"Criteria for Scientific Proof of LRL"

[J_Player]

Originally Posted by Aurificus

Here. All interested parties may have their Discussion on the Criteria for Scientific Proof of LRL, and related matters.

Suggested discussion items include: Acceptable "hit rates", Suitable "real" or artificial targets, Repeatability, Operator skill. experience, influence etc, etc. etc.

Go for it...

Your Welcome,
Aurificus

The criteria for proof of LRL?
To me, this means some apparatus is able to locate something valuable from a long distance. The criteria would be: "Does this apparatus result in a your finding something valuable"?
In addition, we must qualify what this apparatus finds... Is it valuable or not? For example, what could you sell the item you recover for to an informed buyer? Also, what is the hit rate? Does it work 100% of the time? If not, then does it work often enough to warrant using it?

But in the final analysis, if both LRL proponents and skeptics agree that the treasure has been recovered, then I would conclude we must have a preponderance of evidence that says it works. Who could dispute the fact that it works if both LRL proponents and skeptics agree that it recovered treasure?

Look below to see which LRLs work to find treasure based on this criteria for scientific proof: