Carl-NC said:
EE THr said:
Metal detectors are not primarily radio wave transmitters. ... I'm not an expert on the FCC rules. ... But it doesn't appear that anything that would actually have a real "transmitter" would escape FCC regulation.
If you don't really
know what needs an FCC label and what doesn't, nor what happens when someone fails to label a device that should be labeled, then why would you passionately argue this point like it's written in the Gospel of Truth? Kinda like staking an argument on "
no LRL debunker has been sued by a manufacturer." If you were facing any better debate opposition than the likes of Art, you'd get chewed up and shat out.
Can I make a suggestion?
Please... Do your homework.
Can I make another suggestion?
If you got nothing to say, then that's about the right thing to say.
Simply looking a notch better than Art ain't something to brag about.
Congratulations! You finally found something, although minute, to find fault with about me, personally. that tells me that you took something I said to you, personally. Right now I'm thinking it was the sickiatry eugenics population reduction video, "
Sickiatry is Eugenics, Part 1 of 10." Actually, I think you are still feeling guilty about trying to slam me for the "adding frequencies" statement I made to RDT. Then you tried to pass it off by saying something like, "It's OK because I just have a rotten disposition." Tisk-tisk.
I did read somewhere lately, that you said a guy was going to sue you, but when you wouldn't settle, he withdrew the suit the day before it was to go to court. If that's what you were talking about, why didn't you just mention that, rather than trying to climb all over me about it? And now you are trying to bring it up all over again today, even though it's relatively unimportant. I'm not impressed with what seems to be your anti-social attitude.
Also unimportant is the FCC thing. I wanted to see what Art would say, and I learned something from it. I learned that a guy who can hardly spell his own name, suddenly knows the voluminus FCC regulation backwards and forwards---not, he's getting coaching from HQ. Very interesting.
Although I discuss the LRL "situation," in this Section, I'm not going to take time out to study stacks of information merely to "debate" LRL promoters. Because there is no real debate there, due to the nature of the devices, and it being obvious that 99% of the people using the LRL Section here already know the truth. They do put on a good performance, however. Especially the recent part about debunkers being such bullies that they are depriving the LRL fraudsters of their income from ripping off unsuspecting customers.
Anyhow, it appears that you
are interested in debate, no matter what the subject is, and no matter how irrelevent to the topic it is. I'm not interested in that kind of discussion. I like the social kind where everyone contributes to the knowledge of others. Check my sig some time. What's in
your pocket?
Merry Christmas.