rangertell examiner field trials

[Theseus]

Can you describe to me the type and content of the data you would accept (from outside sources you did not observe) as valid and would cause you to believe "signal lines" do not exist in the real world?

When you can do that, I'll have a better idea of what I should take the time to place on here, or any open forum.

[J_Player]

Can you describe to me the type and content of the data you would accept (from outside sources you did not observe) as valid and would cause you to believe "signal lines" do not exist in the real world?

When you can do that, I'll have a better idea of what I should take the time to place on here, or any open forum.

Sure. Any test that the owner of this forum would describe as a scientific test that proves signal lines are imaginary is satisfactory. As far as presentation, the protocol should be described, along with any controls that were used, a list of the data observed in the test results, and any other pertinent information you want to include. In short, any test report that would convince Carl-NC that you ran a test that proves signal lines are imaginary.

But to satisfy me, it is easier. I will concede that you actually ran tests if you simply post the information, regardless of whether Carl-NC accepts it as scientific proof. My argument is you did not show evidence of testing, so if you show the details as described above, I would be happy to admit I was wrong.

Best wishes,
J_P

[Theseus]

Sure. Any test that the owner of this forum would describe as a scientific test that proves signal lines are imaginary is satisfactory. As far as presentation, the protocol should be described, along with any controls that were used, a list of the data observed in the test results, and any other pertinent information you want to include. In short, any test report that would convince Carl-NC that you ran a test that proves signal lines are imaginary.

But to satisfy me, it is easier. I will concede that you actually ran tests if you simply post the information, regardless of whether Carl-NC accepts it as scientific proof. My argument is you did not show evidence of testing, so if you show the details as described above, I would be happy to admit I was wrong.

Best wishes,
J_P

Heh, heh..... another "straw man" you've knocked down. Do you think I was born yesterday (rhetorical).

The question I asked you was NOT what I could post that would prove I ran the tests. I specifically asked; "Can you describe the type and content of the data you would accept (from outside sources you did not observe) as valid and would cause you to believe "signal lines" do not exist in the real world?"

Quite obviously you didn't like that question; but in putting up your "straw man" you gave me my answer anyway. Thank you.

[goldfinder]

Way to go Hung!

Great that you posted a tiny fraction of the data that proves many of these advanced psychotronics discoveries made in the last 50 years.

I myself ran some test on signal lines. A friend of mine is a very good clairvoyant and can see interdimensionally. I used to work for a human factors testing company, know all the rules and scientific methods so I know what I am doing. I have proved that the clairvoyant is in fact for real.

One of my LRL transmitters was set up to transmit the gold frequency. A couple of gold coins were place in the yard about 50 feet away. The clairvoyant knew nothing of what was to happen. I ask the clairvoyant to look on the inner level and tell me what he saw. He described a stream of energy going between the LRL transmitter and the gold. When I turned the xmitr off he said the energy line vanished after about 1 minute. It slowly died down to nothing.

Then I walked between the xmitr and the gold with the xmitr on, a signal line established, and the clairvoyant said that my walking through the energy line between the LRL xmitr and the gold was broken up. He said that the line would reestablish after the xmitr had been running about a minute after I walked through it. These test were repeated with silver and other metals and they all had the same result.

I myself can feel the energy lines.

Extensive testing with various types of sensitive electronic equipment and special equipment that I developed to detect the energy lines also proved positive. No I am not going to disclose these!

What was most disconcerting was the fact that we could not create the signal lines with the LRL xmitr and samples after the sun had gotten very high (after 9am and before 4 pm). So searching for treasure was restricted to early morning and late afternoon hours or at night.

Also, I did these types of tests at different times of the year and over several years. During the high sun spot cycles it was nigh impossible to establish an LRL signal line at any time as the sun increased activity would wipe out any signal lines or never let them be established. There is a good reason for this!

Just a word on skeptics - this is a religion with them. Just like liberalism is a religion and no matter how much proof you go through will ever convince them. So lets those of us who want to work on these things ignore them They are mentally sick and incapable of operating in a higher level mode of though! They need help so lets all just God Bless them All.

Best Regards,
Goldfinder

[Qiaozhi]

Just a word on skeptics - this is a religion with them. Just like liberalism is a religion and no matter how much proof you go through will ever convince them. So lets those of us who want to work on these things ignore them They are mentally sick and incapable of operating in a higher level mode of though! They need help so lets all just God Bless them All.

Best Regards,
Goldfinder

It is not a religion to us, but it clearly appears be a religion for people such as yourself.

The tests you have presented cannot be described as "scientific". There is no suggestion that you carried out any double-blind testing whatsoever, and therefore your conclusions are purely subjective in nature. In this case they are subject to the usual errors in judgment caused by self-delusion and selective memory. Any conclusions can be unintentionally biased by the human unconscious mind unless double-blind testing is used, especially where the tester has a preconceived idea of the expected result.

[Theseus]

It is not a religion to us, but it clearly appears be a religion for people such as yourself.

The tests you have presented cannot be described as "scientific". There is no suggestion that you carried out any double-blind testing whatsoever, and therefore your conclusions are purely subjective in nature. In this case they are subject to the usual errors in judgment caused by self-delusion and selective memory. Any conclusions can be unintentionally biased by the human unconscious mind unless double-blind testing is used, especially where the tester has a preconceived idea of the expected result.

If revealing scams and telling the truth about dowsing and LRL contraptions is a sickness; I admit to being infected with the malady.

[hung]

Only light fights darkness

Great that you posted a tiny fraction of the data that proves many of these advanced psychotronics discoveries made in the last 50 years.

I myself ran some test on signal lines. A friend of mine is a very good clairvoyant and can see interdimensionally. I used to work for a human factors testing company, know all the rules and scientific methods so I know what I am doing. I have proved that the clairvoyant is in fact for real.

One of my LRL transmitters was set up to transmit the gold frequency. A couple of gold coins were place in the yard about 50 feet away. The clairvoyant knew nothing of what was to happen. I ask the clairvoyant to look on the inner level and tell me what he saw. He described a stream of energy going between the LRL transmitter and the gold. When I turned the xmitr off he said the energy line vanished after about 1 minute. It slowly died down to nothing.

Then I walked between the xmitr and the gold with the xmitr on, a signal line established, and the clairvoyant said that my walking through the energy line between the LRL xmitr and the gold was broken up. He said that the line would reestablish after the xmitr had been running about a minute after I walked through it. These test were repeated with silver and other metals and they all had the same result.

I myself can feel the energy lines.

Extensive testing with various types of sensitive electronic equipment and special equipment that I developed to detect the energy lines also proved positive. No I am not going to disclose these!

What was most disconcerting was the fact that we could not create the signal lines with the LRL xmitr and samples after the sun had gotten very high (after 9am and before 4 pm). So searching for treasure was restricted to early morning and late afternoon hours or at night.

Also, I did these types of tests at different times of the year and over several years. During the high sun spot cycles it was nigh impossible to establish an LRL signal line at any time as the sun increased activity would wipe out any signal lines or never let them be established. There is a good reason for this!

Just a word on skeptics - this is a religion with them. Just like liberalism is a religion and no matter how much proof you go through will ever convince them. So lets those of us who want to work on these things ignore them They are mentally sick and incapable of operating in a higher level mode of though! They need help so lets all just God Bless them All.

Best Regards,
Goldfinder

Goldfinder, I salute you for you superior understanding of these matters. Your tests and your equipment proved what we all know about signal lines.
I too, have employed already methods that corroborate what you found, and... just like yourself, no disclosing. Specially here.

Thanks for the compliments. My goal in posting all the information about that scientific experiment in China was to shut the skeptics mouth up in that forum regarding the HUGE BS they became used to pronounce, blasfeming science and giving it a bad name. Ignorant people are everywhere, but the worst thing to meet is some ignorant with bad intention.

That post with the published research had the impact of a megaton in their heads. It was like a complete bowling strike with just one ball.
After that, they fell apart and became aware that scientific phenomena might be much deeper than their limited minds may think of.

Keep evolving Goldfinder and God bless you too. Steping into the light is one true personal conquest.
All the best.

[Theseus]

Isn't pseudoscience wonderful and heart-warming.

[Saturna]

How come the LRL guys also seem to be quite religious ? Coincidence ?

[J_Player]

If revealing scams and telling the truth about dowsing and LRL contraptions is a sickness; I admit to being infected with the malady.

It appears you are not revealing the truth you about your signal line tests.
Are you are concealing the truth of your alleged signal line tests, or you just plain didn't perform any tests as I suspected?

The reason you gave is "I simply do not have the desire or the time...".
It appears obvious you are not willing to tell the truth about your testing (or lack of testing) of signal lines.
No evidence to show whatsoever -- not even a brief description off the top of your head of the protocol and controls?
How much time would that take?

Are we hearing the same old "straw man" excuses like LRL promoters use to evade admitting you have no test data because you did not perform any tests?
Hmmm... Maybe you don't want to talk about the details of your alleged test because it was conducted using a protocol similar to goldfinder's tests?
Or maybe you just plain made up the story of conducting signal line tests.

Perhaps you should join hung for the forum title of fake tests or no tests?

Best wishes,
J_P

[Qiaozhi]

If revealing scams and telling the truth about dowsing and LRL contraptions is a sickness; I admit to being infected with the malady.

I also felt slightly queasy after my last post....

[Qiaozhi]

Thanks for the compliments. My goal in posting all the information about that scientific experiment in China was to shut the skeptics mouth up in that forum regarding the HUGE BS they became used to pronounce, blasfeming science and giving it a bad name. Ignorant people are everywhere, but the worst thing to meet is some ignorant with bad intention.

That post with the published research had the impact of a megaton in their heads. It was like a complete bowling strike with just one ball.
After that, they fell apart and became aware that scientific phenomena might be much deeper than their limited minds may think of.

Where do you get this nonsense from?
I would advise staying away from the hallucinogens, as they can really mess your head up.

[Theseus]

Speaking of appearing.....

It appears J_Player refuses to answer my rather pointed question:

The question I asked you was NOT what I could post that would prove I ran the tests. I specifically asked; "Can you describe the type and content of the data you would accept (from outside sources you did not observe) as valid and would cause you to believe "signal lines" do not exist in the real world?"

What are you afraid of?

Why not tell us in simple terms the framework, protocol and data that you would accept (from a third party you did not observe) that would cause you to believe "signal lines" do not exist in the real world?

Check and Mate! Game Over, Mr. G. Owen!

[Fred]

Goldfinder, I salute you for you superior understanding of these matters.

Ignorant people are everywhere...

Keep evolving Goldfinder and God bless you too. Steping into the light is one true personal conquest.

...blasfeming science and giving it a bad name.

Isn't pseudoscience wonderful and heart-warming.

...Steping into the light is one true personal conquest

How come the LRL guys also seem to be quite religious ? Coincidence ?

God bless you too

[J_Player]

Heh, heh..... another "straw man" you've knocked down. Do you think I was born yesterday (rhetorical).

The question I asked you was NOT what I could post that would prove I ran the tests. I specifically asked; "Can you describe the type and content of the data you would accept (from outside sources you did not observe) as valid and would cause you to believe "signal lines" do not exist in the real world?"

Quite obviously you didn't like that question; but in putting up your "straw man" you gave me my answer anyway. Thank you.

Wrong again. Here are your words:

"It appears most evident that J_P is not really interested in any sort of evidence why Signal Lines (LRL related) DO NOT exist".

"I conducted several tests, back in the 80s, to determine that "signal lines" were an imaginary entitiy, invented strictly to fool the technically-challenged".

"Try to remember, the burden of proof is on those making the claims..."

"Even if I had the time to scan and post all of my data and test protocol details, it would not be convincing to J_P".

You are well aware from my previous posts that I am of the opinion signal lines don't exist, I just haven't been able to prove it. Therefore I cannot claim I have factual proof that they are imaginary. But you have posted that you ran tests that prove they are imaginary. You posted the burden of proof is on those making the claims.

What happened? Did you change your mind? Are you now exempt from the burden of proof? Your claim that you ran tests does not seem factual, simply because nobody has seen any evidence that you ran any tests. Now you pretend it takes too much time to post details of your proof unless you first know what I am interested to see? Whether you conducted tests or not does not depend on what I want, think believe or hope. The burden of proof is satisfied by showing the evidence of your tests.

It won't work to pretend I didn't specify the type and content. I posted the answer here: http://www.geotech1.com/forums/showp...&postcount=692
In case you forgot. The answer was: "Sure. Any test that the owner of this forum would describe as a scientific test that proves signal lines are imaginary is satisfactory. As far as presentation, the protocol should be described, along with any controls that were used, a list of the data observed in the test results, and any other pertinent information you want to include. In short, any test report that would convince Carl-NC that you ran a test that proves signal lines are imaginary".

In addition to what I would accept, I also offered to be satisfied with a much easier test report that would simply satisfy me that you actually ran the alleged tests: "But to satisfy me, it is easier. I will concede that you actually ran tests if you simply post the information, regardless of whether Carl-NC accepts it as scientific proof. My argument is you did not show evidence of testing, so if you show the details as described above, I would be happy to admit I was wrong".

I have answered all your questions, yet you still can't produce any evidence you conducted tests of signal lines.

Remember, I never asked you to convince me of anything except that you ran tests to determine signal lines are imaginary.
Real test results that prove signal lines are imaginary are a bonus that any skeptic including myself will be happy to have at their disposal, but not something I required.
I only asked to see details of evidence that you conducted tests.

I am becoming more convinced you did not perform any tests, and your claims of testing are fake. The only excuse you offered is you don't have time, and you will not be able to consider finding the time until after you know something about what kind of tests I like?
Are you serious?
There is no burden of proof for me or any one else to show that you performed tests.
In fact it is not possible for anyone to prove you conducted tests if you did not.
Only you could prove it, and it does not take more than a few minutes to type in the protocol and controls you used in these alleged tests.

It looks to me like another case similar to when hung stalled and made all kind of excuses why he could not show any test results.
...At least not until someone challenged him, and he found a way to produce test results afterward.
It is beginning to seem obvious you did not conduct testing of signal lines.

Here is my prediction:
You will not tell any details of your alleged testing to determine signal lines are imaginary.
Instead you will produce excuses, and raise hurdles that others must first pass before you will consider describing the details of your tests.
In the end you will never show test details.
Yet you will attempt to maintain you have conducted tests while failing to show any real evidence you conducted tests.

Best wishes,
J_P