lrl Detector circuit - removal (NEED)

[Dave J.]

Funfinder, things that work aren't called LRL's.

If you want an LRL that works, nobody here can produce such a thing, not the fluffy bunnies and not the engineers who have designed underground locating products that actually work. The moment such a thing actually works, it's no longer an LRL, it is some other kind of apparatus.

If you don't want fairy tale powered apparatus, there's lots of tech activity over on Geotech. Feel free to contribute.

Your whining here is wearing thin on everyone. Patience with whining is a lot thinner over on Geotech. So if you jump over to Geotech, my advice is either to fix your attitude or to be treated with great disrespect.

--Dave J.

[Qiaozhi]

The book has nothing to do with this open forum platform -
either we discuss the pro vs contra LRL arguments on an free
and scientifical basis or we can stop talking about it completly.

All I see here is ITMD book advertisment.

Yes, it's a blatant advert ... but why do you think you deserve to receive this valuable information for free?

Thanks for the reduced-price offer, but at the moment I really
have better things to do than reading stuff in a foreign language
where most of it I know already and a big part I don't want to know.

This forum uses English as its method of communication, and you don't seem to have any problems making extremely long posts in a so-called "foreign language". I suspect your resistance has more to do with stubbornness, and your insistence on illegally attempting to acquire information that you have not paid for, than a language problem.

Better I'm waiting for the german edition of this book.

That is highly unlikely to happen.

Qiaozhi, if you are really good in electronics you would have the
chance to work scientifical, use- and worthful here by counterproving
on a public, free and open basis (which of course would lead to
discussions, too, if you are really right etc.) that LRL is not possible.

If you had any scientific training whatsoever you would know that it's not possible to prove a negative. It is up to the proponents to prove that LRLs work as advertised, not the other way around. Many LRL designers do not have an electronic background, and that's one of the reasons why I designed TOTeM, to provide an experimental platform for everyone to use. Try following Goldmaxx's learning experience in the TOTeM thread to improve your education.

Funfinder,
Your whining here is wearing thin on everyone. Patience with whining is a lot thinner over on Geotech. So if you jump over to Geotech, my advice is either to fix your attitude or to be treated with great disrespect.

--Dave J.

Funfinder ..... please follow Dave's advice.

[Funfinder]

Dave J wrote:
> Funfinder, things that work aren't called LRL's.

Are you serious with this definition?
So everyone here just wastes his time with not working crap?

> my advice is either to fix your attitude or to be treated with great disrespect.

Attitude for what? For the unscientifical stuff that is going on here?
Not I am the culprit, but those who refuse to give scientifical info!

Right and law always is the same, it is there to improve the status of the majority and the mighty ones. And here the majority is the unscientifical working guys who refuse to work on a real useful basis. And this is a proven fact, this is a fact since 2006.

Persons who like to hide in the shadows as many LRL-producers do also don't like that scientifical facts come to the surface and of course they will start to make everyone looking bad who wanna have clear facts.


@ Qiaozhi
Your opinions about what you think I want, is far away from what I really want. But I really start to want nothing more here because it's useless anyway.

Only you think I'm in big need to get pro or contra LRL details but I'm not. I'm only think for a forum like this here it would be the minimum of a useful basis so treasure-hunters can decide upon
good argumentation what they should think about the whole stuff.

But the point is: First I wanna have reliable info and afterwards I invest time, money and other resources into it.
Otherwise I would be the same unclever as an OKM Bionic customer
that first wastes his money and afterwards he realizes how stupid
he was.

And if persons refuse to give this reliable info first I also don't need the rest. No matter if product or information, first it has to be shure that the thing really is worth the price or anything at all.


But this forum prefers to undermines itself by selfish and egoistical motives.


> If you had any scientific training whatsoever you would know that it's not possible to prove a negative.

I know how scientifical prove or counterproof works, and the "system" here is far far away from it.
But I appreciate this statement because it shows at least your will to be constructiv into this direction.
And you may be right, not everything can be proven as negative or "excluded", but alot stuff of course can.

An electronical circuit can be measured what it detects and if those signal are not existing, if those are not related to buried metal or if they only give a small hint like magnetometers of course a so called LRL device can be tested what it really detect and what not.
Only the will to find this out has to be there.


> Funfinder ..... please follow Dave's advice.

See my answer to Dave. I don't need to post here at all costs.
We know already since a very long time what's the progress here in this forum, and the interest to change this is very small.

If this forum can't handle, accept or work with scientific methods
or on public acceptable basis, let it be. LRLs are not so deadly
important that the whole treasure hunting world would look at it
to find extremly precious information here. But my time is
precious enough for no longer wasting it here for nothing.


If you like whats going on here, have a great time here.
I don't like it, because it leads to nothing.

[Dave J.]

Funfinder,

Once upon a time, a dog was standing on the bank of a river preparing to swim across. A cobra slid up beside the dog and said, "I wish to cross too, but I can't swim. Let me curl up on your back and you can ferry me to the other side." The dog was suspicious, but since the snake hadn't threatened him, it all seemed to make sense. So the dog gave consent.

When the two reached the other side, the snake slid off the dog's back and immediately bit the dog right on the nose.

The dog of course was shocked. "I carried you across, why did you bite me?"

The cobra replied, "You knew what I was the whole time. I'm a cobra, so I bite dogs."

************************

Funfinder, you knew from the beginning what LRL's are, they are fraudulent. You persisted in denying what you already knew. Congratulations on having reached the other side of the river. No apology for the snakebite, I told you from the very beginning where LRL business ends.

--Dave J.