This will change the world

[Dell Winders]

Dell,

I believe Goldfinder in the other thread listened to my advice.
Now it's your turn.

Don't waste your time (and your health) arguing with these guys.

You are right. There is no arguing with egotistical idiots
who repeat the same asinine questions over and over, and demand that you answer them again,and again, even after you have already answered their question.

What can I say? I used to post to share my field knowledge of LRL. Now I post because I am amused with the idiocy of Skeptic replies.

I agree, that trying to post any useful information on this forum is a waste of time.

Did Carl, ever take Dimasio's, $50,000 challenge with the Mineoro, he bought to prove that the Minero, doesn't work as claimed? Dell

[Theseus]

Ready to answer the questions yet? Or is your memory still being selective?
What was the documentary you referred to that supposedly proves dowsing works?

"WHAT DOESN'T WORK, CANNOT BE MADE TO WORK."

Looks like his memory is still a problem. Why am I not surprised.

[Qiaozhi]

... who repeat the same asinine questions over and over, and demand that you answer them again,and again, even after you have already answered their question.

Actually, that's just the problem. You have not answered the questions, due to your well-developed selective memory. Of course, we will repeat the same questions again and again, and will continue to do so until we finally get an answer ... or not, which is the most likely scenario.

As for the "awards" that H3tec display on their website - they apparently reached the final of the Utah Innovation Awards 2007 (sponsored by Avalanche Studios, Business Connect Magazine, and USTAR) in the Chemical, Materials Science category, but failed to receive the award. I cannot find any reference to H3tec regarding the Utah Best of State Medal, and the same applies to the other "awards". In fact, the last four all seem to be related in some way, so I'm not sure what they are.

"WHAT DOESN'T WORK, CANNOT BE MADE TO WORK."

[Carl-NC]

Let me redirect your attention to the claim that the product is built by Scientist & Engineers. Are you, or are you not, a proponent of Science & Engineering?

Should we accept that claim at face value? Besides, what defines a "scientist"? If it's an "expert in science," then I strongly doubt there are any real scientists involved with this company. But we can also water down the term until it includes a curious 3-year-old.

We seem to agree that Dowsing, is meta-physical.

Why in the world would I agree to that? Science has very thoroughly explained dowsing; it is not "beyond physics" whatsoever.

What about the recognition awards for their company? Are they fake?

I have calls out on this. It appears that several of these "awards" are set up so you nominate yourself, pay an entry fee, then see if you win. From what I can see, H3Tec has never won any of these awards.

But here's the really funny part. When I saw their web site and all those awards, I did not jump to the conclusion that H3Tec had ever won those awards. Why? Because their web site does not claim that they won those awards. The web site simply has pictures of the awards, with no further comment. So the question, Dell, is why did you assume they had won any awards, when they made no such claim?

I bow to your uncanny ability to merely look at a photo and determine that the product is a Dowsing Rod controlled by the operator's mind, rendering the electronics useless.

Yeah, most of this stuff is really really obvious.

Did Carl, ever take Dimasio's, $50,000 challenge with the Mineoro, he bought to prove that the Minero, doesn't work as claimed?

Carl tried several times to contact Mineoro about this, but could never get a response. So he gave up. Kinda like that "$10,000 bet" you once proposed, then refused to discuss. I'm sure, somehow, it's all my fault.

- Carl

[Qiaozhi]

... their web site does not claim that they won those awards. The web site simply has pictures of the awards, with no further comment.

On the Services page they imply that they have won these awards:
A Few Words About Us

...Award Winning Technology
...USTAR University Research
...Best of State
...Stoel Rives Innovations Award
...I.Q. Awards
...Best and Brightest in Utah
...Invented in Utah Awards

The first line makes the implication. However, the Stoel Rives Innovation Award is certainly not true. They made it to the final list in their category, but failed to win. Maybe the award was for being an "also ran".
And perhaps the I.Q. Award was for the advertising video.

[hung]

Carl tried several times to contact Mineoro about this, but could never get a response. So he gave up. Kinda like that "$10,000 bet" you once proposed, then refused to discuss. I'm sure, somehow, it's all my fault.

- Carl

Oh my God... AGAIN??????????

I gave you Damasio's personal phone number several months ago at HIS own request. Did you call him?

What is YOUR excuse now?

[Carl-NC]

"Award Winning Technology"

Yes, but this does not say their "technology" has won any awards, does it? All they need to do is use a Vishay SiP12510 white LED driver (which won an EE Times ACE award) in their design and PRESTO they have "award winning technology".

And, again, they make no claim that they actually won any of those other awards, and I'm inclined to believe that lack of claim. If I had a product that won those awards, I would specifically make that claim, along with the years & categories.

I gave you Damasio's personal phone number several months ago at HIS own request. Did you call him?

Of course not. I prefer to have things in writing, for obvious reasons. Besides, the ball's in his court. Since you seem to have a rapport with Damasio, why don't you ask him why he's refused to follow up on this? I'm sure that, somehow, it'll be my fault. It's always Carl's fault.

- Carl

[Mike(Mont)]

I use H3 in my Aero Rod. It's also called tritium. It's heavy hydrogen. I don't know that much about it, but the proton in hydrogen is what has the high magnetic qualities. I don't even know if this is what they are talking about (the H3 in H3tec).

The thing about radioactive amplifiers is their effect is an inductive one. The typical tritium vial emits a small amount of radioactive particles up to about a quarter inch away, so there is no radioactive beam that zaps the target with energy. They do emit pairs of ions (positive and negative). Some military compasses have trituim vials, and I've seen older Rolex watches had them. The half life is ten years so if you have a thirty-year-old dowsing device with tritium it has nothing much left. Louis Turenne used a homeopathic solution of radium in his devices.

[Fred]

And perhaps the I.Q. Award was for the advertising video.

Even that video look like a compilation of stuff found elsewere.The format (size) is not even the same along it.
I don´t think all this deserve much attention.And i am AMAZED that someone like Dell can believe this just because it is there,on the net.I think he should have the experience of it....
or is this a spin-off of some other "company" ?

[Dell Winders]

I don´t think all this deserve much attention.And i am AMAZED that someone like Dell can believe this just because it is there,on the net.I think he should have the experience of it....

No, I didn't say I believed it. I only pointed out that the proclaimed Skeptics on this forum pretend to be Scientific, then jump to conclusions without any investigation, or field trials.

Just because I am open minded to possibilities, does not mean I am not skeptical of high tech Scientific, engineering claims used for advertising that are often contradictory to the facts of my own field experience with similar products. But, I do try to be fair and unbiased when testing and evaluating any detection method that might serve the requirements of Treasure Hunters.

I adhere to the old adage, Don't believe anything you hear, or read, and only half of what you see. A good reason for me to be skeptical of those who proclaim themselves Skeptics, to excuse their egotistical behavior against users of Remote Sensing Discrimination methods.

There is nothing scientific about posting an article from the internet, or a video from youtube to prove you are Scientific. Dell

[Steve in MS]

Dell, just for the sake of discussion, how big does a piece of silver or gold have to be for one of your LRL's to pick it up?
Also, does it only get a signal on gold or silver if it is on top of the ground or can it be under the ground, and how far under the ground can it pick up an item?
What is the success rate when one uses one of your devices, gets a postive reading in an approximate percentage? I realize your answer to this would vary from person to person, just a rough guestimate will be ok.
How do your devices only pick up gold or silver and not aluminum, copper, iron, tin or underground water streams, water pipes, minerals, etc?
Do your devices give a better response the closer it gets to an object, say,
30 ft, 1 yard and a few inches away?
How much of the success of using one of your devices depend on the metaphysical or the paranormal aspect?
These questions are more or less a curiosity for me and a chance for you to inform us.

[Qiaozhi]

Just because I am open minded to possibilities, does not mean I am not skeptical of high tech Scientific, engineering claims used for advertising that are often contradictory to the facts of my own field experience with similar products.

I would hardly call their claims high-tech. It's the usual pseudo-scientific nonsense we've heard many times before.

Ready to answer the questions yet?

"WHAT DOESN'T WORK, CANNOT BE MADE TO WORK."

[Qiaozhi]

Dell, just for the sake of discussion, .....

I cannot resist it ... although I tried very hard.
I've just got to answer these questions for Dell, especially as you're unlikely to get any answers directly from him. Even if you do, Dell's memory is so selective that he'll probably only answer the odd one, and ignore the others.

So here goes:

... how big does a piece of silver or gold have to be for one of your LRL's to pick it up?

Makes no difference, because it's all metaphysical, and just a trick of the mind. So one atom of gold is as detectable as one ton.

Also, does it only get a signal on gold or silver if it is on top of the ground or can it be under the ground, and how far under the ground can it pick up an item?

It's the same result whether the gold/silver is 1mm from the device, or it's located on Mars.

What is the success rate when one uses one of your devices, gets a postive reading in an approximate percentage? I realize your answer to this would vary from person to person, just a rough guestimate will be ok.

The percentage is the same as guessing.

How do your devices only pick up gold or silver and not aluminum, copper, iron, tin or underground water streams, water pipes, minerals, etc?

Years of selective memory training, and self-denial. It's not worth explaining, as skeptics are too stupid to understand. You would need a brain the size of a planet, like what I've got.

Do your devices give a better response the closer it gets to an object, say,
30 ft, 1 yard and a few inches away?

Distance is irrelevant. The results are the same.

How much of the success of using one of your devices depend on the metaphysical or the paranormal aspect?

I have to exercise the full potential of my enormous cranium in order to metaphysically dowse. Ordinary humans have no chance. That's why I introduced the MFD, to enhance the puny dowsing capability of the average peasant's brain.

These questions are more or less a curiosity for me and a chance for you to inform us.

My pleasure.

"WHAT DOESN'T WORK, CANNOT BE MADE TO WORK." - or something like that!

[J_Player]

Hmmmm...
It looks like there is some difference in opinion about who is right and who is wrong here. So how can we know who to believe knows what is correct about these contraptions that supposedly find treasure?

Let's consider the sources of information we are hearing. I must ask myself a few questions about the background of these people before deciding who to believe. For example:

Who studied science, math, electronics and engineering for years to become knowledgeable in state of the art technical methods?

Who did not make it into college level education?

Who knows how to determine the difference between fake BS fairy-tale stories and the real deal by using scientific methods?

Who loves fairy-tales, fantastic movies and fiction novels, and tries to make these fairy-tales come true in their own lives?

Who is careful to report actual observations and draw conclusions based on principles of logic without introducing unprovable theories that can't be explained?

Who considers a coincidental event to be proof for a new theory of unknown science that only they can make work... and two or three coincidental events become absolute proof of the new theory, so it is no longer a theory, but a law of the new unknown science, even in the face of millions of contrary events that would prove the new theory false by statistical methods?

Who has collected certificates from highly respected educational institutions that certify they are competent in the latest technology?

Who has collected certificates from highly respected municipal and legal institutions which claim they have defrauded someone or a class of people?


Well, If I can determine the answers to these questions, then maybe I will have a clue of who to believe.

Best wishes,
J_P

[Fred]

It's the same result whether the gold/silver is 1mm from the device, or it's located on Mars.

But i want to find gold on Europa,will i work ?
(hmmm i know , lousy one)

The percentage is the same as guessing..

BTW, this will almost always be >= to 50% , as there is always some clues or logical deductions involved. So even positive results must be taken with care.