.

Notice how he makes all his claims, and when cornered, says that they aren't claims at all? That is typical pseudoskeptic diversionary tactics (according to sources online)...very amateurish, but still just tactics to try to scoot out of the corner.

By the tactics he attempts to us it is clear that he has no understanding of how to be a skeptic...
~EE

I guess that since you have lost the battle of trying to convince gullible prospects to buy LRLs, all you have left is to insult people. That's pretty sick.

We are not the one who almost won the LRL salesman of year award. Yes..you were in second place at last years convention..Art

And once again, I am the subject of your entire post. Your obsession with me is useless.

Evidently you don't understand the content of your own posts either.

Look at your post #101...your subject is Dell. That is the subject of your post. Her, I'll repeat it for you in case you forgot already...Dell is the subject of post #101.

Look at post #112.... I am the subject of the post. I am the subject of your post #112.

Do you get it now Of course not. I am referring to you whining about others posting about people instead of LRL's. And then you turn around and do the same thing. The very logic that you use in your debates make you very unbelievable. You aren't a very convincing rhetor.

People might believe an occasional posting of yours if you weren't so hypocritical. But.....that is the role of pseudoskeptics, to sow discord and confusion (and boy are your posts confused). But hey, gotta earn that paycheck, eh?

My post #101 was a reply to Dell, where he brought up how I posted about certain subjects.

My post #112 was a reply to you, where you were posting about me.

This is the same pattern that I mentioned before, where you insult people, then whine when you get insulted back. Poor baby. Does it hamper your LRL promoting? Awwwwwwww....





P.S. Exactly who do you imagine would be paying me? (We know who would be paying the LRL promoters!)

Hmmm...now why it that when people reply to your posts, you start whining, telling them that you are not the subject, they should stick to LRL's.....but when you do the same, you are just replying to their post?

Why be so hypocritical? It just makes you look bad in the long run.

 

[aarthrj3811]

~EdieR~

Hmmm...now why it that when people reply to your posts, you start whining, telling them that you are not the subject, they should stick to LRL's.....but when you do the same, you are just replying to their post?

Why be so hypocritical? It just makes you look bad in the long run.

That’s real simple to answer...We only talk about what we know about the LRL’s that we have used..EE claims to be an expert on all devices that he has never used. So when you ask him simple questions that an expert should be able to answer easily he has to have an answer...It is much easier for him to whine than to answer and let everyone know that he knows nothing..Art

 

[EE THr]

Now you are saying that it's old news to you.

It has been for many years

Logically speaking, one of your statements is totally untrue.

Which one of my statements is totally untrue?

You asked for proof of my DOJ statement, when you already knew that the proof existed.

What would you call that?

 

[EE THr]

~EddieR~

Don't waste your time, as anything you post goes over his head like wind at a bean eating contest.

Notice how he makes all his claims, and when cornered, says that they aren't claims at all? That is typical pseudoskeptic diversionary tactics (according to sources online)...very amateurish, but still just tactics to try to scoot out of the corner.

By the tactics he attempts to us it is clear that he has no understanding of how to be a skeptic...
~EE

I guess that since you have lost the battle of trying to convince gullible prospects to buy LRLs, all you have left is to insult people. That's pretty sick.

We are not the one who almost won the LRL salesman of year award. Yes..you were in second place at last years convention..Art

And once again, I am the subject of your entire post. Your obsession with me is useless.

Evidently you don't understand the content of your own posts either.

Look at your post #101...your subject is Dell. That is the subject of your post. Her, I'll repeat it for you in case you forgot already...Dell is the subject of post #101.

Look at post #112.... I am the subject of the post. I am the subject of your post #112.

Do you get it now Of course not. I am referring to you whining about others posting about people instead of LRL's. And then you turn around and do the same thing. The very logic that you use in your debates make you very unbelievable. You aren't a very convincing rhetor.

People might believe an occasional posting of yours if you weren't so hypocritical. But.....that is the role of pseudoskeptics, to sow discord and confusion (and boy are your posts confused). But hey, gotta earn that paycheck, eh?

My post #101 was a reply to Dell, where he brought up how I posted about certain subjects.

My post #112 was a reply to you, where you were posting about me.

This is the same pattern that I mentioned before, where you insult people, then whine when you get insulted back. Poor baby. Does it hamper your LRL promoting? Awwwwwwww....





P.S. Exactly who do you imagine would be paying me? (We know who would be paying the LRL promoters!)

Hmmm...now why it that when people reply to your posts, you start whining, telling them that you are not the subject, they should stick to LRL's.....but when you do the same, you are just replying to their post?

Why be so hypocritical? It just makes you look bad in the long run.

Read, Eddie my boy, read. I already explained the pattern to you.

You really should quit posting insults about people, and start posting some facts about the topic of this Section, which is LRLs. Attacking people only shows your weakness of support for your position on LRLs. If you aren't intending to promote LRLs, then why the senseless attacks directed entirely toward those who post documented facts?

It's not like nobody has noticed!

 

[EE THr]

~EdieR~

Hmmm...now why it that when people reply to your posts, you start whining, telling them that you are not the subject, they should stick to LRL's.....but when you do the same, you are just replying to their post?

Why be so hypocritical? It just makes you look bad in the long run.

That’s real simple to answer...We only talk about what we know about the LRL’s that we have used..EE claims to be an expert on all devices that he has never used. So when you ask him simple questions that an expert should be able to answer easily he has to have an answer...It is much easier for him to whine than to answer and let everyone know that he knows nothing..Art

You call posting documented facts, my "opinion," when it's clearly the findings of highly recognized Scientific organizations, or courts, or professional electronics people.

Opinions are like anecdotal stories. They aren't proof. But fish stories are all you ever post, aside from things like your photo of a jar full of gold glitter that you claimed was placer gold. The color was close, but all the particles were the same size---good grief, man, you are so obvious! I won't even mention all the other fake photos and videos of your "finding" stuff which you obviously planted beforehand.

When will you start posting real facts about LRLs, and be on-topic? The last time I asked you for factual information, you declined to answer any of my questions with any information, but only childish responses instead.

Let's see, you claim you're on here only to help people understand LRLs, but you refuse to provide any realistic answers to simple questions about your posts. Then you post nothing but silly insults about people.

Instead of posting about any LRL devices themselves, which is the actual topic of this Section, you continually post fish stories about treasure you have found, of which you provide your goofy photoshopped pictures.

I don't think you will be recruiting any gullible newbies that way, Art.

Instead, you are your own best debunker.

 

[werleibr]

The facts, and truth are that nearly all the LRL's on the market world wide are manufactured by Electronics people. According to your logic, that doesn't say much for the character of the people in the Electronics industry.

Perhaps your rants and complaining would do better targeted to electronics people at electronic forums and publications where this criminal fraud you speak of originates. Dell

There are cons and people trying to make a quick buck in every field out there. Look at how much is in the construction insdustry after a storm. Pop up by night repair places that dissapear after payment and before work.

And back to the topic. Another deceitfulness tactic is trying to use science areas that not many people will recognize or understand to state why their thing works. Then when debated, they poof dissapear until the topic has changed.

 

[aarthrj3811]

~EE~

You call posting documented facts, my "opinion," when it's clearly the findings of highly recognized Scientific organizations, or courts, or professional electronics people.

We have saw no facts from Scientific Organizations except for some rumors about Explosive Detectors..We have saw one court case from 1996 where a Judge banned a product for mail fraud but in the same case a Jury found them not guilty..as far as the professional electronics people we have heard from a few who claim to be professional electronic engineers..

Opinions are like anecdotal stories. They aren't proof. But fish stories are all you ever post,

Yes I could post some fish stories but have not because they would not be about treasure hunting

aside from things like your photo of a jar full of gold glitter that you claimed was placer gold. The color was close, but all the particles were the same size---good grief, man, you are so obvious!

Yes I post a jar with 3 pounds of micro gold in it.. The gold was tumbled with mercury and the gold ball had the mercury burned off of it..So you are saying that you can eye-ball a jar of gold and know every thing about it?

I won't even mention all the other fake photos and videos of your "finding" stuff which you obviously planted beforehand.

Sorry you feel that way..You guys begged for a movie of me making a find and that is what I did..I even cropped some of the movie frames that clearly showed the area had no sign of being dug before...There are 100’s of photo’s and movies on the internet and it is strange that you claim that they are all fake..

When will you start posting real facts about LRLs, and be on-topic? The last time I asked you for factual information, you declined to answer any of my questions with any information, but only childish responses instead.

That’s funny...We have posted real facts and answered 1000’s of your questions..You just spin and twist then to satisfy you oun opinions

Let's see, you claim you're on here only to help people understand LRLs, but you refuse to provide any realistic answers to simple questions about your posts. Then you post nothing but silly insults about people.

Yes that is what I do..I answer questions about LRL’s that come from my experiences using them to find treasure..So ..What is your excuse for being on a treasure huntig web site?

Instead of posting about any LRL devices themselves, which is the actual topic of this Section, you continually post fish stories about treasure you have found, of which you provide your goofy photoshopped pictures.

I get no objections except from the Skeptics

I don't think you will be recruiting any gullible newbies that way, Art.

I have no connection with any of the 100 or so manufactures. I have not and will not recommend any LRL or MFD to anyone..I will tell people about the 7 devices that I have used with success..I will continue to tell people how to become informed consumers and what to do if they should decide that they want to spend their money on one of these devices...
Real simple ..so do you still have a problem understanding?

Instead, you are your own best debunker.

No...I am not a skeptic...Art

 

[EddieR]

~EddieR~

Don't waste your time, as anything you post goes over his head like wind at a bean eating contest.

Notice how he makes all his claims, and when cornered, says that they aren't claims at all? That is typical pseudoskeptic diversionary tactics (according to sources online)...very amateurish, but still just tactics to try to scoot out of the corner.

By the tactics he attempts to us it is clear that he has no understanding of how to be a skeptic...
~EE

I guess that since you have lost the battle of trying to convince gullible prospects to buy LRLs, all you have left is to insult people. That's pretty sick.

We are not the one who almost won the LRL salesman of year award. Yes..you were in second place at last years convention..Art

And once again, I am the subject of your entire post. Your obsession with me is useless.

Evidently you don't understand the content of your own posts either.

Look at your post #101...your subject is Dell. That is the subject of your post. Her, I'll repeat it for you in case you forgot already...Dell is the subject of post #101.

Look at post #112.... I am the subject of the post. I am the subject of your post #112.

Do you get it now Of course not. I am referring to you whining about others posting about people instead of LRL's. And then you turn around and do the same thing. The very logic that you use in your debates make you very unbelievable. You aren't a very convincing rhetor.

People might believe an occasional posting of yours if you weren't so hypocritical. But.....that is the role of pseudoskeptics, to sow discord and confusion (and boy are your posts confused). But hey, gotta earn that paycheck, eh?

My post #101 was a reply to Dell, where he brought up how I posted about certain subjects.

My post #112 was a reply to you, where you were posting about me.

This is the same pattern that I mentioned before, where you insult people, then whine when you get insulted back. Poor baby. Does it hamper your LRL promoting? Awwwwwwww....





P.S. Exactly who do you imagine would be paying me? (We know who would be paying the LRL promoters!)

Hmmm...now why it that when people reply to your posts, you start whining, telling them that you are not the subject, they should stick to LRL's.....but when you do the same, you are just replying to their post?

Why be so hypocritical? It just makes you look bad in the long run.

Read, Eddie my boy, read. I already explained the pattern to you.

You really should quit posting insults about people, and start posting some facts about the topic of this Section, which is LRLs. Attacking people only shows your weakness of support for your position on LRLs. If you aren't intending to promote LRLs, then why the senseless attacks directed entirely toward those who post documented facts?

It's not like nobody has noticed!

EE, comprehend what you read. I ehave explained your pattern several times in the hope that you would wise up. Oh well.

I just posted the fact that you were being hypocritical. You yourself said that posting a fact is not an insult. Or did you "forget" that? Or ......does that only apply to your posts?

 

[EE THr]

EE, comprehend what you read. I ehave explained your pattern several times in the hope that you would wise up. Oh well.

I just posted the fact that you were being hypocritical. You yourself said that posting a fact is not an insult. Or did you "forget" that? Or ......does that only apply to your posts?

Here is both of our patterns, combined for ease of understanding---

1. Someone posts how wonderful LRLs are.
2. I point out that it's impossible, and why, usually with verifyable references.
3. Instead of posting real facts, with legitimate references, you insult me.
4. I return the insult.
5. You whine about being insulted.


Do you see it any differently?

 

[EddieR]

EE, comprehend what you read. I ehave explained your pattern several times in the hope that you would wise up. Oh well.

I just posted the fact that you were being hypocritical. You yourself said that posting a fact is not an insult. Or did you "forget" that? Or ......does that only apply to your posts?

Here is both of our patterns, combined for ease of understanding---

1. Someone posts how wonderful LRLs are.
2. I point out that it's impossible, and why, usually with verifyable references.
3. Instead of posting real facts, with legitimate references, you insult me.
4. I return the insult.
5. You whine about being insulted.


Do you see it any differently?

Of course.

If anyone asks questions of you, you give a run around....which means you didn't know the answer. Then you whine about people not believing your "proof". (you left that out)

 

[EE THr]

Of course.

If anyone asks questions of you, you give a run around....which means you didn't know the answer. Then you whine about people not believing your "proof". (you left that out)

Any questions that I don't answer are off-topic, irrelevant personal ones, which are part of your insult strategy. You never ask questions about the documented proof that people post.

Then you try to make it sound like I don't answer pertinent questions.

You are clearly biased on the side of LRLs, and are thus another LRL promoter in (attempted) disguise.

But you are so obvious that you are your own best debunker.

 

[EddieR]

Of course.

If anyone asks questions of you, you give a run around....which means you didn't know the answer. Then you whine about people not believing your "proof". (you left that out)

Any questions that I don't answer are off-topic, irrelevant personal ones, which are part of your insult strategy. You never ask questions about the documented proof that people post.

Then you try to make it sound like I don't answer pertinent questions.

You are clearly biased on the side of LRLs, and are thus another LRL promoter in (attempted) disguise.

But you are so obvious that you are your own best debunker.

"Never ask questions about the documented proof that people post" (your words). I have questioned nearly everything you have posted as "proof" because it is all second hand (you know this, of course).

You have come up with nothing on your own. No tests, nada, zilch.

The questions you won't answer have nothing to do with topic. The reason you won't answer is because you have nothing to fall back on, because most of what you offer is only your opinion.

When you post about my supposed "claims", and I ask you what those "claims" are that you are referring to, but you REFUSE to answer....that is not an off topic question when it is in relation to your post.

Get over yourself and start telling the truth....you will be much more credible.

 

[aarthrj3811]

EE THr

Any questions that I don't answer are off-topic, irrelevant personal ones, which are part of your insult strategy. You never ask questions about the documented proof that people post.

Gee EddieR...Looks like he thinks you don’t ask important questions..I would guess asking questions about all his claims is not important to him...All I see from him is that all our proof is fake.

Then you try to make it sound like I don't answer pertinent questions.

All I see from him is that if you answer questions that he thinks is pertinent you will get an answer that twists and spins your answer followed by insults.

You are clearly biased on the side of LRLs, and are thus another LRL promoter in (attempted) disguise.

Now he is blaming you for his believe that he claims you are a LRL promoter..To me you ask pertinent questions about the only time you used a LRL and located the object you were looking for..And then you were added to his personal insult list

But you are so obvious that you are your own best debunker.

The good guys know you are the owner of a pizza shop and use many kinds of conventional metal detectors...It seems that now he thinks you are skeptical of LRL’s..Talk about twist and spin..Art

 

[EE THr]

"Never ask questions about the documented proof that people post" (your words). I have questioned nearly everything you have posted as "proof" because it is all second hand (you know this, of course).

You have come up with nothing on your own. No tests, nada, zilch.

The questions you won't answer have nothing to do with topic. The reason you won't answer is because you have nothing to fall back on, because most of what you offer is only your opinion.

When you post about my supposed "claims", and I ask you what those "claims" are that you are referring to, but you REFUSE to answer....that is not an off topic question when it is in relation to your post.

Get over yourself and start telling the truth....you will be much more credible.

No, Eddie, you haven't asked questions about documented proof that anyone has posted, but you have insulted me for nearly everything I have posted.

Because I posted SWR's find of that DOJ document, your only lame complaint is that it's "second hand." It is what it is. Of course it's second hand, because I am not the DOJ. Get it now?

It's a DOJ publication, how could that possibly be my "opinion"?

I have already explained to you, twice, that any testing I might have done, would be of no real value in posting because it would be merely anectdotal. Just like the fish stories that you boys like to ridiculously claim as "proof."

And I have also explained your "claims" to you, twice. By your attacking only those who post verifiable facts about LRL fraud, you are exposing yourself as an LRL promoter, no matter what you claim to be. It's your obvious actions, Eddie, not your obviously misleading words.

I don't need credibility, because I'm not making any claims about the topic. I'm just posting documented fraud from verifiable sources. And sometimes I make statements about electronics, and those can be verified by just about anyone who knows how to search the Internet, and takes a little time to read what they find there.

So basically it goes like this: You post personal insults, Art posts fish stories and personal insults, while I post verifiable facts. Anyone reading this Section can soon verify that as true. The more you try to deny it, the more obvious your real intentions are. So you are your own best debunker. Keep up the good work!

 

[aarthrj3811]

~EE~

Because I posted SWR's find of that DOJ document, your only lame complaint is that it's "second hand." It is what it is. Of course it's second hand, because I am not the DOJ. Get it now?

Since you keep bring up the DOJ report about how to use a Explosive Test Kit you should be able to answer some of the out standing question in the discussion of said report..How come in the first month after SWR posted the report it was changed 3 times?...

It's a DOJ publication, how could that possibly be my "opinion"?

Is it?

I don't need credibility, because I'm not making any claims about the topic. I'm just posting documented fraud from verifiable sources. And sometimes I make statements about electronics, and those can be verified by just about anyone who knows how to search the Internet, and takes a little time to read what they find there.

You have done none of that..Every post you are making some kind of claim with nothing to back up your claim..Every time we back you into a corner you claim it is our responsibility to disprove your claim...A discussion on a form is an exchange of information not this one sided thing like you claim..
Now I have ask you two more questions..Does anyone want to make a bet about the answers to the questions?...Art

 

[EE THr]

~EE~

Because I posted SWR's find of that DOJ document, your only lame complaint is that it's "second hand." It is what it is. Of course it's second hand, because I am not the DOJ. Get it now?

Since you keep bring up the DOJ report about how to use a Explosive Test Kit you should be able to answer some of the out standing question in the discussion of said report..How come in the first month after SWR posted the report it was changed 3 times?...

I posted the most up to date version. It shows LRLs and MFDs to be fraudulent. How is the fact that it has been updated, make it relevant to the illegitimacy of fake devices? Once again you are posting irrelevant questions, in an attempt to divert off topic with a Strawman.

It's a DOJ publication, how could that possibly be my "opinion"?

Is it?

How would whether or not it's my opinion, change the illegitimacy of fraudulent devices? And again you post irrelevant Strawman questions.

I don't need credibility, because I'm not making any claims about the topic. I'm just posting documented fraud from verifiable sources. And sometimes I make statements about electronics, and those can be verified by just about anyone who knows how to search the Internet, and takes a little time to read what they find there.

You have done none of that..Every post you are making some kind of claim with nothing to back up your claim..

And again you are trying to say that the DOJ document which shows LRLs and MFDs to be fraudulent, is my claim, when it's actually the proof which you have been asking for. First you mistakingly think that your claims can substitute for proof. And now you are saying that real proof is only my claim. You are either confused, or a steadfast con artist.

Every time we back you into a corner you claim it is our responsibility to disprove your claim...

I'm not the one in the corner, Art. You have painted yourself into your own corner!

I have only said that it's your responsibility to prove your claims that LRLs and MFDs really work. So far you have refused to even try to do that. I have made no claims, but only posted documented proof. Do you get it now?

A discussion on a form is an exchange of information not this one sided thing like you claim..

But you refuse to discuss anything about proving that LRLs work. And you refuse to acknowledge documented proof that they don't. You also refuse to provide real answers to questions about your "antenna testing" which you were trying to brag about, but didn't really exist.


Now I have ask you two more questions..Does anyone want to make a bet about the answers to the questions?...Art

Yes. I'll bet they were attempts at creating a Strawman diversion away from the documented facts which show that LRLs and MFDs don't work!