Funfinder, I agree with your assessment. As a Professional Treasure Hunter/Salvor When I first started testing and encouraging development of Frequency Discrimination methods in 1980 there was adequate hobbyist metal detectors on the market that would detect coins & jewelry at shallow depths. Not much was available for the Professional Treasure Hunter,or Salvor, so we would make modifications, or try to come up with innovative solutions of our own. This is when the Frequency Discrimination from a distance to detect deep buried Treasure Trove was born and implemented.
My interests is in detecting large Treasure Troves buried deep underground or under water where conventional Metal detectors lack the depth penetration to reach the targets I am seeking. Although technologically primitive by today's standards, the first MFD's I used throughout the 1980's were fully electronic, both transmit & receive. I was fortunate to have enough inventors interested to provide me models to Field, and comparison test. My intent and purpose for Frequency Discrimination was never for detecting small ,shallow depth targets, it never has been, and is not now. So I have no pony in this race for LRL shallow depth detection except to point out the Skeptic Con game the owners of this forum are playing on it's contributors and viewers.
I applaud those who are making an effort to discover, and share with others a viable method to make a workable, shallow depth, discriminating LRL, that has universal appeal to hobby metal detectorist. It's a huge market, but will not be won without a fight from those with a vested interest in the lucrative Metal Detector industry
It is understandable that those EE's & Techs embedded in the system that earn a substantial income from the hobbyist Metal detector industry would be concerned about the increased interest and growth of a concept they don't understand in a competing industry.
With all best wishes, Dell
__________________
 " WHAT HAS BEEN DONE, CAN BE DONE" |