signal from gold

[Steve in MS]

Back in the past, LRLs were said to be able to detect gold that had not been buried for a long time but it seems more recently that they only detect longtime buried gold items.
Is this like playing a card card where the rules change in the process on the game?

[Fred]

Carl, is that expressed as your personal opinon, or are you stating this as a fact? Please clarify.

And of course, "LRL proponnents can do none of this" is blatenly untrue.

It a fact of course ! don´t you know that ?

[Clondike Clad]

You said it.

Technically, a magnetometer does not detect iron, rather it detects the magnetic field distortion caused by an iron target. And a metal detector does not detect metal, rather it detects the magnetic field distortions caused by the eddy currents that are induced by a primary magnetic field.

That said...

1. I can tell you exactly how a magnetometer or a metal detector works, down to the very physics involved.
2. I can use a magnetometer or a metal detector in a randomized double-blind test to objectively prove they work as I claim they will work.
3. I can tell you exactly how to build a magnetometer or a metal detector, that you can build for yourself, that you can test for yourself, and that you can use to independently verify everything I tell you about how they work.
4. I can provide examples of people who have used magnetometers and metal detectors to locate and retrieve all sorts of valuable objects, from individual items to caches to massive hoards of treasure. And lots of it, too.

LRL proponents can do none of this.
That is why I want to make one Carl.
If I can take your money it would be proof for me
BUT AS YOU KNOW YOUR MONEY IS STILL SAFE.....MONEY OH MONEY I LIKE TO GET YOU


- Carl

[Clondike Clad]

NOW ,NOW

Carl, is that expressed as your personal opinon, or are you stating this as a fact? Please clarify.

And of course, "LRL proponnents can do none of this" is blatenly untrue. There you go Carl, two lies from you in two weeks. Last week on TNET, you said MFD was a Dowsing Rod Scam.
This is your Scam, Carl, and you may feel being untruthful has worked for you in the past, but trying to cover one lie with another is catching up with you.

Now if you had stated that LRL PROPONENT, BASHER'S can do none of this, you would have been closer to the truth. Dell

Mr Dell we all know that told some BIG ONES

[Qiaozhi]

Technically, a magnetometer does not detect iron, rather it detects the magnetic field distortion caused by an iron target. And a metal detector does not detect metal, rather it detects the magnetic field distortions caused by the eddy currents that are induced by a primary magnetic field.

That said...

1. I can tell you exactly how a magnetometer or a metal detector works, down to the very physics involved.
2. I can use a magnetometer or a metal detector in a randomized double-blind test to objectively prove they work as I claim they will work.
3. I can tell you exactly how to build a magnetometer or a metal detector, that you can build for yourself, that you can test for yourself, and that you can use to independently verify everything I tell you about how they work.
4. I can provide examples of people who have used magnetometers and metal detectors to locate and retrieve all sorts of valuable objects, from individual items to caches to massive hoards of treasure. And lots of it, too.

LRL proponents can do none of this.

- Carl

Carl, is that expressed as your personal opinon, or are you stating this as a fact? Please clarify.

It is a fact.

Personal opinion is something reserved for dowsing and LRL users. In other words - subjective rather than objective measurement.
LRL proponents have no facts to present. Otherwise they could be $20,000 richer.

[J_Player]

Dell Rides Again...

Technically, a magnetometer does not detect iron, rather it detects the magnetic field distortion caused by an iron target. And a metal detector does not detect metal, rather it detects the magnetic field distortions caused by the eddy currents that are induced by a primary magnetic field.

Technically, a magnetometer does not detect iron, rather it detects the magnetic field distortion caused by an iron target. And a metal detector does not detect metal, rather it detects the magnetic field distortions caused by the eddy currents that are induced by a primary magnetic field.

That said...

1. I can tell you exactly how a magnetometer or a metal detector works, down to the very physics involved.
2. I can use a magnetometer or a metal detector in a randomized double-blind test to objectively prove they work as I claim they will work.
3. I can tell you exactly how to build a magnetometer or a metal detector, that you can build for yourself, that you can test for yourself, and that you can use to independently verify everything I tell you about how they work.
4. I can provide examples of people who have used magnetometers and metal detectors to locate and retrieve all sorts of valuable objects, from individual items to caches to massive hoards of treasure. And lots of it, too.

LRL proponents can do none of this.


- Carl
-----------------------------------------
Originally Posted by Dell Winders
Carl, is that expressed as your personal opinon, or are you stating this as a fact? Please clarify.

And of course, "LRL proponnents can do none of this" is blatenly untrue. There you go Carl, two lies from you in two weeks. Last week on TNET, you said MFD was a Dowsing Rod Scam. This is your Scam, Carl, and you may feel being untruthful has worked for you in the past, but trying to cover one lie with another is catching up with you.

Well Dell, It is getting hard to believe you this time. You are calling people names that you can't substantiate. Let's take a look at proof:

Carl:
1. Has shown us exactly how a magnetometer and a metal detector works, down to the very physics involved in the articles he published on this website.
2. Is able to pass a double blind test with a metal detector or a magnetometer just as he claims.
3. Has told us exactly how to build a magnetometer and a metal detector many times in his articles, that many of us have build for ourselves, tested for ourselves, and have used to independently verify everything he told us about how they work.
4. Can provide examples of people who have used magnetometers and metal detectors to locate and retrieve all sorts of valuable objects, from individual items to caches to massive hoards of treasure. And lots of it, too.

It seems like Carl is telling the truth. The proof is right here on this website, and with the hundreds of people who have built and used the detectors and magnetometers published on this website.

So what can Dell do?
Dell sells LRLs that are depicted on his web page to find hidden dollar bills in a home as well as other LRLs which he says are able to locate signals from treasure.

1. Can Dell tell us exactly how to use these devices? His reply was "Not from afar". Apparently you can only get instructions bu visiting him personally, or by making a telephone call to him. Dell has not published information telling how these LRLs work, down to the very physics involved.
2. Can Dell pass a double blind test with an LRL? Apparently not. He failed when he tried to pass the Randi test, then complained that the test was not fair, and there is a video that proves he did not fail. However, he can't produce this video. Not only did he fail the randomized test, he refused to take part in any future double blind test with his LRLs.
3. Can Dell tell us exactly how to build an LRL, that we can build for ourselves, that we can test for ourselves, and that we can use to independently verify everything he tells us about how they work? I doubt it. Not the same LRLs that he sells. I don't think even Dell knows how to build his LRLs, as evidenced by his posts where he claims he has no clue what the speaker coil in a pot housing was for in one of his LRLs.
4. Can Dell provide examples of people who have used LRLs to locate and retrieve all sorts of valuable objects, from individual items to caches to massive hoards of treasure. And lots of it, too? Maybe. I have heard stories of great treasures coming from Dell. Somehow, I didn't see a strong connection to LRLs and recovered treasure in these stories, but there may be some. In fact I have read many posts made by people who say his LRLs don't work at all.

So let's tally the score:
Carl = 4 out of 4
Dell = maybe 1 out of 4.

So who is full of BS, Dell?

Best wishes,
J_P

[Carl-NC]

Back in the past, LRLs were said to be able to detect gold that had not been buried for a long time but it seems more recently that they only detect longtime buried gold items.
Is this like playing a card card where the rules change in the process on the game?

At one time, the LRLs on Fitzgerald's web site included the statement, "Finds fresh targets too!" Then I came along with my LRL challenge; that statement quickly vanished, and suddenly his LRLs could only find long-time buried targets. Is that knee-slapping funny or what?

- Carl

[Carl-NC]

Last week on TNET, you said MFD was a Dowsing Rod Scam.

Very true. MFD is a dowsing rod scam. It doesn't work. Never did.

I will gladly meet with you, and do an objective test that proves this. Unless, like Fitzgerald, your MFD suddenly only locates long-time buried gold. BTW, sunspot activity is virtually non-existent right now, so that alibi is gone. In fact, 2008 should have been a banner year for MFD recoveries. Let's take a look at some of those recovered treasures... [crickets chirping].

So, I'm willing to meet you to back up what I say. Are you willing to meet me to back up what you say?

- Carl

[Dell Winders]

Very true. MFD is a dowsing rod scam. It doesn't work. Never did.

That of course, is a blatant lie, and you are the liar.

Unless, like Fitzgerald, your MFD suddenly only locates long-time buried gold.

Nope, you have never heard me say that, have you? You are baiting.

I'm sure you have heard me state that Frequency Discrimination, has physical limitations that must recognized , and understood to obtain the best results? And that there has been a lot mis- information, misleading advertising, and false claims about these products that some in this industry promote to be competitive with rip-off prices to warrant their advertising claims.

You can't honestly compare me with those who use unscrupulous marketing ploys.

I will gladly meet with you, and do an objective test that proves this.

Now that is knee slapping funny. The egotistical, prejudicial, Randi loving skeptic, Carl Morland, thinks he can create an "objective" test for LRL, or Frequency Discrimination? Who are you trying to fool today?

As I have said before, you are one of the very few in the world that I have no interest in meeting. You have betrayed my trust more than once in the past.

But I have offered my services to you numbers of times as a knowledgeable field operator of any LRL, MFD, or device,you wish to conduct legitimate Scientific testing on, for a fee. Apparently, you are not interested in approaching these concepts from legitimate scientific studies to learn the truth of how wrong you are. Invest your $25,000 in legitimate field research, then you will be qualified to intelligently discuss the subject of LRL, Frequency Discrimination, and the related physics of Earth Science, in which they operate.

Originally Posted by Carl-NC
Technically, a magnetometer does not detect iron, rather it detects the magnetic field distortion caused by an iron target. And a metal detector does not detect metal, rather it detects the magnetic field distortions caused by the eddy currents that are induced by a primary magnetic field.

You mention a Primary Magnetic field. This implies secondary magnetic Fields.

How many secondary Magnetic fields are there? What is their purpose? What type of Magnetic fields are they? And how are you measuring them to know their realativity to a primary field? Dell

[Theseus]

Dell said to Carl:

Invest your $25,000 in legitimate field research, then you will be qualified to intelligently discuss the subject of LRL, Frequency Discrimination, and the related physics of Earth Science, in which they operate.

Oh Mighty BSer Himself Has Spoken From Up On The Mountain!

Why would anyone in their right mind invest so much as 25 cents to learn about the pseudo scientific subjects of LRL, MFD and Frequency Discrimination? None of those things are real, they all relate to subjectively observing a series of random events, and those that talk about them as if they were real science, can arrive at any conclusion that best fits their own agenda (ie. marketing scheme).

.................and you have.

Simple truths about nature can't choose to hide from the skeptical minds and be seen by the gullible at the same time.

[Dell Winders]

#55
Today, 04:23 PM

Theseus
Senior Member

Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Well above sea level
Posts: 163

Dell said to Carl:
Quote:
Invest your $25,000 in legitimate field research, then you will be qualified to intelligently discuss the subject of LRL, Frequency Discrimination, and the related physics of Earth Science, in which they operate.
Oh Mighty BSer Himself Has Spoken From Up On The Mountain!

Why would anyone in their right mind invest so much as 25 cents to learn about the pseudo scientific subjects of LRL, MFD and Frequency Discrimination? None of those things are real, they all relate to subjectively observing a series of random events, and those that talk about them as if they were real science, can arrive at any conclusion that best fits their own agenda (ie. marketing scheme).

.................and you have.

Simple truths about nature can't choose to hide from the skeptical minds and be seen by the gullible at the same time.
__________________
The Wallet-Miner's Creed
Why bother with the truth, when it doesn't suit the argument?

This is the rationale you get when an Idiot trys tp speak for Carl. Dell

[Carl-NC]

That of course, is a blatant lie, and you are the liar.

As usual, I'm willing to back up what I say, and you are not. And, as usual, you stoop to name-calling. This is where we've been for years, eh?

Nope, you have never heard me say that, have you? You are baiting.

Not specifically, but there's always an alibi. Since solar interference is out this year, I figured you needed another alibi. Just trying to help!

I'm sure you have heard me state that Frequency Discrimination, has physical limitations that must recognized , and understood to obtain the best results?

Metal detectors and magnetometers have physical limitations that should be understood to obtain the best results. But I can still demonstrate one, even in a randomized blind test, and objectively prove it will do what I claim it will do, to anyone, anywhere, any time. I can show how they work. I can demonstrate the very physics behind their operation. I can show people how to design and build them. I don't need alibis, because They Really Work.

And that there has been a lot mis- information, misleading advertising, and false claims about these products that some in this industry promote to be competitive with rip-off prices to warrant their advertising claims.

You can't honestly compare me with those who use unscrupulous marketing ploys.

Have you ever made dishonest claims about your products? Have you ever represented your products, even implicitly, as having any ability to locate, or assist in the location of, buried treasure?

Yes, I already know that you will either deny all evidence, or blame someone else. It's always someone else's fault. There's always an alibi.

The egotistical, prejudicial, Randi loving skeptic, Carl Morland, thinks he can create an "objective" test for LRL, or Frequency Discrimination?

As I've said before, I'll let YOU design an objective test for your own equipment.

But I have offered my services to you numbers of times as a knowledgeable field operator of any LRL, MFD, or device,you wish to conduct legitimate Scientific testing on, for a fee. Apparently, you are not interested in approaching these concepts from legitimate scientific studies to learn the truth of how wrong you are.

A scientific test is only legitimate if I pay you a fee? After all these years, why not finally prove ol' Carl wrong? Put me in my place. Embarrass the heck outta me. The real reason has nothing to do with a fee, that is just another alibi. There's always an alibi!

You mention a Primary Magnetic field. This implies secondary magnetic Fields.

How many secondary Magnetic fields are there? What is their purpose? What type of Magnetic fields are they? And how are you measuring them to know their realativity to a primary field?

For what? A metal detector? Read my article on Induction Basics, it explains all this. And if you want to discuss further I'll gladly do so, no alibis needed.

- Carl

[Theseus]

This is the rationale you get when an Idiot trys tp speak for Carl. Dell

I speak for myself; guess I must've missed where this thread is restricted to only you and Carl.

Besides, I'm only following your lead. Wasn't it just a day or two ago that I was trading remarks with one Tim Williams, and you butted in and tried to come to his rescue? Right after that he ducked out, and left you holding the bag; guess it got too warm for him.

Incidentally, trys is spelled t-r-i-e-s. Maybe if your blood pressure wasn't quite so high when you post your replies you could spell better. Take a chill pill.

BTW, do you ever make a posting where you don't call people names? When you do that, does that somehow make you feel superior?

[Dell Winders]

Originally Posted by Dell Winders
That of course, is a blatant lie, and you are the liar.

As usual, I'm willing to back up what I say, and you are not. And, as usual, you stoop to name-calling. This is where we've been for years, eh?

REALITY CHECK:. It was you, Carl Morland, that originally came on to the internet publicly attacking me, Dell Winders, with untruthful inferences, ineuendo, and accusations that I am a Scam artist, selling fraudulent products, in order to make a name for your self with the Skeptic organization. NOT, the other way around. It appears there was a peer recognization bounty to the first who defamed me, and put me out of business. An ambitious Carl, worked eagerly, spoke untruthfully about me, created publicity gimmicks, and became a hypocrite, for the attention of his peers,.and the public. Now, even your beloved Randi, has given me up as a lost cause, and you are stuck in the agenda with few supporters, and little recourse.

Yet, I am still here. I am still in bussiness at the age of 75 and excellent feed back from my customers. Honesty and integrity prevails.

Nope, you have never heard me say that, have you? You are baiting.

Not specifically, but there's always an alibi. Since solar interference is out this year, I figured you needed another alibi. Just trying to help!

That's a rather ridiculous rationale from a person who claims Scientific and knowledge of physics.

I'm sure you have heard me state that Frequency Discrimination, has physical limitations that must recognized , and understood to obtain the best results?

Metal detectors and magnetometers have physical limitations that should be understood to obtain the best results. But I can still demonstrate one, even in a randomized blind test, and objectively prove it will do what I claim it will do, to anyone, anywhere, any time. I can show how they work. I can demonstrate the very physics behind their operation. I can show people how to design and build them. I don't need alibis, because They Really Work.

Me too, by referencing the same sources as you. Big deal!

[quote}
And that there has been a lot mis- information, misleading advertising, and false claims about these products that some in this industry promote to be competitive with rip-off prices to warrant their advertising claims.

You can't honestly compare me with those who use unscrupulous marketing ploys.[/quote]

Have you ever made dishonest claims about your products? Not that I know of, but you certainly have. Have you ever represented your products, even implicitly, as having any ability to locate, or assist in the location of, buried treasure? Of course. It's a known fact.

Yes, I already know that you will either deny all evidence, or blame someone else. It's always someone else's fault. There's always an alibi.

What Evidence? What alibi? What to heck are you talking about?

[quote]
The egotistical, prejudicial, Randi loving skeptic, Carl Morland, thinks he can create an "objective" test for LRL, or Frequency Discrimination? [/quote

As I've said before, I'll let YOU design an objective test for your own equipment.

Thanks! Been there, done that hundreds of times over the past 28 years. Blind tests, double blind tests, Thousands of field tests, comparison tests, etc, etc, with all types of Geophysical products. I have been a Professional Treasure hunter/ Salvor, for 35 years, or more. How long has Carl Morland, been a Professional Treasure Hunter/Salvor?

But I have offered my services to you numbers of times as a knowledgeable field operator of any LRL, MFD, or device,you wish to conduct legitimate Scientific testing on, for a fee. Apparently, you are not interested in approaching these concepts from legitimate scientific studies to learn the truth of how wrong you are.

A scientific test is only legitimate if I pay you a fee? Not True! After all these years, why not finally prove ol' Carl wrong? I really don't care if you are wrong. It's already obvious to me, and those who have field experience and success with my products, but certainly, you have legal reasons to care if you are wrong. Put me in my place. I don't know where your place is? Embarrass the heck outta me. You do an excellent job of doing that for yourself. You don't need my help. The real reason has nothing to do with a fee, that is just another alibi. There's always an alibi! What an imagination! Of course it's the money. That's the only way I would offer you my services.

You mention a Primary Magnetic field. This implies secondary magnetic Fields.

How many secondary Magnetic fields are there? What is their purpose? What type of Magnetic fields are they? And how are you measuring them to know their realativity to a primary field?

For what? A metal detector? For a metal detector, or any device that supports the use of magnetic induction. Read my article on Induction Basics, it explains all this. And if you want to discuss further I'll gladly do so, no alibis needed. I read your your article, and apparently the information is copied from other sources. It didn't answer my questions. Do I need to give you time to look for other sources to answer those questions? Have you ever developed a product of your own concept totally without depending on other sources for your information? Dell

[J_Player]

You mention a Primary Magnetic field. This implies secondary magnetic Fields.

How many secondary Magnetic fields are there? What is their purpose? What type of Magnetic fields are they? And how are you measuring them to know their realativity to a primary field?

... It didn't answer my questions. Do I need to give you time to look for other sources to answer those questions?

Ummm... Dell,
This is real basic stuff. Maybe Carl didn't answer your questions because the answers are already in his article. But if you must have an answer in a post rather than reading the article, I can give some answers that would satisfy most of the readers of this forum:

In reference to a metal detector:
1. How many secondary magnetic fields are there? There are as many as are induced by the primary field. This would depend on how many objects capable of producing eddy currents are in range of the primary field.
2. What is their purpose? They have no intrinsic purpose. They are a natural phenomenon of the physics of magnetism and electricity when a primary magnetic field fluctuates in range of an object capable of producing eddy currents. However, a metal detector exploits the presence of these secondary fields to locate the objects that send out the secondary fields.
3. What type of magnetic fields are they? I suppose they are the type that have magnetic properties generated by an electric current. What types do I have to choose from?
4. How are you measuring them to know their realativity to a primary field? This is a bit of a confusing question. I presume you mean "How are you measuring the secondary magnetic fields to know their relative distance from a primary field? Actually there are a number of methods used by different kinds of metal detectors. In Carl's Hammerhead design, He shuts off the primary field, then waits for the secondary field to interact with the search coil and produce an electrical impulse that is amplified in the electronics of the detector. This all happens very fast, and repeats itself often enough that you can actually connect an amplifier and speaker to hear the signal become stronger as you approach the object providing eddy currents. Or you can connect a circuit that indicates the object's field by a meter, or lights or any other method you choose. This is the beauty of Carl's Hammerhead design. He stayed away from the extreme high tech methods and parts, and allowed many options so a novice hobbyist could build it and adjust it for simple metal detecting, or by tweaking the controls and adding options, he can produce a very high-end metal detector.

But you will find many other metal detector projects on this website that don't use this method at all. Many send out an alternating primary magnetic field that interacts with the secondary fields in ways that cause the frequency of the alternating primary field to vary. Other detectors use different schemes to detect the secondary field when sending out an alternating primary field. These are all posted on this website, and are fairly well documented.

The idea that Carl needs to copy his ideas from someone else is ludricous. If you read his instructions for the Hammerhead project, you will see it is pretty obvious that nobody could write those instructions except the designer of the circuitry... namely Carl Moreland. The hammerhead has a relatively easy to understand set of instructions. I believe Carl kept it this way so novice hobbyists could easily understand the basics and the reasons for building the circuits in the manner he designed, as well as understanding what optional features they could incorporate. But if you read some of Carl's posts in the more technical forums on this site, you will quickly come to realize he is quite brilliant in electronics, and a master of his trade.

I hear a lot of rhetoric and name-calling coming from the Dell Winders trailer, But I don't see anything substantial to support anything you say. You call anyone who thinks you are full of BS names, and even threaten to sue them if they won't take their words back. Yet the things people are complaining about are centered around the fact that your posts are full of rhetoric and name-calling as well as your statements that you back up all your products .... with nothing to substantiate anything you say. In other words... a bunch of hot air.

For example, when will you demonstrate your X-Scan finding hidden dollar bills in a house like it is depicted to do on your web page?
When can we see the published results of all the double-blind tests you claim you performed with your LRLs?
When will you show us the proof that Randi lied about you failing his LRL test, or take the retest that he offered?

Best wishes,
J_P