“New for 2009 - The most advanced long range locator on the world”

[Dell Winders]

Originally Posted by J_Player

Most of us are smart enough to recognize the value of a double blind test. It is virtually impossible for anyone to use trickery or to
tamper with the results. Whatever results are returned from the testing then can be tallied and run through a statistical analysis to
determine the efficiency of the device testsed. But even if the kind of testing does not lend itself to statistical analysis, double
blind is still the best way to assure unbiased and accurate testing methodology.

I suppose most of the metal detectors sold can pass a double blind test. We may find that some of them will have shorter range than
advertised, or discrimination properties that are not as good as advertised. But most all of them will prove to be useful tools. In the
case of LRLs, we see another scenario. No manufacturer has ever allowed a public double blind test of his LRL products. Even more
curious, no owner of an LRL has submitted their LRL to a public double blind test. This raises serious questions to whether they work or
not. So do they or don't they work?

We hear occasional anecdotal stories about how great treasures were found with an LRL, and other anecdotes about which LRL performs
better than another. But never a test with recorded results that show the performance values like we do for metal detectors. And never
test results from double blind testing. This LRL story-telling is hardly convincing considering the the hard facts that we've learned
about LRLs. For example, many LRLs contain rods with or without attached electronics that are supposed to point in the direction of the
target, and no known principles of electronics or physics to explain why it should do that. Also no LRL can be demonstrated to find a
target that is recovered in a test. So what do we have? A contraption that has no valid working principle, and no valid evidence of
working. Just stories by people who will not demonstrate it working to prove what they say is true.

This is not a very convincing scenario for LRLs.

Consider the conventional metal detectors: The working principles of search coils are well known and substantiated by engineers and
physicists. The manufacturers of metal detectors as well as owners are usually happy to demonstrate them working right in front of you.
And I doubt anyone with a metal detector would mind participating in a double blind test.

Did you ever wonder why we have this scenario with LRLs, but not conventional metal detectors?
The skeptics seem to know the answer: Because LRLs don't work.
They are just another version of a bogus contraption to get peoples money.
The added electronics are simply there as sales gimmicks to fool people into thinking their version is more high-tech than a competitor.

But what about Dell Winders?
Dell has offered a demonstration where you get to try it out - a major exception to the rule maintained by most LRL manufacturers.
Let's assume that Dell is completely ignorant of real physics and electronics, and is incapable of explaining correctly how his LRLs work or don't work. Let's also suppose that none of the Omnitron products can pass a double blind test. His LRLs are functionally the same as anyone else's LRLs with one exception: He is willing to show you how well it works for yourself before you buy one. No double-blind test, but you get to try it out first to see if it works for you. This is the back door to testing. If there is no valid working principle, and no valid evidence that it works, then there is one last resort to see if it has value -- try it out and see for yourself.

According to Dell, it takes practice. Thus, someone untrained would have a difficult time getting it to work. But Dell offered to demonstrate it and show you how to use it. You are not testing to see if it can find a hidden target in one of 10 places -- you are testing to see if you can use it to find a target that someone else hides in a field. Suppose you discover you can find the target 90% of the time within 14 feet of the target?
Would you care if it passes Carl's double blind test?
Would you care if it has do-nothing electronics attached?
And then if it doesn't work, you didn't rely on guessing or theories to figure it out.... you will know from first hand experience.

If I was in Central Florida, I would certainly give it a try, just to see if it really works. If I was impressed with the results, I would place my order on the spot.

Best wishes,
J_P

THIS IS DIFFICULT TO BELIEVE that after all these years, a loyal Skeptic on Carl Morland's, forum is suddenly speaking with rational logic. I am shocked,and impressed, but from past experience, I'm untrusting of the sincerity, and expecting there wil be a catch.

Anyway, Thank you JP, for this miracle moment.

I have my motive for inviting folks to test my products for themselves. It gives them the opportunity, to experience the conditions, and have an awareness of when the Rod(s) will react to the "field" of a target, and when they will not. It is of utmost importance to me, and to the customers success that they experience, and understand the physical limitations associated with using Rods, that are also used for Dowsing, when they are used in a physics application.

This problem applies to ALL MFD, Directional Locators, and LRL that utilize Hand Held Rod(s), or electronic receivers, to detect "field" of a signal line, or target.

You won't find any of the electronics people manufacturing these products and selling at outrageous prices, ripping off consumers, that are warning their customers of this problem. In fact, according to their advertising, there are no problems with their products. After all, they have electronic credentials, and utilizing the latest advance technology. Why should there be limitations to in the use of the Rod(s) Right?

Carl, and the Skeptics on this forum have fully supported their Electronic buddies who are making a fortune ripping off consumers, in the LRL industry, for years.

How? Well, according to Skeptics, a pair of hand held Rod(s) are not affected by physics, and that fluxuations, or changes of a magnetic "Field" can have any possible affect on hand held rods is, total nonsense. (err, scientifically speaking of course.) BS, and pure assumption at best.

It's spoken with authority by folks with Electronic credentials, and Scientific pretense, but without field tests, or evidence to substantiate.
It's an excellent example of the way Skeptics, using pretend Science to help their fellow electronic engineers, and Techs, rip off trusting consumers, cover up lies, and discredit those of lesser education.

How can you trust the logic of a person who's stated criteria for a Scientific evaluation is, If it looks to him like a duck, appears to walk like a duck, and seems to sound like duck, then it has to be a duck?

Without consideration of the possibility that even what appears to be an ugly Duck, can in reality, turn out to be a Swan. Dell

[J_Player]

Originally Posted by Dell Winders

How can you trust the logic of a person who's stated criteria for a Scientific evaluation is, If it looks to him like a duck, appears to walk like a duck, and seems to sound like duck, then it has to be a duck?

Hi Dell,
The logic of a person using the "looks like a duck" principle is called inductive logic, developed by one of the most famous Greek philosophers of all time -- Aristotle. This kind of logic is indispensable in modern technology, and the basis for statistical analysis which sets the standards for electronic parts testing to see if you have a good batch or bad batch of parts for the rocket scientist to put in orbit, as well as millions of other applications in everyday life.

To clarify, double blind testing is field testing. When people refuse to subject their LRL to a double blind test, then we are left with using inductive logic --- Gee... not a single manufacturer will show their LRL doing what they say it will do in the field using a DB test, so it looks like they're trying to hide the fact that they don't work. If LRLs only cost $1.99 plus s&h, nobody would care. Throw it out if it doesn't work. But when people have to save and plan how they spend their money, then they want assurances that it will work. And refusing a DB test is not a very good assurance.

For the record, I am not anyone's loyal Skeptic. I gravitate toward ideas that make sense. If you see me agreeing more with Carl-NC than LRL promoters, it is because he makes more sense. In fact most of the engineers in this forum make more sense. This is what an engineer is trained to do --- figure out how things work and utilize them to their best advantage. I am skeptical for the same reasons most people are skeptical about spending large amounts of money for items that are described to work on nonsensical principles, and have no credible evidence that they work.

There is no catch to what I offered. If anyone wants to show me an LRL working, and show me how I can recover targets with it, then I will meet with them in Southern California and find targets in the field. For any LRL that works, I will post a professional web page with photos and videos, and links to all the major treasure hunting forums including this one. You will also see a post in this forum describing the event. If I am impressed with the results, I may even buy one for myself.

Best wishes,
J_P

[Dell Winders]

"Trained",or perhaps brainwashed, appears to be the optimum word here to describe rationalizing, assumption, presumption, and irrelevance to truth, or fact, by Geotech skeptics.

I'm glad that I haven't read the electronic text books, that tell me what is possible, or impossible, to do.

Not knowing in advance what works, or doesn't, allows me the freedom to learn from my personal experience of trial & error, without bias, prejudice, or judgement ,and enjoy the benefit of knowing and practicing that what the skeptics say, can't be done, is neither fact, or truth in this case.

Thanks for the skeptics miracle moment of rational logic, and instance of common sense. Dell

[J_Player]

Originally Posted by Dell Winders

"Trained",or perhaps brainwashed, appears to be the optimum word here to describe rationalizing, assumption, presumption, and irrelevance to truth, or fact, by Geotech skeptics.

Sure Dell,
Enter your LRLs in a double blind test in the field.
When you show your LRLs pass a double blind test, then I will stop assuming that they can't pass a double blind test.

Until the time comes when I see an LRL finding treasure live, I will continue to assume they can't find treasure.

Best wishes,
J_P

[Theseus]

Dell said; "I'm glad that I haven't read the electronic text books, that tell me what is possible, or impossible, to do.

Not knowing in advance what works, or doesn't, allows me the freedom to learn from my personal experience of trial & error...... "

Every time you turn on your computer, or jump in your car/truck and motor off to the bank with someone's cash, or watch the space shuttle arrive or depart from your fair State - you should be THANKFUL that your reasoning and thinking is limited to only yourself and a very few individuals who by design or accident are completely devoid of a basic education.

It would be hard to imagine just how many technological advances we would be WITHOUT today, if everyone had to learn/discover things by trial and error. It's probably fair to say our advancements would no doubt be stuck at least in the early 1900s and more likely the middle 1800s; if that far.

Your persistence in putting down those with a basic, or even a higher education is really a very poor marketing tool for your do-nothing LRL contraptions. Think of the many years you've wasted pursuing that line of thinking. If you'd of spent an equal amount of time developing a device that would actually pass a d-b test, and succeeded, perhaps you could have followed a legitimate business career.

[Carl-NC]

Originally Posted by Dell Winders

Carl, and the Skeptics on this forum have fully supported their Electronic buddies who are making a fortune ripping off consumers, in the LRL industry, for years.

How? Well, according to Skeptics, a pair of hand held Rod(s) are not affected by physics, and that fluxuations, or changes of a magnetic "Field" can have any possible affect on hand held rods is, total nonsense. (err, scientifically speaking of course.) BS, and pure assumption at best.

It's spoken with authority by folks with Electronic credentials, and Scientific pretense, but without field tests, or evidence to substantiate.
It's an excellent example of the way Skeptics, using pretend Science to help their fellow electronic engineers, and Techs, rip off trusting consumers, cover up lies, and discredit those of lesser education.

Dell, this doesn't even make sense. Can you explain exactly WHO we are trying to help? Names please!

While you're at it, please tell us, "Which manufacturer of LRLs has a true degreed electronic engineer?"

Fitzgerald used to tell me that he had an engineer working for him. I didn't believe him, of course. I recently got the chance to check out one of his few non-LRL products, the Maxi-Pulse PI detector. Besides being a poor performer, it looks like it was built by a 6-year-old. Like his LRLs, it's pretty obviously made by someone who doesn't know what they are doing.

- Carl

[J_Player]

Originally Posted by Dell Winders

THIS IS DIFFICULT TO BELIEVE that after all these years, a loyal Skeptic on Carl Morland's, forum is suddenly speaking with rational logic.

Rational logic?
So, now Dell Winders is the expert on what is rational logic?
Now lemme see... If we use Dell's standards to judge what kind of logic is acceptable, then perhaps this is what we will find:

1. It helps me to sell Omnitron LRLs = Good, rational logic
2. It does not help me to sell Omnitron LRLs = Bad, irrational logic

Of course... bad, irrational logic is inspired by evil intent, with the purpose to single out Omnitron, and specifically to put Dell Winders out of business.

So how did Dell Winders become so wise as to become an authority on what is the best logic?
That's simple...
He didn't get any advanced education to bother him with the troublesome pain of passing tests, or learning electronics or physics, or even the systems of logic that are taught in universities and colleges. With the advantage of not abiding by the eternal torture of education, Dell is free to make up his own ideas about what logic works the best.

Best wishes,
J_P

[Qiaozhi]

Originally Posted by Dell Winders

It gives them the opportunity, to experience the conditions, and have an awareness of when the Rod(s) will react to the "field" of a target, and when they will not.

The simple answer is that the rods are not reacting to any "field" from a target, except in your mind. And "when they will not" is 100% of the time.

Originally Posted by Dell Winders

It is of utmost importance to me, and to the customers success that they experience, and understand the physical limitations associated with using Rods, that are also used for Dowsing, when they are used in a physics application.

Again - your statements do not make sense. What does "when they are used in a physics application" mean?

Originally Posted by Dell Winders

This problem applies to ALL MFD, Directional Locators, and LRL that utilize Hand Held Rod(s), or electronic receivers, to detect "field" of a signal line, or target.

Oh yes, of course ... the mystical (but totally nonexistent) "signal line".

Originally Posted by Dell Winders

You won't find any of the electronics people manufacturing these products and selling at outrageous prices, ripping off consumers, that are warning their customers of this problem. In fact, according to their advertising, there are no problems with their products. After all, they have electronic credentials, and utilizing the latest advance technology. Why should there be limitations to in the use of the Rod(s) Right?

This makes no sense.

Originally Posted by Dell Winders

Carl, and the Skeptics on this forum have fully supported their Electronic buddies who are making a fortune ripping off consumers, in the LRL industry, for years.

I see you are trying to surpass Hung as the LRL comedian.

I've ignored the rest of your diatribe for obvious reasons.

[J_Player]

Whats all this talk about the Geotech engineers helping Dell's competitors to succeed, while putting Dell out of business?

For many, it is hard to follow Dell's reasoning. But through a fortuitous coincidence, I have had the experience of becoming fluent in the language/mind-set of hillbillies and rednecks. You want to know what Dell is saying?
Here it is:

The Geotech engineers have spent most of their energy concentrating on de-bunking Dell Winders, while generally ignoring, or supporting other LRL manufacturers who add lots of fancy electronics to their LRLs that work on the same principle as Dell's LRLs. Over a period of time, this gave the advantage to Dell's competitors, and left him trailing in the weeds behind them, nearly putting him out of business. Furthermore, Dell claims that the Geotech engineers have "fully supported their Electronic buddies who are making a fortune ripping off consumers, in the LRL industry, for years". To sum it up, the Geotech engineers are helping to promote LRLs with lots of fancy electronic gizmoes attached, and criticizing the simple LRLs that Dell sells.

Another significant item Dell mentioned is that these LRLs all work by sensing the same kind of signals around treasures, which have limitations. He pointed out that because he gives demonstrations and training, he will show you what these limitations are before you buy. But Dell's competitors claim that their LRLs are without limitations because their fancy electronics make them foolproof. Dell's point is that he is the only honest LRL manufacturer who tells you they are not perfect, while the others will say anything you want to hear to make a sale.

That is what Dell is basically saying.

So let's look into Dell's rants:

1. Have the Geotech engineers focused their skepticism on Dell Winders, and not his competitors who have fancier electronic gizmoes connected to their LRLs?
In my opinion, Dell has gotten more arguments against him than other LRL manufacturers if you measure the count of words in negative posts. This appears to be true in the Geotech forums as well as others. So why would people focus their efforts on Dell, and not his competitors? Could it be because only Dell comes around calling people bald face liars, and threatening to sue them for stating their opinion, and calling people names, etc, etc? How often have you seen Dell's competitors do that in the forums? Not very often. I suppose the more you attack people, the more you should expect to receive negative comments back. You can also look in this remote sensing forum at others who make verbal attacks, and you will see they also receive much more negative feedback than people who do not.

More important, Dell comes around more often than his competitors. How can anyone post a reply to a manufacturer who did not make a post? Dell decided to put himself on the firing line and his competitors did not. Should we blame the skeptics for this fact?

2. Have Geotech engineers given the advantage to Dell's electronic competitors and caused him to go out of business?
I doubt it.
I look at Carl's LRL reports page, and I see reports on 13 different LRLs. Only one is sold by Dell Winders. I see no glowing reports for any of Dell's competitors. Carl is basically saying they are all garbage, the ones with fancy electronics and the ones without. I found the same attitudes in the forums. The LRLs manufacturer who had the most negative words posted against it is probably Mineoro, not Dell-Omnitron. I doubt any fancy electronic LRL get's a special break. Even the topic of this thread -- the Spektra -- is a debunking of a fraudulent fancy electronic LRL that competes with Dell.

3. Have the Geotech engineers fully supported their electronic buddies who are making a fortune ripping off customres in the LRL industry for years?
Their "electronic buddies?" What!!! ?
As far as I know, there is no electronic engineer putting circuit boards on LRLs. Most LRL internal electronics look like they were done by middle school students who never saw a soldering iron before they got the job. In this forum we keep hearing skeptics use the same words to describe the electronics in LRLs like "garbage", "trash", "crap", etc. The idea that the persons who design this crap and assemble it are "buddies" of any of the skeptics seems ludicrous to me. *(One exception is Tim Williams, who designed a nice PIC board for the Pro 4. I consider Tim to be a good guy, based on his forum posts. The funny thing is, he might be considered a buddy who helps with Dell's electronics, not Dell's competitors).

4. Dell is the only LRL manufacturer who tells the limitations of the devices he sells.
This may be true. I don't see other LRL companies talking about limitations of their products. Maybe Mineoro... They talk a lot about their idea of how LRLs work, and about how humidity and other things can impair the operation of their LRLs. But generally speaking, it looks like most LRL ads avoid any reference to limitations on their products.

Bottom line (just my opinion):
It seems to me that Dell gets more negative posts because he makes his presence more often, and in a more abrasive manner than his competitors. Could it be that the energy that Dell puts into attacking people who disagree with him is causing an overall negative image of his LRL business? Or maybe his posting technically ignorant blunders in a technical forum brings lots of negative feedback?

Perhaps Dell's LRL business trails behind his competitors because he lacks some needed business management skills, and has nothing to do with what people post on forums. After all... how can one engineer put an LRL manufacturer out of business? How can even one forum accomplish that?

Best wishes,
J_P

[Dell Winders]

Originally Posted by J_Player

Whats all this talk about the Geotech engineers helping Dell's competitors to succeed, while putting Dell out of business?

For many, it is hard to follow Dell's reasoning. But through a fortuitous coincidence, I have had the experience of becoming fluent in the language/mind-set of hillbillies and rednecks. You want to know what Dell is saying?
Here it is:

The Geotech engineers have spent most of their energy concentrating on de-bunking Dell Winders, while generally ignoring, or supporting other LRL manufacturers who add lots of fancy electronics to their LRLs that work on the same principle as Dell's LRLs. Over a period of time, this gave the advantage to Dell's competitors, and left him trailing in the weeds behind them, nearly putting him out of business. Furthermore, Dell claims that the Geotech engineers have "fully supported their Electronic buddies who are making a fortune ripping off consumers, in the LRL industry, for years". To sum it up, the Geotech engineers are helping to promote LRLs with lots of fancy electronic gizmoes attached, and criticizing the simple LRLs that Dell sells.

Another significant item Dell mentioned is that these LRLs all work by sensing the same kind of signals around treasures, which have limitations. He pointed out that because he gives demonstrations and training, he will show you what these limitations are before you buy. But Dell's competitors claim that their LRLs are without limitations because their fancy electronics make them foolproof. Dell's point is that he is the only honest LRL manufacturer who tells you they are not perfect, while the others will say anything you want to hear to make a sale.

That is what Dell is basically saying.

So let's look into Dell's rants:

1. Have the Geotech engineers focused their skepticism on Dell Winders, and not his competitors who have fancier electronic gizmoes connected to their LRLs?
In my opinion, Dell has gotten more arguments against him than other LRL manufacturers if you measure the count of words in negative posts. This appears to be true in the Geotech forums as well as others. So why would people focus their efforts on Dell, and not his competitors? Could it be because only Dell comes around calling people bald face liars, and threatening to sue them for stating their opinion, and calling people names, etc, etc? How often have you seen Dell's competitors do that in the forums? Not very often. I suppose the more you attack people, the more you should expect to receive negative comments back. You can also look in this remote sensing forum at others who make verbal attacks, and you will see they also receive much more negative feedback than people who do not.

More important, Dell comes around more often than his competitors. How can anyone post a reply to a manufacturer who did not make a post? Dell decided to put himself on the firing line and his competitors did not. Should we blame the skeptics for this fact?

2. Have Geotech engineers given the advantage to Dell's electronic competitors and caused him to go out of business?
I doubt it.
I look at Carl's LRL reports page, and I see reports on 13 different LRLs. Only one is sold by Dell Winders. I see no glowing reports for any of Dell's competitors. Carl is basically saying they are all garbage, the ones with fancy electronics and the ones without. I found the same attitudes in the forums. The LRLs manufacturer who had the most negative words posted against it is probably Mineoro, not Dell-Omnitron. I doubt any fancy electronic LRL get's a special break. Even the topic of this thread -- the Spektra -- is a debunking of a fraudulent fancy electronic LRL that competes with Dell.

3. Have the Geotech engineers fully supported their electronic buddies who are making a fortune ripping off customres in the LRL industry for years?
Their "electronic buddies?" What!!! ?
As far as I know, there is no electronic engineer putting circuit boards on LRLs. Most LRL internal electronics look like they were done by middle school students who never saw a soldering iron before they got the job. In this forum we keep hearing skeptics use the same words to describe the electronics in LRLs like "garbage", "trash", "crap", etc. The idea that the persons who design this crap and assemble it are "buddies" of any of the skeptics seems ludicrous to me. *(One exception is Tim Williams, who designed a nice PIC board for the Pro 4. I consider Tim to be a good guy, based on his forum posts. The funny thing is, he might be considered a buddy who helps with Dell's electronics, not Dell's competitors).

4. Dell is the only LRL manufacturer who tells the limitations of the devices he sells.
This may be true. I don't see other LRL companies talking about limitations of their products. Maybe Mineoro... They talk a lot about their idea of how LRLs work, and about how humidity and other things can impair the operation of their LRLs. But generally speaking, it looks like most LRL ads avoid any reference to limitations on their products.

Bottom line (just my opinion):
It seems to me that Dell gets more negative posts because he makes his presence more often, and in a more abrasive manner than his competitors. Could it be that the energy that Dell puts into attacking people who disagree with him is causing an overall negative image of his LRL business? Or maybe his posting technically ignorant blunders in a technical forum brings lots of negative feedback?

Perhaps Dell's LRL business trails behind his competitors because he lacks some needed business management skills, and has nothing to do with what people post on forums. After all... how can one engineer put an LRL manufacturer out of business? How can even one forum accomplish that?

Best wishes,
J_P

Well, so much for the truth being in a Skeptic's arm chair analaysis. No research, no supporting data.

Again, presumption,and assumption, spoken in ignorance. Carl, and cronies started their attacks on me personally, actually posting that they were there to put me out of business.

The Skeptic rationale? They demanded that I provide them the schematics to a fully electronic Frequency Discriminator, so that they could duplicate it and conduct their own tests. (sound familiar?) Because I wouldn't cater to their Blackmail, they proclaimed that they (Skeptics) had every right to say whatever they wished about me, and that I should be put out of business. (I still have hard copies)

Your nice guy, Carl, and Skeptic cronies have pursued that goal ever since, on every Treasure forum, using aliases, and their computer knowledge to perform unscrupulous offline damage.

Carl, didn't put up this forum and the Challenge gimmick, in search of credibility and support, until years after he and the Skeptic clan started their attacks on me to put me out of business.

I even stopped building, and selling LRL products for 3 years, yet the vengeful Skeptic attacks on me continued relentless. LRL manufacturers obtained a monoply during that time, and their already high prices sky rocketed from $3,000 to $17,000, and then to as much as $100,000. ALL, using Rods to detect & meter the signal. A little B&K audio generator that retailed for $70, sold for $1,700 with the added pair of Rods, and claims of detecting fossils, and ancient arrow heads.

So what was Carl, and his Skeptic cronies doing about the increased Rip-offs while I was out of the business? Why, still attacking me, of course, for not catering to their Blackmail scheme. Nothing else mattered.

Even when there was an internet Scam, ripping off Treasure Hunters for big bucks. What did Carl, do about it? Nothing! What did his Skeptic Cronies do about it? They laughed and mocked the Treasure Hunters for being such Suckers as to fall for a Scam.

I notice the same blackmail tactics being employed by Skeptics on this forum, and sanctioned by Carl, with the demand to post schematics for you to duplicate, or, we can expect to suffer your consequences. You will mock, make inferences, tell lies about me, call me a Scammer, a fraud, say I am evil, hack my websites, computer, and e-mail. And that's while you pretend you are being courteous and Carl, whining his total innocence, that he always gets blamed.

Duh! Carl, You started the unprovoked attacks on me. It was never the other way around. An now, this is your forum. You are responsible for the content.

You stick your head in the sand and don't want to hear that It's Electronics people doing the manufacturing of LRL that are profiteering by ripping off Consumers with advanced technology claims, and justifying their claims with exaggerated prices.

You infer I can't possibly know what I am talking, because I am not formally educated.

You are right JP, those are good business practices for becoming financially successful. I understand them, and I see their effectiveness, but no thank you, that method of obtaining wealth doesn't interest me. I will suffer the skeptic wrath, and stay poor if that is my alternative.

And do your homework. I have been encouraging folks to test these products for themselves, or join me on a Treasure hunt and learn for themselves, ever since before I started selling anything. There is nothing new about that. It's no big deal.

Having lots of personal field experience with many types, makes and models off MFD, LRL, etc, I prefer educating people in their use, problems, limitations and benefits. I have experimented with, field tested, compared, and used these methods and they have been a great aid in my own Treasure searches. The benefits, and flaws should be pointed out, but total condemenation is NOT Scientifically justifiable, nor does Carl, have a valid, or provable argument against my products. They perform exactly as I say they do, under the magnetic conditions in which I claim they do. I would like for Carl, to show his valid Scientific proof that my products do not perform as advertised?

I do not support ripping off Treasure Hunters. I am a Treasure Hunter/Salvor myself for 35 years, and I have the knowledge, experience, and have personally experienced the hits, and rip-offs myself. It's my hope that other Treasure Hunters, can learn from my field experience, which includes Frequency discrimination methods.

I would have joined Carl, in his crusade to make a name for himself a long time ago, if he were not so sneaky, and two faced.

You folks may feel pride in rationalizing a vengeful Skeptic agenda, filled with hate mongering, and prejudiced, but to this uneducated hillbilly who has been on the receiving end, you are a pack of arrogant, egotistical, intellectual hypocrites who make a mockery of Science. Best Wishes, Dell

[Carl-NC]

Dell, your post is so full of wrong that a full response would be a waste of time. However, there is one point that I would still like to pursue:

Originally Posted by Dell Winders

You stick your head in the sand and don't want to hear that It's Electronics people doing the manufacturing of LRL that are profiteering by ripping off Consumers with advanced technology claims, and justifying their claims with exaggerated prices.

Since you're making such a Big Deal about this, I'll ask once again:

"Which manufacturer of LRLs has a true degreed electronic engineer?"

Can you either name someone, or simply say, "I don't know"? Because I sure don't know of any Real Engineers designing or promoting LRLs. All the Real Engineers I know of who look at LRLs agree that they are nonsense.

- Carl

[hung]

Dell, I see this thread has gone way off topic (as always), but I feel I should say some words to you although I don't come here as often as before.

I just don't understand why you bother with Carl.
He has no importance to the LRL subject at all. You know for eons he tries to pursue a local promotion against LRLs with the old and tiresome 'motto' pretense they are scam for his own business purposes. So why bother? Just ignore him once and for all.

If you know your device works and you also know much more about this subject than him, relax. You don't need to prove him anything.

Also don't understand why you insist wasting your time and precious health arguing here with his followers. You have done this hundreds of times in the past. What did you gain with that? Huh?

So, I'm sorry if I might bother you with my words, but I care about you and I don't like this situation. I think you should make a reflection about it.
But, feel free to do what you want.

All the best my friend.

[Carl-NC]

Originally Posted by hung

You know for eons he tries to pursue a local promotion against LRLs with the old and tiresome 'motto' pretense they are scam for his own business purposes.

Hmmm... sure would like to know what my "business purposes" are. Might make me feel better about all the money I've spent debunking this junk.

- Carl

[Götz von Berlichingen]

I think Mr. Winders gave a good answer in 2006 on thunting.com.

"NO! In my opinion, the locators I sell DO NOT actually detect Gold." Dell

http://thunting.com/smf/black_box_te...sg1338#msg1338
No matter how hard you try, you will never get a better piece of Information from him.

[hung]

Originally Posted by Götz von Berlichingen

I think Mr. Winders gave a good answer in 2006 on thunting.com.

http://thunting.com/smf/black_box_te...sg1338#msg1338
No matter how hard you try, you will never get a better piece of Information from him.

Wow... I haven't read that thread back then.
I'm sorry for Carl. He was put into pieces by Art, Dandequille and Dell himself.

Thanks for posting this Gotz.