Long Range Locator. Fact or...

guvmore Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> My hobby is metal detecting and I joined this site
> to get to know knitting people. I am 57, married a
> nd live in Farmington Mo. Occasionally when someon
> e gripes about something on the metal detecting fo
> rum somebody will say something like "You can join
> the knitting forum" I know that some might feel th
> at people on the knitting forum might be "inferior
> " to them but I know different and I am going to b
> e sticking up for us. As a metal detectorist I sea
> rch parks and private property with permission loo
> king for coins and stuff and really enjoy the hobb
> y. I am a member of Friendly Metal Detecting Forum
> as well as Treasurenet. I have been on vacation fr
> om Friendly but will be back on there in a couple
> days. If you want to keep track of me you can visi
> t either of those sites and I use the same usernam
> e. I try not to get too serious about things and T
> hank you all for the friendly welcome. If anyone h
> as any doubts about me my full name is Gary Kemper
> and,, like I said, I live in Farmington Mo. Thank
> you Should be fun.


Amazingly,honest fellow. Relevance to LRLs ?

Dirtmover Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>.... So, logically, if a person claim
> s it doesn't work it is on them to prove that....


On the contrary: "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proofs". The burden of proof would not be on the person making the claim. Not the other way around.

Besides: Even when doubters HAVE gone to do as you say (prove they don't work), it's fruitless. All the double blind tests in the world get explained away by the faithful. Eg.: "You need more practice" or "sun spots" or "solar flares" etc....

Tom_in_CA Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Dirtmover Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> >.... So, logically, if a person claim
> > s it doesn't work it is on them to prove that...
> .
>
>
> On the contrary: "Extraordinary claims require ex
> traordinary proofs". The burden of proof would no
> t be on the person making the claim. Not the othe
> r way around.
>
> Besides: Even when doubters HAVE gone to do as yo
> u say (prove they don't work), it's fruitless. A
> ll the double blind tests in the world get explain
> ed away by the faithful. Eg.: "You need more prac
> tice" or "sun spots" or "solar flares" etc....


Wouldn't have to be extraordinary. The burden of proof could apply to any claim. I agree,as I (you ) said that the burden of proof is on the person making the claim. I don't make the claim that they don't work nor do I make the claim that they do. It would have to be proven to me that they work in order for me to believe they do. Same goes for claims of them not working. I haven't seen anything that would make me take them seriously. I have seen things ( read ) that make me tend to believe they do not work.

I still don't understand where a person could even use an LRL. If you took it to the beach, wouldn't it go crazy pointing at everyone on the beach wearing jewelry? How about all the wealthy folks living in those beach front homes with their gold and silver. What a crock. If a $300 detector gets a coin 5" deep and a $1,000 detector gets a coin 10" deep then it only make sense that a $10,000 LRL will find a coin a mile or more away. So you get a hit on your LRL and you start digging but don't find anything. That's easy to explain "you didn't dig deep enough". Have you ever noticed that most all LRL have a 30% restocking fee. Sure they'll take it back and keep $3000 of you hard earned dollars. I think they only ever made two or three of them and every time one gets returned they just resell it.

Tom Slick Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I still don't understand where a person could even
> use an LRL. If you took it to the beach, wouldn't
> it go crazy pointing at everyone on the beach wear
> ing jewelry? How about all the wealthy folks livin
> g in those beach front homes with their gold and s
> ilver. What a crock. If a $300 detector gets a coi
> n 5" deep and a $1,000 detector gets a coin 10" de
> ep then it only make sense that a $10,000 LRL will
> find a coin a mile or more away. So you get a hit
> on your LRL and you start digging but don't find a
> nything. That's easy to explain "you didn't dig de
> ep enough". Have you ever noticed that most all LR
> L have a 30% restocking fee. Sure they'll take it
> back and keep $3000 of you hard earned dollars. I
> think they only ever made two or three of them and
> every time one gets returned they just resell it.




They should sell them at the used car lot dealerships they are honest too the whole LDL is absurd. Sure not our wasted money but hate seeing those scammers on Ebay and other web sites'

cheers

For people to say they work or not, they say they must be proven by science. Meaning someone has to be able to duplicate it or it don't work .....correct. Then as an example lets take the Bigfoot coil it works, yet nobody has been able to duplicate it, people have tried without any success. So does that mean the Bigfoot coil really dosen't work because science can't prove it does? I am not saying they work or don't work. Why is there an argument every year, about if they work or not?

deadeye Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> . Why is there an argument
> every year, about if they work or not?


Because of Human nature when it comes to the topic of "treasure". It's only natural to want SO HARD to believe in a better mousetrap. After all , you don't want to get laughed at all the way to the bank. No one wants to be "left out". So we subconsciously put critical thinking aside, and believe, hold-out-hope, etc.... I mean, it's pretty compelling, when you see an ad, with a guy posing next to the jar of coins he just found, right ?

THAT'S the reason the argument comes up every year. It's not coming up because "there might be merit to them".

guvmore Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> My hobby is metal detecting and I joined this site
> to get to know knitting people. I am 57, married a
> nd live in Farmington Mo. Occasionally when someon
> e gripes about something on the metal detecting fo
> rum somebody will say something like "You can join
> the knitting forum" I know that some might feel th
> at people on the knitting forum might be "inferior
> " to them but I know different and I am going to b
> e sticking up for us. As a metal detectorist I sea
> rch parks and private property with permission loo
> king for coins and stuff and really enjoy the hobb
> y. I am a member of Friendly Metal Detecting Forum
> as well as Treasurenet. I have been on vacation fr
> om Friendly but will be back on there in a couple
> days. If you want to keep track of me you can visi
> t either of those sites and I use the same usernam
> e. I try not to get too serious about things and T
> hank you all for the friendly welcome. If anyone h
> as any doubts about me my full name is Gary Kemper
> and,, like I said, I live in Farmington Mo. Thank
> you Should be fun.


Funny guvmore!!