Long Range Locator. Fact or...

guvmore Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> OK I admit they work, they can find and take your
> money from any believer a hundred miles away.
> A quick google shows they are fakes.
>
> Cheers

LOL Maybe im not making myself clear enough. I don't care if they do or don't work. I have no horse in this race. I am not trying to convince anyone, one way or they other. Just stated my observations.

Here's what Wiki says.

[en.wikipedia.org]

.

How much can you pay for dreams?

Saw a fellow using one in church yard...he gave me a short how to work...planted a gold ring with my back turned...walked around yard and by golly pointed out the ring...
Label was taken off so don't know model...wouldn't buy one but truthful post. ????????

Dan-Pa. Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Saw a fellow using one in church yard...he gave me
> a short how to work...planted a gold ring with my
> back turned...walked around yard and by golly poin
> ted out the ring...
> Label was taken off so don't know model...wouldn't
> buy one but truthful post. ????????

Interesting. Let's just assume for the moment that one-such-experiment passed a double-blind test. Ok, the next obvious question that would follow (which the demonstrator or manufacturer should be quick-to-explain) is: "how does it do that?" Ie.: explain how it's electronically possible.

Notice , in this example, I'm not denying that a double blind test passing couldn't happen.

Ok, then what ? If they say: A) it's totally scientific and electronic, they'll be faced with the inevitable "how?" question. B ) if they say "it's mystical and/or spiritual, they'll be faced with the hocus pocus occult accusations. And ... no no no, we can't go there. So what's their choices ?

For the life of me, I can't understand why md'ing manufacturers are "all over themselves" with glee to rush to the patent office with a latest greatest mousetrap invention. So if an LRL weren't equally as scientific with explanation, why isn't the same thing in play ?



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/21/2017 04:43PM by Tom_in_CA.

someone is sure to answer , that the reasons those "better mousetrap" LRL inventors don't rush to the patent office, is because they're going to dig multiple treasures for themselves.

Ok. then:

1) Why wasn't that the phenomenon/history seen when metal detectors were invented ? Certainly they could have kept it "hush hush" and dug all the treasures for themselves ? Or

2) Ok , let me guess: The LRL crowd does indeed dig big-ticket treasures all-the-time. But it's just that they can't show you (@ show & tell forums, etc....). Lest they be the targets of the IRS, thieves, claim-jumpers, etc... But rest assured : They're digging caches all the time. Right ?

Thus, as you can see, it's a never-ending vicious loop. Any objection you can raise, the promoters have a quick-come-back line.

Kind of reminds me of someone saying: There's green gremlins hiding under my bed ! Another person looks under the bed and says : "nope. I don't see any gremlins". The person making the claim says "that's because the gremlins are invisible".

ok, how do you disprove that ? YOU CAN'T (because they're "invisible"). So too does it become a vicious loop with the LRL or dowsing crowd. Common sense logic and double blind tests never work. There's always an "out ". Where they shift the burden of proof back on you. (which is bass-ackwards).

I have no reason to believe in LRLs Tom as I haven't used one. I do believe some things can work such as locating my sewer line with an L shaped wire as I have done that repeatedly. Other people have " witched " cable lines and other things underground. The science ( ? ) behind such things is a mystery to me.

Tom_in_CA Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Thus, as you can see, it's a never-ending vicious
> loop. Any objection you can raise, the promoters
> have a quick-come-back line.
>
> Kind of reminds me of someone saying: There's gre
> en gremlins hiding under my bed ! Another person
> looks under the bed and says : "nope. I don't see
> any gremlins". The person making the claim says [
> i]"that's because the gremlins are invisible"[/i].
>
> ok, how do you disprove that ? YOU CAN'T (because
> they're "invisible"). So too does it become a vic
> ious loop with the LRL or dowsing crowd. Common
> sense logic and double blind tests never work. T
> here's always an "out ". Where they shift the bur
> den of proof back on you. (which is bass-ackwards)
> .

I agree with you for the "there is always an out" scenario. How does something like this work? How does luck work, or fate, or chance work? How is it that there are some people with timing that defies explanation(like the person in those famous traffic accident cam vids that nearly get hit and if their timing was off, the would be dead).

Any man of science would have to agree that, there are more forces at work than plain ole physics. I know that there are people that are so ingrained to hard proof that they have no room for speculation. I say speculate on everything. It's your right as a free person and to limit yourself to just what your senses tell you, is to just plain limit yourself.

Beyonder-Pa Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Explain luck. There isn't a person alive that says
> luck doesn't exist.

Actually there is a person - me. What we call luck is often just random probability. You can't control probability if it is truly random. You can control your attitude and/or behavior which so often determines what we refer to as good or bad luck.

As for LRL's, bravo to Mr. Moreland for spending so much time and effort to debunk them. There's good reason no one has ever collected his bounty.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/21/2017 06:04PM by marcomo.

marcomo Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Beyonder-Pa Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Explain luck. There isn't a person alive that s
> ays
> > luck doesn't exist.
>
> Actually there is a person - me. What we call luc
> k is often just random probability. You can't con
> trol probability if it is truly random. You can c
> ontrol your attitude and/or behavior which so ofte
> n determines what we refer to as good or bad luck.
>
> As for LRL's, bravo to Mr. Moreland for spending s
> o much time and effort to debunk them. There's go
> od reason no one has ever collected his bounty.

2xs that

No such thing as “luck” — that’s the same as believing in fairytales/LRL’s!

To define it is luck = chance based on probability (plain and simple).

If this magic wand worked then why have we not bought these ATM machines....this subject seems to show up at least once a year.
I used to report them on Ebay yea that was a joke they get paid a fee honest or criminal.

You can define it how you like. It seems some people have access to "chance based on probability" more than others. Which again is out of the norm. It's what they are doing either. They are just walking down the street. A true man of science is open to the possibility of anything, even the most improbable.

Why haven't I ever seen an air test performed with an LRL? If an LRL can locate a silver coin at say 100 feet than it should be able to find one at say 5 or 10 feet. I want to see someone wave a silver quarter 5 to 10 feet from the LRL and have the LRL show the coin on the screen or meter or see it swing around and point to the coin while the LRL was clamped in a vice? Any takers?

Hook, Line & S
I
N
K
E
R

Why do you insist upon defending this hocus pocus bs beyonder? You said you have no dog in this race but insist the bs MIGHT be real?

You’re the same person that said we (diggers) should leave stuff in the ground for others to find a couple yrs back/aren’t you!?

No one can/will take you serious. You made your impression when you came on here griping/whining that you can’t find anything and that we should leave stuff in the ground so you and other newbies have a chance to find it! And now this??

May as well hang/swing a plumbob over a map to find X marks the spot for some long lost treasure = see what that does for you!

MichiganRelicHunter Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> LoL = the laughs on this forum in re to topics never cease - better than reality TV

Ain't that the truth, I need to dig out the stronger wine, or cut over to Scotch in the evenings

Beyonder-Pa Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> A true man of science is open to the possibility of anything, even the most improbable.

True, and I'm willing to pay dearly for the possibility of being wrong. So far, that hasn't happened. What I've seen is that any apparent successes of LRLs is either as an intuition indicator, or out of pure random probability. A good scientific test attempts to eliminate visual cues which can steer intuitive processing, and the results of such tests is that LRL successes always falls to pure guessing, The same thing happens with dowsing.

Beyonder-Pa Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> You can define it how you like. It seems some people have access to "chance based on probability" more than others. Which again is out of the norm. It's
> what they are doing either. They are just walking down the street. A true man of science is open to the possibility of anything, even the most improbable.

Seems like your simply being obtuse

Hey LRL's don't work. Everyone feel better?

Beyonder-Pa Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Hey LRL's don't work. Everyone feel better?




nO DOES not sound heart felt

guvmore Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Beyonder-Pa Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Hey LRL's don't work. Everyone feel better?
>
>
>
>
> nO DOES not sound heart felt

HA HA HA HA...ha.

Gentlemen. Good inputs. Since this md'ing forum is one that focuses on the tech. side of the hobby discussions, it is to be expected that most of the inputs would be against the notion of LRL's

My personal horse in the race, was because of the following: In the early 1990s, I did a 4 week trip to Mexico, to go cache hunting. Partnered up with a relative of one of my employees, who had moved here from Mexico. They regaled me with all the great stories of caches back where they're from. That should be child's play to find, blah blah. I listened to all the stories, and we decided to partner the efforts: I would go along for tech. support (since I was proficient with metal detectors), and they would be the translators, tour guides, etc..

All the expenses of the travel , equipment, supplies, etc....were to be split .

About a week before we were set to leave, my host brought me a magazine ad from one of the treasure magazines. It was for some sort of expensive LRL. He wanted to take some of our budget money and buy the thing. He was quite "taken" by the pictures , in the ad, of the person detecting a jar of coins from xx miles away, or xx feet deep, blah blah. And, I guess, perhaps it's a cultural thing they have anyhow.

Of course I told him it was hogwash . But the problem was: I couldn't explain WHY I thought that. I just figured it was some sort of dowsing. But he was quick to point out that it had a battery, electronics, etc.. Hence it was not dowsing. All I had was a hunch , but had no real explanation why. And now this guy was going to take $ from our common pot, and invest in this.

So I delved into a deep study of the matter. No small feat in the era before the internet. Fortunately, I talked him out of it. But ever since then, the topic has interested me. A "bee in the bonnet", haha

Dirtmover Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I have no reason to believe in LRLs Tom as I haven
> 't used one. I do believe some things can work suc
> h as locating my sewer line with an L shaped wire
> as I have done that repeatedly. Other people have
> " witched " cable lines and other things undergrou
> nd. The science ( ? ) behind such things is a myst
> ery to me.

Dirt-mover: Don't take this wrong. But whenever the subject comes up on a metal detecting forum, someone is sure to bring up finding water, or sewer lines, or cable lines. However, I always have to ask: Ok, even assuming this is true, ... what does this have to do with metal detecting for coins, goodies, caches, etc... ?

But I even have my doubts about the water thing, sewer lines, etc... The proponents of this have been tested, and been found to score nothing better than random chance. I mean, after all, you can find water "anywhere leaves fall" for pete's sake. But as I say, it's a moot point for md'ing for coins & caches anyhow. With all due respect for water and sewer lines, ... I'd rather find jars of coins

Beyonder-Pa Wrote:

> How does luck work, or fate, or chance work? How is it
> that there are some people with timing that defies
> explanation....

. The science ( ? ) behind such things is a myst
> ery to me.

This line of reasoning would work if we were talking about dowsing . But not when talking about LRL with electronics . Which is supposed to rely (as you yourself say in the quote) on "science". Hence should repeatable and test-able. So that 10 people, coming in , and waving the same metal object in front of it, would all get the same response. Just like if 10 people waved a quarter in front of a propped up metal detector, it will beep for all 10 of them. No "luck" or "fate" or "skill" or "practice" involved. So too should LRL's, if they are truly operating by some logical scientific means.

Beyonder-Pa Wrote:

>
> Any man of science would have to agree that, there
> are more forces at work than plain ole physics. I
> know that there are people that are so ingrained t
> o hard proof that they have no room for speculatio
> n. I say speculate on everything. It's your right
> as a free person and to limit yourself to just wha
> t your senses tell you, is to just plain limit you
> rself.

Ok, sure. But this all just assumes it works in the first place. If it worked, then yes, everything you're saying would logically follow. Ie.: That the person(s) who fail to avail themselves of this asset, are "limiting themselves".

Do you see how your starting premise implies that they work ? That's fine if it's the starting inference, but then we're just back to square one: If they work, let's see it! And then the excuses roll out, which put them and the adherents out of any scrutiny. The vicious circles that are impenetrable , as I showed above.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/22/2017 12:50AM by Tom_in_CA.

Tom_in_CA Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Dirtmover Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > I have no reason to believe in LRLs Tom as I hav
> en
> > 't used one. I do believe some things can work s
> uc
> > h as locating my sewer line with an L shaped wir
> e
> > as I have done that repeatedly. Other people hav
> e
> > " witched " cable lines and other things undergr
> ou
> > nd. The science ( ? ) behind such things is a my
> st
> > ery to me.
>
> Dirt-mover: Don't take this wrong. But whenever
> the subject comes up on a metal detecting forum, s
> omeone is sure to bring up finding water, or sewer
> lines, or cable lines. However, I always have t
> o ask: Ok, even assuming this is true, ... what d
> oes this have to do with metal detecting for coins
> , goodies, caches, etc... ?
>
> But I even have my doubts about the water thing, s
> ewer lines, etc... The proponents of this have b
> een tested, and been found to score nothing better
> than random chance. I mean, after all, you can fi
> nd water "anywhere leaves fall" for pete's sake.
> But as I say, it's a moot point for md'ing for coi
> ns & caches anyhow. With all due respect for wate
> r and sewer lines, ... I'd rather find jars of coi
> ns

Like i said, I don't believe in LRLs . I was wondering what,if any, science ( ? ) is behind the finding of the lines. If a person knew why some can find lines, that could be used to research/debunk the claims of LRLs.

No one has ever claimed the million dollar reward. Seems common sense it's snake oil. Sold on FleaBay.

If a person claims that an LRL works it is on them to prove it does. So, logically, if a person claims it doesn't work it is on them to prove that. I don't believe they work and wouldn't purchase one because of that position. A person can remain neutral on the issue,as I am.

My hobby is metal detecting and I joined this site to get to know knitting people. I am 57, married and live in Farmington Mo. Occasionally when someone gripes about something on the metal detecting forum somebody will say something like "You can join the knitting forum" I know that some might feel that people on the knitting forum might be "inferior" to them but I know different and I am going to be sticking up for us. As a metal detectorist I search parks and private property with permission looking for coins and stuff and really enjoy the hobby. I am a member of Friendly Metal Detecting Forum as well as Treasurenet. I have been on vacation from Friendly but will be back on there in a couple days. If you want to keep track of me you can visit either of those sites and I use the same username. I try not to get too serious about things and Thank you all for the friendly welcome. If anyone has any doubts about me my full name is Gary Kemper and,, like I said, I live in Farmington Mo. Thank you Should be fun.