Those that have been scammed..

[EE THr]

Sorry. I don't jump through hoops for you.

What you are calling an "attack"....is when I merely questioned the source of your claims you made earlier. So you try to twist words around, trying to make everyone feel sorry for you, as if you are a "victim".

I was not attacking you personally, I just wanted an explanation as to what you were basing your claims on. You then started hedging, because you KNEW you made them up, and had been called on it.

Before that, we had been civil toward one another, as per agreement. I told you that I had obtained the original device that I used when I found my ring, and had performed some informal tests with it. I never got around to posting the results, though.

My purpose for posting in the LRL Section is to expose fraudulent devices, so that honest people don't get ripped off.

What is your purpose for posting here?

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

Minelab PRO-FIND 35 Waterproof Pinpointer Metal Detector for Experts with Tone ID & Adjustable Sensitivity - Grab it through Amazon!

[aarthrj3811]

~EE~

My purpose for posting in the LRL Section is to expose fraudulent devices, so that honest people don't get ripped off.

And a great job your doing....So far you have not exposed a single LRL used for treasure hunting that is fraudulent. So far there is only one person that has said that he was ripped of...
We have had 60 plus people who are happy with their Treasure Hunting LRL’s...
For some reason you have failed to prove any of your claims

What is your purpose for posting here?

Is there a Long Range Locator capable of this?
Posted Nov 06, 2009, 10:36:14 AM
Quote

With that, I open this forum to the discussion of said devices.

To exchange information about said devices..

Sorry Eddie...he temped me...Art

 

[humble]

I am interested in LRL. I want to find unhappy customer to learn from and help me decide. I waste my time to read over 500 posts to find treasure hunter customer with complaints about being scammed, and you show me Rangertell with only 3 out of 200 on E-bay link who can't be unhappy because money was returned. 1 link on google by Watcher, of customer having difficulty with Fitzgerald product. Where are the user complaints?

I want to hear from real treasure hunter LRL customer to learn what device he bought that is scam? Please help. humble

 

[EddieR]

Sorry. I don't jump through hoops for you.

What you are calling an "attack"....is when I merely questioned the source of your claims you made earlier. So you try to twist words around, trying to make everyone feel sorry for you, as if you are a "victim".

I was not attacking you personally, I just wanted an explanation as to what you were basing your claims on. You then started hedging, because you KNEW you made them up, and had been called on it.

Before that, we had been civil toward one another, as per agreement. I told you that I had obtained the original device that I used when I found my ring, and had performed some informal tests with it. I never got around to posting the results, though.

My purpose for posting in the LRL Section is to expose fraudulent devices, so that honest people don't get ripped off.

What is your purpose for posting here?

My purpose? I don't really have one, as that could be considered an "agenda" by some. When I first got on the LRL forum, I didn't post at all. I just read the posts. When I told my story about finding my ring, I was told I was mistaken, I was called a liar, I was called a shill, etc.....simply because I questioned the evidence presented here against LRL's.

I have always, FROM THE START, said that I could not say whether a certain LRL worked or not if I hadn't personally tried it. If you read over my posts in the past, I constantly questioned the investigative method used to determine the falsity of the devices, when the poster admitted they hadn't even tried the device. I mean, seriously...what kind of investigative method is that?

Now, with that being said.... the results of the informal tests (I mentioned them a few days ago) I performed with the LRL I used to find my ring were .....interesting.

 

[aarthrj3811]

~humble~

I am interested in LRL. I want to find unhappy customer to learn from and help me decide. I waste my time to read over 500 posts to find treasure hunter customer with complaints about being scammed, and you show me Rangertell with only 3 out of 200 on E-bay link who can't be unhappy because money was returned. 1 link on google by Watcher, of customer having difficulty with Fitzgerald product. Where are the user complaints?

I want to hear from real treasure hunter LRL customer to learn what device he bought that is scam? Please help. Humble

Hey humble..Thanks for reading our posts...I have received some complaints via pm’s and e-mails...I have helped some of them become happy with their devices..These people who use devices with adjustable frequencies are the ones that I have been able to help the most..
With about 200 different models and brands on the market I can not help some of them just because I don’t have the necessary knowledge of their devices..
Some people will not come to this forum simply because they do not want to be insulted by the skeptics for spending their money on the device.
We are told that there are only about 20 of these devices that are in use..We are told that the 60 plus owners that have put testimonials on here are all fake. We are told that all the testimonials and photo’s of finds on the internet are all fake...
All the treasure hunters I know would be making a lot of noise if they had been ripped off...Art

 

[EE THr]

Anybody can say just about anything they want on the Internet.


But the fact remains that no LRL has ever been scientifically proven to the World to work.

Everything that really works, works all the time, when operated under specified optimum conditions and within manufacturer's specifications. LRLs have never done that, but are only alleged to "work" in reports by LRL promoters. That's not scientific.

Furthermore, LRL promoters refuse to participate in any fair scientific test, in public, with valid witnesses. We have only their "stories," with no actual proof, and silly reasons for why they can't demonstrate their devices like any other piece of equipment---in the open, under logical conditions.

There is one primary question which they will never be able to answer with other than nonsense---

ref: Can You Scientifically Prove to the World That LRLs Work?

 

[aarthrj3811]

~EE~

Anybody can say just about anything they want on the Internet.

That is true and your posts prove that.

But the fact remains that no LRL has ever been scientifically proven to the World to work.

Gee EE..I told you how it can be done at http://forum.treasurenet.com/index.php/topic,411065.0.html and
http://forum.treasurenet.com/index.php/topic,411065.msg2925592.html#msg2925592
It would cost about $500,000 to accomplish the prove you want

Everything that really works, works all the time, when operated under specified optimum conditions and within manufacturer's specifications.

Have you read all specifications provided by manufacturer's...If you had you would know that the specifications are different even between models of the same manufacturer

LRLs have never done that, but are only alleged to "work" in reports by LRL promoters. That's not scientific.

Reports by LRL users are more scientific than reports from people who have never used one.

Furthermore, LRL promoters refuse to participate in any fair scientific test, in public, with valid witnesses. We have only their "stories," with no actual proof, and silly reasons for why they can't demonstrate their devices like any other piece of equipment---in the open, under logical conditions.

We do not know of any fair scientific test, in public, with valid witnesses that has been offered...The two test that you keep pushing are not scientific tests and would not be recognized by the Science community.

There is one primary question which they will never be able to answer with other than nonsense---

What is your one primary question?...

We are still waiting for your answer to humbales question

I want to hear from real treasure hunter LRL customer to learn what device he bought that is scam? Please help. Humble..

Art

 

[EE THr]

Art---

If you refuse to attempt to prove your fairy tale claims---that is entirely your problem.

 

[humble]

Where is proof from LRL Treasure hunters that LRL don't work. I want to hear. That is the only proof that counts. If they work for anyone, it is Scientific. LRL would never work at all, even once, unless it is Scientific. Common sense. Maybe critics not smart enough to know answers? humble

 

[aarthrj3811]

~Art~

What is your one primary question?...

~EE~

If you refuse to attempt to prove your fairy tale claims---that is entirely your problem.

So that’s your prime question..As far as I am concerted I have answered all your questions...I have put photo’s, links and addresses where my prove can be found...I made and posted a movie of a find and recovery..
If you are talking about Carl’s bogus Double Blind test..Yes, I will not participate...I have told you how a real Scientific Double Blind Test should be organized and also told you that if one is organized I would consider participate ... Art
How’s the cooked Goose smell?

 

[EE THr]

Where is proof from LRL Treasure hunters that LRL don't work. I want to hear. That is the only proof that counts. If they work for anyone, it is Scientific. LRL would never work at all, even once, unless it is Scientific. Common sense. Maybe critics not smart enough to know answers? humble

Allegedly humble---

1. There are no critics or skeptics posting on this board, the debunkers are all people who know for certain that LRLs don't work.

2. All the so-called LRL treasure hunters posting on here, are LRL promoters. They will say anything.

3. The requirement for real proof is greater than just a small group of LRLers telling stories. Scientific proof must meet certain standards.

4. If LRLs could possibly work, someone would have provided ample proof by real scientific testing, in the open, for all to see. Plus someone would have collected Carl's $25,000.00 prize for anyone who can prove that LRLs actually work. This random double-blind test has been available for several years, and not one single LRLer has ever even attempted to pass it. That's because they know they can't. Because LRLs don't ever work. It's just a bunch of stories.


ref: Can You Scientifically Prove to the World That LRLs Work?

 

[aarthrj3811]

~EE~

1. There are no critics or skeptics posting on this board, the debunkers are all people who know for certain that LRLs don't work.

You can call your self any thing that you want..You may think that LRL’s don’t work but can not prove it..Why don’t you make arrangements to actually use one and find out for yourself?

2. All the so-called LRL treasure hunters posting on here, are LRL promoters. They will say anything.

The LRL treasure hunters posting on this board I find to be honest treasure hunters that en joy their hobby

3. The requirement for real proof is greater than just a small group of LRLers telling stories. Scientific proof must meet certain standards.

If there is no Scientific proof how is that possible?

4. If LRLs could possibly work, someone would have provided ample proof by real scientific testing, in the open, for all to see. Plus someone would have collected Carl's $25,000.00 prize for anyone who can prove that LRLs actually work. This random double-blind test has been available for several years, and not one single LRLer has ever even attempted to pass it. That's because they know they can't. Because LRLs don't ever work. It's just a bunch of stories.

Carl’s test has been discussed many times and you still can not post the truth..6 or 7 people have excepted Carl’s test...None have been able to get a signed contract from Carl..In fact Carl e-mailed and told the time, date and place for 2 of his tests..Carl was a no show at both...Even some of the skeptics admit that Carl’s test would not be excepted by the Scientific community as it will only prove if one person can or can not use his LRL...Art

 

[humble]

Alegedly EE,

Thank you. I know you try to help me but I need proof that LRL not work from Treasure Hunter who has used LRL. You create questions to your self.


1. There are no critics or skeptics posting on this board, the debunkers are all people who know for certain that LRLs don't work.

How you know for certain LRL not work? Tell me how many times you try to use to hunt buried treasures. What kind you use?

2. All the so-called LRL treasure hunters posting on here, are LRL promoters. They will say anything.

I see posts on other internet from Treasure Hunters who say LRL work for them. I talk to some. I want to talk to treasure hunter customer who LRL Not work for. Will you give contacts please?

3. The requirement for real proof is greater than just a small group of LRLers telling stories. Scientific proof must meet certain standards.

I have see scientific proof in form of double blind tests, but LRL not work the way you believe.

4. If LRLs could possibly work, someone would have provided ample proof by real scientific testing, in the open, for all to see.

How you know this?

Plus someone would have collected Carl's $25,000.00 prize for anyone who can prove that LRLs actually work. This random double-blind test has been available for several years, and not one single LRLer has ever even attempted to pass it.

Why you say this? Mr. Morland, has said he has tested LRL users.

That's because they know they can't. Because LRLs don't ever work. It's just a bunch of stories.

How can you know this about everybody in the world? Maybe you are
telling stories?

If you really know please contact me with LRL treasure hunters you know who are scammed to buy an LRL. I want to know what they are using. It will help me. TY humble

 

[woof!]

Where is proof from LRL Treasure hunters that LRL don't work. I want to hear. That is the only proof that counts. If they work for anyone, it is Scientific. LRL would never work at all, even once, unless it is Scientific. Common sense. Maybe critics not smart enough to know answers? humble

An "LRL" is a dowsing rod with fraudulent electronics added; or in at least one case a manufacturer's claim that electronics have been added when in fact none have been. In order to work like a dowsing rod, they need to pivot when held in the hand.

In other words, LRL's do "work" -- like dowsing rods, whatever you think of that, and there's another forum for that discussion. The electronics are bogus, and most of the people who post here saying that are electrical engineers, in at least three cases engineers familiar with electronic underground metal detecting and geophysical apparatus.

If you'd like to see a manufacturer's advertisement which in its own funny way explains the whole thing, take a look at the magazine ads for the Thomas "Gravitator". It lists "features" without making any claims other than that it's gonna make someone rich (i.e. Thomas) and that the information request form produces "action at a distance". And how does the swingy thingy really "work"? It's right there in the name, it's a gravitator. In order to dowse with it, it has to be unbalanced, it is unbalanced, and there you have it. Can't dowse with a compass because the darn thing is balanced, so that it can detect a magnetic field rather than the omnipresent gravity.

And it gets even funnier. The Gravitator is essentially the same thing as the "DKL Lifeguard", for which explicit (and absurd) claims are made, claims which are completely different from the claims you're supposed to imagine in your mind for the Gravitator. In other words each product proves the other one to be fraudulent.

If you want to know that LRL's are fraudulent, the best place to go for the evidence is direct to the manufacturers of the things. They provide the best proof: the debunkers here merely report the findings.

If after having read this forum, you still want to buy an LRL, I say that you deserve one-- the most expensive one you can afford. If all you can afford is a calculator on a swivel, you can get the kind Artie has, or you can build your own for a whole lot less.

If you would rather skip the bogus electronics and use a dowsing rod without fraudulent enhancements, you can make your own from coat hangers, or buy nicely made units with mechanical swivels for a lot less than $100. And if it's buried metal you're hoping to find, you'll probably need a metal detector.

--Toto

 

[EE THr]

humble---

If you insist that LRLs work, then let's see you prove it.

Otherwise all your stories are just BS.

If you claim it, then it's up to you to prove it.

Take an LRL and go win Carl's $25,000.00.

As far as I know, no LRLer as attempted to take his test. If you know of one, then provide the documentation or links to it.

Otherwise you are all talk, just like the rest of the LRL promoters.







P.S. I have already gone around in circles with the other LRL promoters on here about all of these things, and I'm not about to repeat everything with you.

ref: Can You Scientifically Prove to the World That LRLs Work?

 

[EE THr]

bumble---

You don't sound so "humble" to me. Apparently you're just another masquerader.

Maybe critics not smart enough to know answers?

 

[humble]

Thank you. I know you try to help me but I need proof that LRL not work from Treasure Hunter who has used LRL. Y

EE, I ask simple question for help and you waste my time running me in circles to evade question. Not nice. I not talk to you more. Goodbye sir.

Toto, I see with my own eyes 40 repeated double blind test of LRL with no electronics. It was not dowsing. You are mis-informed.

I come here to find If anyone know LRL treasure hunters who are scammed to buy an LRL. I want to contact and know what they are using. It will help me. If you don't know any one, say so.

I did not come here to argue, be accused, be insulted, or have my time wasted by pretend scientist. humble.

 

[EE THr]

Thank you. I know you try to help me but I need proof that LRL not work from Treasure Hunter who has used LRL. Y

EE, I ask simple question for help and you waste my time running me in circles to evade question. Not nice. I not talk to you more. Goodbye sir.

Toto, I see with my own eyes 40 repeated double blind test of LRL with no electronics. It was not dowsing. You are mis-informed.

I come here to find If anyone know LRL treasure hunters who are scammed to buy an LRL. I want to contact and know what they are using. It will help me. If you don't know any one, say so.

I did not come here to argue, be accused, be insulted, or have my time wasted by pretend scientist. humble.

Not-so-humble---

You can't have it both ways. You can't pretend to be humble and unbiased, then insult people.

Real treasure hunters use equipment that works. They don't use LRLs. I don't care how many stories you have heard, or how many you tell---LRLs don't work.

If a free swinging pointing device doesn't have electronics, it's a dowsing rod. Of course, since the electronics in LRLs are fake, unworking circuits, that makes LRLs dowsing rods also, just much more expensive.

What you want doesn't exist. Nobody who seriously hunts for treasure is going to buy a dowsing rod with fake electronics. They aren't going to fall for some fake demonstration, where the seller already knows where the target is, unless they are a total noob.

If you are really not just another LRL promoter, then the only thing that will do you any good is full scientific proof, in which case the LRL will fail every time. So there you have it, like it or not.





ref: A Dozen Points Proving LRL Fraud These points have never been rationally refuted.

 

[woof!]

Thank you. I know you try to help me but I need proof that LRL not work from Treasure Hunter who has used LRL. Y

EE, I ask simple question for help and you waste my time running me in circles to evade question. Not nice. I not talk to you more. Goodbye sir.

Toto, I see with my own eyes 40 repeated double blind test of LRL with no electronics. It was not dowsing. You are mis-informed.

I come here to find If anyone know LRL treasure hunters who are scammed to buy an LRL. I want to contact and know what they are using. It will help me. If you don't know any one, say so.

I did not come here to argue, be accused, be insulted, or have my time wasted by pretend scientist. humble.

If it neither swung like a treasure hunting style dowsing rod nor had electronics, what the heck was it? The military has apparatus that can locate things from a long distance, and this very evening I located Jupiter in the sky with my organic eyeballs. But nobody calls such things LRL's, that term is reserved for dowsing rods with bogus electronics.

And, to put another spin on the question, whatever the apparatus was or is, why do you believe that dowsing wasn't involved? I've done successful double-blinded dowsing, and unlike many people posting here, I actually know what double-blinding is. I also know what happens to dowsers who try to compete for prize money: Carl & AR don't have to cheat, the dowser will lose, and the funny thing is that dowsers reveal that they know this on a subconscious level. So even though they still don't know consciously that they're full of malarkey about the Carl & AR problem, the rest of us can know.

--Toto

 

[Ted Groves]

Art---

If you think that court cases prove something, then how come no debunker has ever been sued or arrested for slander? Because the LRL makers can't prove that they work, that's why.

And the reason they can't prove it, is because they just don't work! (Duh!)




A Dozen Points Proving LRL Fraud These points have never been rationally refuted.

Eddie is here strictly for his own entertainment value - he likes to see how much he can stir up with his little paddle (it matches the size of his other accessories). I mean... what else is there to do between watch'in the ovens and keep'n the pizza pies from burning.

He has not a clue of who or what he is so vehemently protecting - he just gets a kick out of sitting on that side of the fence and prodding the threads when they cool off a little.

...harmless little troll, just like his cigar-smoking (or whatever she does with that cigar) little sister.