signal from gold

[Steve in MS]

LRL stands for long range locators?
Just for discussion, do LRLs give a stronger response the closer it gets to a
gold object?
If this is true then if one passes a gold object very close to an LRL then it should be observable to anyone and would therefore prove the effectiveness of the device, correct?
If the above is not true, how would one ever know if an LRL is working or not
?

[Carl-NC]

Dell,

This "debate" is same ol' same ol'. The bottom line is, I am willing to back up everything I say about LRLs, and you are not. LRLs are junk; they simply don't work. Until you are willing to meet with me and prove me wrong, further debate is pointless.

However, I will gladly answer any questions you have on induction & magnetic fields.

- Carl

[hung]

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?

I usually don't hang out often in this forum anymore simply because besides the fact I'm busy with my own projects,it's a waste of time talking about LRLs with 'typos' everybody knows very well here who they are, either having a hidden agenda, being hungry for a working LRL due to inescrupulous comercial interests or being as ignorant and blind as a rhino towards the LRL subject.

Dell's, statement above should be enough to end for good discussions and arguings like the ones in this thread with LRL 'rookies and pretenders who pose stating that 'physics prove LRLs don't work'...
Ha,ha,ha.

If people like Carl knew only 20% of the physics they think they know, they would probably be here stating the opposite or at least that they can't explain how it works. But NEVER SAYING IT DOES NOT WORK.

Again, comparing Dell's long time field experieces, knowledge about several devices he used, and data he collected along all this time against some 'new born babies' in this forum who still smells fresh s**t regarding LRL subject and also against Carl who had never walked 10 feet outside home with the FG80 in his hands for a field research and conducts his tests employing an 'electric dog fence'... it's just plain ridiculous.

So as I said in the begining, the above quote from Dell should end this non sense arguing for good. It should. But probably it won't.

The m**r*ns of the hour won't let it.

[Qiaozhi]

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.

"lost cause" - you said it, not us!

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

So many wasted years.....

That's a rather ridiculous rationale from a person who claims Scientific and knowledge of physics.
Me too, by referencing the same sources as you. Big deal!
What Evidence? What alibi? What to heck are you talking about?

You must secretly derive pleasure from visiting this forum, in a masochistic sort of way. Why else would you come here?
Strangely, this always seems to happen just before Christmas. You come here making accusations, name calling, and threatening to sue, before eventually stating that you'll never return here again ... only to come back later for another bashing.

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?

So which double-blind tests did you actually pass successfully? Can you provide any evidence? (Hmmm.... just more crickets chirping).

I usually don't hang out often in this forum anymore simply because besides the fact I'm busy with my own projects,it's a waste of time talking about LRLs with 'typos'...

But (like Dell) you still do come back. Why is that? Are you another LRL masochist?

Dell's, statement above should be enough to end for good discussions and arguings like the ones in this thread with LRL 'rookies and pretenders who pose stating that 'physics prove LRLs don't work'...

Maybe it's good enough for you, but to the rest of us it's just more pseudo-scientific claptrap.

The bottom line is, I am willing to back up everything I say about LRLs, and you are not. LRLs are junk; they simply don't work.

Carls' statement above should be enough to end for good discussions and arguments like the one's in this thread. ----- Hang on ----- that's sound familiar! Must be deja vu.

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

[Clondike Clad]

learn

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.



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.



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.

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?

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?



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.



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

OK DELL WHY IS IT YOU CAN'T HELP SOMEONE USE AN LRL ,I ALSO HAVE ONE FROM CARLS WEBSITE ,BUT CAN'T GET IT TO WORK.
NO PROOF AND YES YOU ARE MORE LIKE A SNAKE OIL MAN TO MANY PEOPLE.

SHOW PROOF,CARL DID SHOW PROOF,PROOF AND MORE PROOF.
WHAT CAN YOU SHOW BUT TALKING CHIT TO PEOPLE.

[Theseus]

I usually don't hang out often in this forum anymore simply because besides the fact I'm busy with my own projects,it's a waste of time talking about LRLs with 'typos' everybody knows very well here who they are, either having a hidden agenda, being hungry for a working LRL due to inescrupulous comercial interests or being as ignorant and blind as a rhino towards the LRL subject.

So why do you drop in at all? Are you selling something? ...and like Dell, use the dowsing and LRL forums to keep his name and his products in the face of those gullible and technically-challenged folks who might stop by here.

Dell's, statement above should be enough to end for good discussions and arguings like the ones in this thread...

End the discussion? How ludicrous! Dell has had literally thousands of opportunities to offer up proof of his pseudo science claims and paint roller handle locators, and yet to this very day he has not been able to come up with a shred of substantiated evidence. But forget about coming up with the evidence, that is obviously not going to happen.

A bigger problem is the fact that both Carl and Randi still have their Challenge Money. Taking their money would not involve revealing any "LRL secrets" (as you claim to have) and it would not require you or Dell to explain how your contraptions work. Yet Carl and Randi have still got their money. I know why Dell won't try for the Challenge Money, but what is your excuse?

[J_Player]

Dell,

This "debate" is same ol' same ol'. The bottom line is, I am willing to back up everything I say about LRLs, and you are not.

Originally Posted by Qiaozhi
You must secretly derive pleasure from visiting this forum, in a masochistic sort of way. Why else would you come here?

... But (like Dell) you still do come back. Why is that? Are you another LRL masochist?

Originally Posted by Theseus
So why do you drop in at all? Are you selling something?

Sure this debate is the same ol' same ol'.
Dell is not here to prove he is right or demonstrate any of his LRLs working. Neither is hung. They are here to try to use their rhetoric and name-calling to defame anyone who questions the baseless nature of their extraordinary claims. Their general technique is to wait until someone concludes they are reading BS that has no foundation, rather than facts that can be demonstrated repeatedly, and wait for these persons to post that they think Dell or hung is fullo BS, and their alleged long range locators don't work. Then they use name-calling, threats, demands and defamation to attempt to make these people change their mind and agree that they have really produced some extraordinary device for locating treasure.

But why defame people who question their baseless claims? In Dell's case, It appears he thinks Carl has caused havoc with his LRL sales business, and he has stated he is in a financial condition that leaves him dependent on a meager social security income and whatever supplemental LRL profits he can accumulate by assembling his LRLs. Does this sound likely? Is it possible that one electronic engineer can single-handedly put an LRL manufacturer out of business, or even make a dent in the LRL business? It seems to me that every metal detector shop I have contacted except Kellyco tells me flat out that LRLs don't work, and buy at your own risk. I also hear this same opinion from every metal detectorist I have come into contact with. I don't think any of these people ever heard of Carl except maybe Kellyco. So I must conclude that if Dell is destitute, it cannot be due to Carl's influence, but from poor business administration methods. Otherwise, Why is he not doing well like the other LRL manufacturers? After all, there is a sucker born every minute.

I believe the real reason Dell calls names and tries to defame people is because he knows he cannot demonstrate any of his LRLs working, And Carl actually took some of his machines apart to show what they really are. It appears that Dell was embarrassed by the proof that his LRLs don't work, and unable to prove Carl wrong, so he attacks with name-calling and baseless rhetoric.

But why is hung posting here when he ends up looking like a general idiot every time he comes around? He has nothing to sell (for money). So what does he want us to buy? Could it be he wants us to buy into the idea that he is a very knowledgeable expert who knows even more than the brilliant engineers who post in this forum? Is he trying to convince us that he has built a secret treasure machine that finds treasures from miles away? Are we reading posts from the new "Nicola Tesla" of the treasure hunting industry, and too stupid to realize it?


Hahahahhahahahahaaaaa.... I will believe this after I first become convinced that Santa Clause comes down the chimney every year with lots of free presents. It sure seems to me that hung is posting here to try to convince someone in this world that he is and important accomplished builder of treasure equipment, and his ideas are very important. This makes me wonder if nobody listens to him in his home town. Oh well, I never paid much attention to his theories, except for their humor value.

Although their reasons appear to be different, the methods of hung and Dell seem to be similar, with the common theme of making extraordinary claims and nothing to back up what they are saying except empty words.

Best wishes,
J_P

[Clondike Clad]

sorry to all Snake oilmen

All I wanted was a working LRL.
So I post and post.
I build some circuits and talked with others.
I now know if I keep asking ...someone will talk about the good the bad and the snakeoil of LRL.
So until someone or I takes carls money.....LRRRRRRL are just that SNAKEOIL.
NOW DELL YOU NEED TO POST PROOF AND THIS YOU CAN'T DO.

HUNG IF YOU DO HAVE A WORKING UNIT SHOW US A SIMPLE CIRCUIT THAT WILL GIVE PROOF.
THA IS ALL I AM ASKING.
NOW AS FOR WHAT CARL SAID.....HE HAS PROOF AND WE CAN MAKE HIS CIRCUITS AND YES ANYONE CAN MAKE THEM WORK...THAT IS PROOF.
CARL'S LRL CIRCUITS DIDNOT WORK,BUT CARL SAID THE CIRCUITS WILL NOT WORK........PROOF.
SO UNTIL WE HAVE PROOF IT IS ALL TALK.
I WAS ON THE MOON BUT I WON'T TELL YA HOW I GOT TO THE MOON.

[Carl-NC]

Dell's, statement above should be enough to end for good discussions and arguings like the ones in this thread with LRL 'rookies and pretenders who pose stating that 'physics prove LRLs don't work'...
Ha,ha,ha.

Hung, I believe you are right, that Dell's 35 years as a "Professional Treasure Salvor" should count for something in the debate over LRLs. We should therefore look at all the treasure recoveries Dell has made with LRLs:
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Er, OK, maybe that's not such a good idea. Despite 35 years as a "Professional Treasure Salvor" I guess there's not much to show for his use of LRLs, except for all those "finds" that never seemed to have gotten dug up for one reason or another. But if you include all those unrecovered treasures, Dell's LRLs have an impressive record indeed! Wow!

In any case, I have personally bought, tested, and dissected practically every type of LRL being peddled. Not only do they not work, but they are often laughably obvious frauds such as the Ranger-Tell Examiner, which you actually believe is something other than a complete joke! That says a lot, and it's not good. Not good at all.

Again, all the LRLs I'm aware of are total junk; they do not work, at all. And, unlike LRL proponents, I'm willing to back up what I say about them.

- Carl

[Steve in MS]

Dell's, statement above should be enough to end for good discussions and arguings like the ones in this thread....
Again, comparing Dell's long time field experieces, knowledge about several devices he used, and data he collected along all this time....

We really don't care what Dell's statements are or yours
or what LRL devices that some have that are not available to the public
and are supposed to be so great.
Since this is a public forum we could care less about such secret devices.
Since there is no evidence that LRLs work we just plain don't believe you or Dell
.

[hung]

Could it be he wants us to buy into the idea that he is a very knowledgeable expert who knows even more than the brilliant engineers who post in this forum?

I regret to inform that you are completely mistaken on this. If I for some reason, led you or others to believe that my knowledge is superior than anyone else's here, I deeply excuse myself. This was never my intention.
Scientific knowledge and moral knowledge are the most valuable treasures of all. I learn everyday and know how much insignificant the amount of data I have represents compared to what is out there to be learned.

But if you carefully analyze your sentence against me, you will find that it can be very well applied to your 'brilliant engineers' here who are the ones who really pose as 'know it all' typos thinking they are sure about issues which they simply don't understand.
And worst, thinking there's nothing to be learned anymore. Their egos would never allow them to stand correct if necessary.
This contradicts all scientific lines of thought when they pre judge as fact what they don't compreehend. Dign of the middle ages.

Also, the 'brilliant engineers' here could not make the PD to work.

Is he trying to convince us that he has built a secret treasure machine that finds treasures from miles away?

There's nothing secret on this as all technology is already available.
You people here think that long range detection is like a time machine top secret technology. You people are completely lost on it.
Simplicity is the beauty of nature.

[hung]

In any case, I have personally bought, tested, and dissected practically every type of LRL being peddled. Not only do they not work, but they are often laughably obvious frauds such as the Ranger-Tell Examiner, which you actually believe is something other than a complete joke! That says a lot, and it's not good. Not good at all.

You dissected them and still were not able to comprehend what it was all about.

Fact 1: Many people can't make a particular LRL to work and bash it.
But then there's fact 2: Also many people DO MAKE this particular LRL work and are happy and busy in the field. A few of them come to a forum once in a while to release their experience.

Regarding the RT, the way it's presently built is not the most adequate and it has flaws, but it works. I know for a fact of some persons who suceeded with them finding treasures and gold in mines. This is a fact.
So I respect them. You should also do this and not come here saying that 'it's laughable' just because you think it is.

Respect is a good virtue. Take good care of it.

[Qiaozhi]

And worst, thinking there's nothing to be learned anymore. Their egos would never allow them to stand correct if necessary.
This contradicts all scientific lines of thought when they pre judge as fact what they don't compreehend. Dign of the middle ages.

It is statements like this that expose your total lack of understanding. The Geotech forums demonstrate very well that its members have a thirst for knowledge, and certainly do not believe there is nothing left to learn

Also, the 'brilliant engineers' here could not make the PD to work.

I wonder why?
Could it be that "what doesn't work, cannot be made to work!".

There's nothing secret on this as all technology is already available.
You people here think that long range detection is like a time machine top secret technology. You people are completely lost on it.
Simplicity is the beauty of nature.

That's funny!

You dissected them and still were not able to comprehend what it was all about.

On the contrary, it is immediately obvious "what is was all about". A combination of self-delusion, selective memory, and often blatant fraud.

Regarding the RT, the way it's presently built is not the most adequate and it has flaws, but it works. I know for a fact of some persons who suceeded with them finding treasures and gold in mines. This is a fact.

This is exactly why your credibility is close to absolute zero.

[Theseus]

...Regarding the RT, the way it's presently built is not the most adequate and it has flaws....

Flawed? Certainly it's overpriced, but it actually does exactly what any dowsing rod is designed to do. IT REACTS PERFECTLY TO AN OPERATOR IDEOMOTOR RESPONSE AND THE PULL OF GRAVITY! What else was it supposed to do?

Oh......... did you think the stick-on calculator was doing something beneficial towards locating targets? Sorry to inform you, but the calculator merely adds weight to the swinging mass atop the swivel handle.

In truth, the RT Examiner will find just as many gold mines as an L-shaped bent piece of wire. Remember, if you dig enough holes, eventually one of them will yield what the operator can imagine is a viable target.

[J_Player]

...But if you carefully analyze your sentence against me, you will find that it can be very well applied to your 'brilliant engineers' here who are the ones who really pose as 'know it all' typos thinking they are sure about issues which they simply don't understand.
And worst, thinking there's nothing to be learned anymore. Their egos would never allow them to stand correct if necessary.

There's nothing secret on this as all technology is already available.
You people here think that long range detection is like a time machine top secret technology. You people are completely lost on it.

Oh really?
Isn't this the secret LRL that you made after modifying a Ranger Tell, and then told us that you cannot divulge what changes you made? Isn't it the same secret LRL that you said would never be allowed to be used by anyone except your "Team"? As I recall it was your secret invention that was inspired by the Ranger Tell.

So we simply don't understand the working of a Ranger Tell? If a Ranger Tell does not work by fooling idiots into believing that a calculator stuck to an antenna finds treasure, then I guess I don't understand, and I think there's nothing to be learned any more from the Ranger Tell. But I have already learned what the LRL proponent's answer is to how the Ranger tell works by reading the posts of someone who believes the Ranger Tell finds treasure, and is so valuable that any modified versions must be kept a secret....


From:

http://thunting.com/geotech/forums/showpost.php?p=63150&postcount=48

http://thunting.com/geotech/forums/showpost.php?p=63151&postcount=49

http://thunting.com/geotech/forums/s...3&postcount=81

Although I cannot divulge what I changed in the examiner original circuit, I must say that the original version should work ok.

My LRL system has nothing to do with the examiner itself. When I said it ‘was the basis’ of my system, I meant that upon seing the mod I did working, I came to know that the principle was correct to a more compllex aproach which now we are materializing. It’s a complex electronic system/device. As an analogy, it’s like a pocket radio and radar. The principle is the same, but they are totally different animals.

...First and most important.

If you don't have any knowledge in the ECE theory and metaphysics, as you show you don't, then there's not what discuss. It will be like discussing quantum physics using using obsolete models or discussing the general theory of relativity from a static perspective.

You understand what I'm saying Carl?
First of all the static magnetic field is just the field that it's not dependent of time. Electricity and magnetism are independent phenomena as long as charges and current are static, but not that it behaves as the classical static magnetic field.

The B(3) spin field is the magnetic flux density generated by the spin
connection of a space-time with torsion. It signals the fact that
electrodynamics is a sector of a generally covariant unified field theory.
This magnetic flux density is defined by:
F = d ^ A + omega ^ A



... In Maxwell Heaviside field theory:

F = d ^ A

Omega is missing , so this is not consistent part of general relativity because it does not define a B(3) field and is Lorentz covariant only, not geneally covariant. In ECE theory the B(3) field is part of the omega ^ A term and is observed experimenetally in many ways, because the electromagnetic phase is defined by B(3). This is also observed in the magnetization of matter by an electromagnetic field (the inverse Faraday effect).

Without the B(3) field there can be no generally covariant unified field theory as required by the fundamental philosophy of relativity.

This is an example how some aspects cannot be viewed through the standard model. And also blocks the complete understanding of what the examiner concept might be dealing with. Now, I'm not stating the examiner is a complex device, etc. Far from that. I even seriously doubt its inventor had all of this in mind when he developed.
The examiner is not a finished project in my view but it deals with a great concept which has a long road ahead.



....Although the mod I did to the examiner works, it does not make use of all the functions the calculator is able to produce according to RT, such as estimates on depth, shape, etc.
Well, actually my mod version only works on gold and I cannot use the functions above. But it works fine. Totally electronic without me having to worry to not move my wrist wrong anymore.

I believe that according to the concept envisioned by the inventor, the functions claimed for the calculator, might be quite possible and logical, although I still have not come to an explanation on how this happens.

In my view, the calculator produces two magnetic fields, a static one, since it employs a dc battery and a dynamic (AC), due to its oscilator, which interact. Both in its turn, interact with the user charges that produce the HEF (human electromagnetic field) and this result use the own earth's field as a carrier.

I believe (this is a personal view) our own magnetic field acts as a resonance amplifier for the field generated by both calculator and antenna circuit. It's inteteresting to see diodes present I think in all versions.

I am fascinated by things I can't comprehend and I pursue the explanation until I can find it. It's not always I'm sucessful, but the examiner's case is a teasing one. Although our system was based on its ideas and concepts, specially after my mod working fine, apart from that, it has nothing else similar to the examiner itself as our system is a much more complex and sensitive all electronic apparatus.

Anyway, I will talk about the examiner with Myron Evans and see what he thinks and how ECE can explain the interaction of all those fields. I'm sure it does when it explains the true role of the static field, getting away from the standard Maxwell-Heaviside model which omits the spin resonance.
But what about interaction of the others? At what level does this happen? What about the math to back it up?
And this I've learned from our physicist when first starting our project. He used to say: 'if there was no math to back it up, I would not even bother to stand from my couch. Now that I confirmed this mathematically, give me a hand to stand up and let's go to the lab'.
Funny guy...

Now lemme see... The Ranger Tell sends out a static magnetic field because it has a DC battery, and a dynamic magnetic field from it's oscillator. But wait, it doesn't have an oscillator! ...Ooops I forgot the clock inside the calculator... The magnetic field it produces in addition to the magnetic field produced by the battery makes it a treasure machine!

So there is my choice... To believe all that with no substantial proof it ever found treasure, or believe it doesn't work. So what should I believe? Doh.

Best wishes,
J_P