One more to prove the concept

[Theseus]

So, those who believe in all those ideomotor thing, keep it to yourself. I will respect your opinion. I just ask that you respect mine and don't start a debate emitting pre-judgements as undisputed truth about a subject you don't completely understand yet. Maybe someday you will.

Oh yes, the Holier-Than-Thou Attitude is always a good approach when you don't really know what you are talking about, and have not a leg to stand on. And, if that fails to net you any ground, you can always go back to the "privileged information".... "it's a secret" gag.

Besides repeatedly trying those old gimmicks on this forum, when was the last time you actually applied those debate techniques; and were successful in winning someone over to your side? Let me guess, was it in a sandbox at elementary school recess?

Just a suggestion to aid you in your never-ending pursuit of furthering your education. Before trying to explain why a simple ideomotor response is not involved in the operation of the RT dowsing wand (and similar contraptions); perhaps it might be well to first apprise yourself of exactly how and what causes the ideomotor effect.

[joecoin]

Hung,

If someone had trouble being effective with a Ranger Tell (or any other similar LRL) and they received a heart transplant from someone who was highly successful with a Ranger Tell (or similar LRL), do you think that would help them be more succesful?

[Theseus]

Suppose we modify the Theseus test a little...
Why not mount the ranger tell to a non-metalic version of a tripod? Suppose a tripod were built with three wooden legs and a platform with three dowel holes on the bottom to accept the three legs. On the top, epoxy a wooden tube that the Ranger Tell handle will slide into. Be sure to cut a vertical slot along the length both sides of this tube so you can stretch rubber bands around it to clamp down tight against the Ranger Tell handle. Now we have the ranger tell mounted on a non-metallic tripod that can be leveled so that when the Ranger Tell is spun, it comes to a stop pointing random directions and does not favour any particular direction. The Ranger Tell should be mounted at the same elevation that it is normally held.

At this point, I would think it important that the operator stood in a position where he could hold the Ranger Tell in the same manner as if the tripod were not there. This would alleviate any concerns that his "EM field is not at the proper distance from the Ranger Tell. Now the testing is ready to begin. Press you favorite calculator buttons to get the gold frequency. While the operator is holding the Ranger Tell, his assistant can be moving gold objects across the field of view in the distance ahead. A fishing rod may be helpful to move gold jewelry across the field quickly. I suppose we should now see the Ranger Tell begin to swivel and to track the movement of the gold jewelry.

So do you think this could be a good test to see if hung's concept is correct?

Best Wishes,
J_P

Now I think we are getting somewhere... sort of. But what about the requirement stating... "the RT contraption must be charged by contact with the human operator" ??? (Or are we ignoring the contact requirement for now?)

[J_Player]

Now I think we are getting somewhere... sort of. But what about the requirement stating... "the RT contraption must be charged by contact with the human operator" ??? (Or are we ignoring the contact requirement for now?)

Of course we don't ignore that. The operator walks up to the side of the tripod and puts his right hand around the handle of the Ranger tell.... oops... there is a wooden tube around the handle... This means the tube must be modified so the operator can place his hand on the handle while the tripod still supports it and prevents it from tilting. We can simply shorten the wooden tube to make room to place your hand on the Ranger Tell handle above it. (also note this entire tripod assembly can be made from fiberglass as well as wood). See idea for test equipment below:

[Fred]

As to what makes the RT Examiner swing? That's an easy one. First an ideomotor response happens and then the operator tilts his hand ever so slightly, causing the RT dowsing rod to swing one way or another.

Ok, but Hung it the "enlightened" here, so i ask again, HUNG, WHAT MAKES THE THING TO SWING ??

1 - I own an all diode model. I have opened it as I said.

Hey, more than one diode then ??!!

[J_Player]

1 - I own an all diode model. I have opened it as I said.

Errr... can you show us a picture of the inside so we can see the diode soldered to the pot like you saw when you opened it?

Best wishes,
J_P

[UWLocator]

Of course we don't ignore that. The operator walks up to the side of the tripod and puts his right hand around the handle of the Ranger tell.... oops... there is a wooden tube around the handle... This means the tube must be modified so the operator can place his hand on the handle while the tripod still supports it and prevents it from tilting. We can simply shorten the wooden tube to make room to place your hand on the Ranger Tell handle above it. (also note this entire tripod assembly can be made from fiberglass as well as wood). See idea for test equipment below:

The only problem is that the operator can still influence the unit with that arrangement.

I would suggest that the operator should wear a blackout mask, like used in blackwater dive training, and ear muffs to minimize the chance of getting clues to the location of the target. Of course, if you put those two things on the operator and spin him around first, you would not need the stand.

Oh, but I guess spinning him around would upset his magnetic field.

[J_Player]

The only problem is that the operator can still influence the unit with that arrangement.

I would suggest that the operator should wear a blackout mask, like used in blackwater dive training, and ear muffs to minimize the chance of getting clues to the location of the target. Of course, if you put those two things on the operator and spin him around first, you would not need the stand.

Ahhhh... Not so...
This test is designed to use apparatus that makes it impossible for the Ranger Tell to tilt. Thus, the operator cannot cause the Ranger Tell to lean any direction by use of his muscle movements whether voluntary or involuntary.

What this means is if there is any ideamotor response happening, it's path is blocked from the Ranger Tell by the rigid tripod arrangement that prevents any motor movements from moving the Ranger Tell. The only signals coming from the operator will have to travel as hung describes "EM field" and through the operator's "body charge" that enters through his hand touching the handle. The purpose of the test is to see if energy and/or signals from the operators body charge can cause the Ranger Tell to track in the direction of jewelry. We don't really care if the operator can see the target or not at this point. If the operator is watching the target, and the Ranger Tell tracks the jewelry, then we know it did not happen through ideamotor response because the motor part was blocked from moving the Ranger Tell. It could however be caused by idea-energy transfer of some sort, if we observe the Ranger Tell begin to track the moving piece of jewelry. And then we could have the operator look away from the location of the moving jewelry and see if the Ranger Tell still tracks it. This would indicate that there is no ideamotor, no idea-only, and no motor-only response working. It would indicate the Ranger tell was working without any cognizant input from the operator.

So we only need to watch and see if the Ranger tell begins to track the moving piece of jewelry when the operator's hand is placed on the handle to see if hung's theory is correct. (Of course, we should also have the operator repeat the test while looking the other way so he can't see the jewelry swinging through the air during this test. This will give us some valuable clues to what causes the Ranger Tell to track moving jewelry).

Hmmm.... What if this test is conducted and the Ranger Tell does not track moving jewelry in any circumstance? Does this mean it only works by ideamotor response?

p.s. It may be wise to glue a small level vial to the tripod platform to indicate if the operator is using excessive force of muscle power to try to move the Ranger Tell away from the level condition as supported by the tripod.

Best wishes,
J_P

[Steve in MS]

Seems to me it would be difficult while using LRLs not to slightly tilt the hand thereby causing the swinging effect.....
I bet wind plays havoc on using one too?

[J_Player]

Seems to me it would be difficult while using LRLs not to slightly tilt the hand thereby causing the swinging effect.....
I bet wind plays havoc on using one too?

Not if the LRL was locked to a level non-metal tripod on a windless day.

Best wishes,
J_P

[Carl-NC]

Hmmm... According to hung, maybe not...
Ideamotor response implies that the operator must have some belief of where he thinks the target is located in order for involuntary muscle impulses to be processed by the brain.

No, ideomotor is just involuntary motor (muscle) movement. It can be triggered by a simple belief, or by a visual stimulus, or it can be random.

I've observed that in DB tests I've done with dL'ers, when they are trying to find a target they don't know the location of, they will often get an initial ideomotor response that is random. That is, it just happens at some location. Once they get the first reaction, their belief in the dL device takes over, and they get repeated responses at the same location. Once they find out that's the wrong location, they cease getting the response there, and start getting it somewhere else.

It's all very entertaining, and a wonderful lesson in psychology.

So do you think this could be a good test to see if hung's concept is correct?

There are lots of ways to test Hung's claims. But keep in mind that no matter what you come up with, he will have an alibi as to why it's no good.

Yes, mounting the RT in a wooden fixture, where you can still fully grasp the handle but not tilt it, will prevent it from tracking a target, and proves that it requires tilting to work. Hung will tell us why that test is no good.

Adding a wooden counterbalance to the RT, so that it is perfectly balanced, will prevent even tilting from causing it to turn, and it will cease to track a target. That further proves it's the imbalance plus tilting that makes it turn. Hung will tell us why that test is no good.

Covering the display with a piece of paper, then having someone else "program" the RT so that the user has no idea what element it's programmed for, will cause it to cease responding to the "right" element, proving that programming the RT does nothing. Hung will tell us why that test is no good.

Doing the classic DB marked target test will prove that the RT has no ability to actually locate a target, even when its location is marked. Hung will tell us why that test is no good.

Videotaping a person holding the RT and tracking a target that is moved back & forth in front of them, will provide indisputable evidence that it is the tilting of the RT that causes it to turn. Hung will tell us why that test is no good.

Yes, there are many ways to prove the RT (and any other LRL, and dowsing in general) is pure nonsense. IT'S NOT HARD. But people who have felt the ideomotor response time after time, and have become immersed in the lure of doing the impossible, have also become so deluded that even the silliest claims about how it all works makes perfect sense to them. Even the most obvious fallacies get dismissed without a thought. And even rationality itself escapes them.

You will never ever ever ever ever change their mind. I have seen enough dL'ers to say that with extreme confidence. Suggesting tests like these mean nothing to someone that far gone. You may as well tell an alchoholic to stop drinking, and show him all the reasons why he should. Reasons mean nothing to an alchoholic.

The best you can do is provide honest information about the LRL scams, and let folks make up their own minds. I got another email today from someone thanking me for the LRL information on Geotech. He avoided the scam. Good on us.

- Carl

[J_Player]

There are lots of ways to test Hung's claims. But keep in mind that no matter what you come up with, he will have an alibi as to why it's no good.

Well, if the best tests we can come up with are all no good, then how will we know if these LRLs work or not? Must we believe hung's stories that he refuses to prove? How come hung's stories don't agree with the performance observed by others like Clondike-Clad, gold24h, Carl-NC and others?

Dang, If most folks are saying they don't work, maybe I should read some test results before buying one.

Best wishes,
J_P

[Rangertell]

Hi Clondike


Rangertell here. We will replace your Examiner on your sending it back to us.


RTL&ES

[Rangertell]

Rangertell Will Replace Examiner

Message for Clondike

It has come to our notice that your Examiner is playing up.
We will replace it if you send it back to the address in PM.

RTL&ES

[Qiaozhi]

Message for Clondike

It has come to our notice that your Examiner is playing up.
We will replace it if you send it back to the address in PM.

RTL&ES

Clondike Clad - go for it!
This will no doubt be the latest model with improved frequencies, the correct number of knobs, and suitable diodes in the right places.
We may even be given a new excuse by Hung when you find that it doesn't work.