Ultra Science For Detection

[J_Player]

Hi Dell,

It sounds like you're confused:

Carl's contest will award $25,000 to the person who locates a 10-ounce gold bar. There is no extra aluminum or iron added to confuse the test. Just a simple 10-ounce hidden gold bar. I can think of a few metal detectors that may locate this gold bar hidden under a paper cup from 10 feet, but I can't think of any LRL that can do that. Can yours?

There is nothing negative about it. It is a fact that there is no LRL capable of locating a 10 ounce bar hidden under a cup 7 times out of a total of 10 tries from 10 feet distance. Simple scientific provable fact. It is neither positive or negative unless you decide to assign those values to it. If I am wrong about this fact, why not prove it? I think we are all willing to learn what your LRL can do by taking Carl's test.

Best wishes,
J_P

[J_Player]

.

[Max]

Hi Dell,
I swear, I never see, never read, never used, never heard (apart here of that claims) that

A METAL DETECTOR CAN DETECT A COIN ON SURFACE SOIL FROM METERS AWAY !

Also considering "meters" = 2meters, the shortest for making the plural... I know that there aren't commercial metal detectors capable of that, and even homemade or homemade mods. No "serious" manifacturer of metal detectors (Minelab, White's, Garrett, Tesoro, Fisher, TBel, Lorentz etc) claim that one of his detectors could do.

I've heard of e.g. ULF/ELF detectors capable of detecting metals at meters away, nanovoltmeters, zahori... and LRL-devices like that, but never that a "metal detector" can do.

Or that "metal detector" definition was generic meaning "everything that can detect metals (or claimed of detecting metals)" ? Who knows ? We have to ask Nihil.

But he said I can do myself... a "metal detector" like that, or that I can "modify" it as a CAR to get it work for "medium range".

Maybe I'm wrong, I don't feel being the holder of absolute truth as someone here said. Maybe it exist. Maybe you're right on that White's detector and I've just wrong thoughts about detecting coins at meters away using metal detectors.

If so, I'll be the first admitting here I'm wrong. But untill someone explain me which model/brand can do or give me any patent or any serious information I'll consider the claim impossible.

How can I test myself if I don't know model/brand or patents or any other good informations ?

How can I test, if people like N.R.M. said that stuff exist and work... and then don't give any information, any patent, any model/brand reference !?

Have I perform a faith act ?

Of course, if the coin is an antenna wired e.g. with a separate tx I can detect even at 30 or 100 meters away and more! But it's serious pretending or claiming that a "metal detector" can do, when you need to wire the coin as an antenna ?

Or point a directional tx antenna in the right spot (between thousands of possible spots) to get reflected rf signal from a coin on surface? You must know where the coin is cause otherwise you'll lost in thousand of other reflections e.g. from stones, from grass, from the ground itself!

Also it's serious even talking about of treasure detectors for object on that stay on surface soil ???

In underwater TH it's serius talking about that stuff, cause if you are e.g. in water with your legs... can't see stuff easy even if not under sand etc... but in inland conditions why one would need that ??? to avoid bush and grass masking the coin to eyes ???

Kind regards,
Max

[Dell Winders]

If a PI metal detector was allowed in this contest at 1 meter range, I would easily win the $25,000. But from 10 feet, and only LRL devices, I can't do it. Perhaps some of the people who claim LRLs work can do it

And if it were a comparison test between my LRL and your PI on finding a 1 oz Gold bar buried 2 meters deep you wouldn't stand a chance of winning.

As I said, Carl has made rules to his challenge that winning will only be by a wild stroke of luck. It proves nothing. It's a gimmick designed to promote Carl, and you are falling for it. Good luck! You will need it with your PI comparison rationale. Dell

[Dell Winders]

Max, I have no idea what nihil is referring to. I only speak from my personal experience to try to get you guys to realize that some of the things you say can't be done, have already been done, and are being done. It's been obvious from the posts on this forum that you guys don't know half of what you pretend to know.

So how about the photo I posted? Is it a scam Dowsing device that can't possibly work any beter than chance guessing?

Or is it a real working device that actually discriminates to Gold from a distance, and operates within laws of physics?

Does it work as I say it does or not? Nothing has stopped your pretended expertise from making irrational judgement from a photo before. Come on, and show how smart you really are. Carl, anybody? Do you really think something this crude & simple, made by an uneducated Kentucky hillbilly, could actually Discriminate to Gold from a distance? Dell

[J_Player]

And if it were a comparison test between my LRL and your PI on finding a 1 oz Gold bar buried 2 meters deep you wouldn't stand a chance of winning.

As I said, Carl has made rules to his challenge that winning will only be by a wild stroke of luck. It proves nothing. It's a gimmick designed to promote Carl, and you are falling for it. Good luck! You will need it with your PI comparison rationale. Dell

Hi Dell,
Again, you are confused. Carl's test does not require that you bury the 10 ounce bar 2 meters deep. You only need to tell which one of 10 paper cups it is hidden under. So this is basically an air test to see if any detector can determine which of the ten cups the gold bar is hidden under from at least 10 feet away.

A good PI detector will find the gold bar every time from 1 meter distance, but most won't from 10 feet. Can a LRL find the gold bar from 10 feet even 7 out of 10 times? That's all you need to do to pass the test and get your check for $25,000.

Your arguments claiming the test is not fair lead me to believe you are not capable of locating the 10 ounce gold bar 7 out of 10 times from 10 feet. Therefore you want Carl to change his test to something different that you think a LRL can do. But wait, "LRL" stands for "long range locator". Doesn't this mean it should locate something at long range?

Carl's test rules seem pretty simple to me. Can you tell us which of Carl's rules prevents a LRL from locating the 10 ounce gold bar hidden under a paper cup 10 feet away so finding it "will only be by a wild stroke of luck"?

Best wishes,
J_P

[Max]

Max, I have no idea what nihil is referring to. I only speak from my personal experience to try to get you guys to realize that some of the things you say can't be done, have already been done, and are being done. It's been obvious from the posts on this forum that you guys don't know half of what you pretend to know.

So how about the photo I posted? Is it a scam Dowsing device that can't possibly work any beter than chance guessing?

Or is it a real working device that actually discriminates to Gold from a distance, and operates within laws of physics?

Does it work as I say it does or not? Nothing has stopped your pretended expertise from making irrational judgement from a photo before. Come on, and show how smart you really are. Carl, anybody? Do you really think something this crude & simple, made by an uneducated Kentucky hillbilly, could actually Discriminate to Gold from a distance? Dell

Hi Dell,
OK so it works !

OK so please now give us data about detector (MODEL/BRAND), eventual mods. required, usage and distance at how it can detect a coin (and size and type of coin, of course).

So we can find it, test and gain your experience too.

Kind regards,
Max

[Dell Winders]

Hi Dell,
OK so it works !

OK so please now give us data about detector (MODEL/BRAND), eventual mods. required, usage and distance at how it can detect a coin (and size and type of coin, of course).

So we can find it, test and gain your experience too.

Kind regards,
Max

How can you tell if it works by looking at a picture? Does everybody else say it works as you imply? Does Carl, say it works?

As I said, from your posts it doesn't appear that you people are capable of thinking for your selves. Just copycats looking for a free ride.

I guess you expect me to go out at my own expense, recover your treasure and hand it to you on a Gold platter. Get Real!

No, I am not going hand every thing over to you Carte Blanche so you can copy and build your own at my expense. Who to hell do you think you are to make such a request.

I've wasted enough of my time on this forum replying to the same asinine posts over and over. Dell

[Max]

As I said, from your posts it doesn't appear that you people are capable of thinking for your selves. Just copycats looking for a free ride.

I guess you expect me to go out at my own expense, recover your treasure and hand it to you on a Gold platter. Get Real!

No, I am not going hand every thing over to you Carte Blanche so you can copy and build your own at my expense. Who to hell do you think you are to make such a request.

I've wasted enough of my time on this forum replying to the same asinine posts over and over. Dell

Dell

Hi,
??? Now I'm really puzzled ???

So you don't provide more informations than others here.

Really sorry about that.

Sorry, but I can revert question that way:
Who to hell do you think you are to hope we belive what you said without providing any information or proof but just your personal ideas and claims ?

No productive ideas exchange here. Nice.

Just claims ! Good ! Bravo!

I was trying making some serious discussion... not to be intellectually insulted.

I can also say:
If your detector can detect a coin from few meters away
MINE CAN DETECT FROM ONE GALAXY TO ANOTHER.

Best regards,
Max

[J_Player]

Hi Dell,

We don't know if your LRL works from looking at a picture or listening to stories. The only way we know is if we see a demonstration of what it can do, same as a real scientist would do.

Carl's test does not require that you hand over any of your technology. Carl will fork over the $25,000 if you demonstrate your LRL finding the hidden gold bar 7 out of 10 tries from 10 feet distance. There is no requirement that you show the secret contents inside the plastic parts of your LRL. Simply locate the gold bar 7 times, then take the $25,000 check and go home. Your trade secrets are safe.

Is the reason you say the test is unfair because your LRL cannot locate a gold bar from 10 feet?

Would you say the test is more fair if Carl changed the rules to find the gold bar hidden under only one paper cup? Maybe your LRL could find it 7 out of ten times if only one cup to hide it under?

Best wishes,
J_P

[Max]

Hi JP,
I think that all these are goodnight stories... no metal detector can find any (normal) coin on surface soil from meters away! that's what I say!

And LRL are, in a similar way, unuseful locate stuff at meters away (or even at cms in that case, where instead metal detectors work and find coins not only on surface but also buried).

LRL finds nothing of nothing.

All rhetoric examples here: trade secrets !

Which trade secrets ? Think there isn't any secret about any technology of lrl, just immagination in the best case, or fraud intentions in bad cases.

OK, ok give them the opportunity of show that this stuff work for real!
Why not !?

But problem is that nobody want try!
Nobody can demonstrate nothing of that!
That's why nobody partecipate at challenge here!

If you have a business, earn money etc why you would like partecipate to such a competition knowing that your devices are fake ? And you'll reputation would lost in space, you customers would ask tribunals for compensation... you'll have to change identity maybe (for real)... cause someone would search you even in the "hall of fame of LRL out there"... you'll lose everything:

- money
- face
- and even the right to post here or even to talk in a bar of TH

You'll be banned from the world of TH forever! That's why they are so scared!

I wrote about e.g. magnaCharta or whatever of my friend... but are all the same stuff:
electronic-LRL is a dream (for the naive TH) and a nightmare (for the naive TH that buy one).

At least for now. Actual stuff out there I mean.
Future who knows ?

All I see here confirms that.

Claims, words, stupid pictures: as you want
Real scientific results, facts, documents, informations, patents, even model/brand: nothing

Nothing of nothing.

Pictures of men holding StarTrek pistols, phasers, claim of television programs about "discoveries", some ir-led, some homemade work...

I could replicate here posting tons of fake pictures like that.
But I don't sell or push/support LRL, so I don't.

Which trade secrets ? Only trade secrets I see are about people sharing economic interests in selling/promoting/supporting that stuff...

That at the end don't interest me at all !

We are just wasting time here, trying to get some information from people that don't even know what they are talking about... but just glue with spit (as my friend said) pieces of junk, claiming this or that, in this pretty mosaic.

That's my opinion.

Kind regards,
Max

[J_Player]

OK, ok give them the opportunity of show that this stuff work for real!
Why not !?

But problem is that nobody want try!

...We are just wasting time here, trying to get some information from people that don't even know what they are talking about

Hi Max,

Some people don't want you to know the facts. Dell concealed the facts about the Dell Omnitron V.R. 800 for years because he did not want us to know that Vernell manufactured it. He also is concealing the facts about field tests he conducted in public using this device. It seems that if you ask Dell to see something substantial to demonstrate what he says is true, Dell will call you deceitful, pretender, liar, etc. rather than demonstrate his LRLs working. He tells us we must look at the field tests rather than relying on photos to determine what his LRLs can do, but he refuses to show us field testing. Can you guess why?

Dell is one of the few LRL manufacturers who actually did test his LRL in front of witnesses to show what it can do. Today you will have your chance to read about the field testing on the LRL that Dell demonstrated when he attempted to win a contest for finding the hidden treasure. He tried to show Randi that his LRL will find hidden coins at the beach, and win a prize in 1987. The Randi prize is silmilar to Carl's contest, except in 1987 Randi's prize was only for $10,000, while it is $1 million today. Randi will pay the million dollars to anyone who can demonstrate dowsing with dowsing rods or an LRL.

Back in 1987, Dell decided to win Randi's $10,000 prize using the Dell Omnitron model V.R. 800. Yes, this is the same Omnitron VR 800 that Dell now says was manufactured by Vernell without his knowledge or consent. But still he chose it as the LRL to use to locate the hidden targets in 1987. The result was Dell failed Randi's test. During this test, Dell offered seven different excuses for why the Dell Omnitron V.R. 800 did not find the hidden targets. But maybe better to read the whole story here about the Omnitron V.R. 800 failing to locate coins in the sand: http://www.randi.org/jr/200511/111805setback.html#i9

But thats not all... After Dell saw this story, he responded back to Randi. See what Dell said here: http://www.randi.org/jr/200511/112505psychich.html#i5

So now you know the story of the testing of Dell's LRL. But you also asked about the technical details. On the Randi page you saw some photos of the circuit board that show the construction methods. The real explanation of why this LRL can't find treasure is revealed in the circuit schematic. The functional part of the circuit is a 555 timer with adjustable frequency using 10% duty cycle negative pulse. The output of this timer is sent directly to 2 ground probes via a 0.1 uF capacitor. There is no power amp! Can you imagine any EM energy transmitted more than a few cm? See the full internal components and schematic diagram here: http://geotech.thunting.com/cgi-bin/...r800/index.dat

Now, if some LRL manufacturer refuses to demonstrate their products before you pay money for them, then maybe they are selling equipment similar to what you see in that report. But if the LRL manufacturer is willing to demonstrate their machine working like they say it will, then you are talking to somebody with a real LRL.

Best wishes,
J_P

[Qiaozhi]

Carl, anybody? Do you really think something this crude & simple, made by an uneducated Kentucky hillbilly, could actually Discriminate to Gold from a distance? Dell

OK - as you're asking..... No I do not think such a crude device can discriminate gold from a distance, let alone detect gold in the first place.

Remote sensing Discriminators are intended to be an information tool to aid in determining the probability of deep buried treasure being present that are usually beyond the depth limitations of conventional detectors.

The only probability associated with an LRL is the probability that you won't find anything.
Although LRLs do have one certainty - an empty wallet and many regrets.

[Dell Winders]

J Player, you sure love to tell lies, and now perpetrate Randi's lies. Just like Carl. There is very little truth in your posting. Randi, lied, and now you have included yourself as a part of the cover up. So why hasn't Randi sued me for calling him a liar, and for defamation of his character?

It's because he knows I can prove what I say in a court of law. He's a liar, and so is Carl.

Let's see you, or Randi, show proof to back up your false accuations and libelous action. You are a LIAR!

Dell

[Carl-NC]

Dell concealed the facts about the Dell Omnitron V.R. 800 for years because he did not want us to know that Vernell manufactured it.

I have the original box for the VR800. The shipping label says it came from Dell, not Vernell.

- Carl