TO THE SKEPTIC

TESLATESLATESLATESLATESLATESLATESLATESLATESLATESLATESLATESLATESLATESLATESLASLATESLATESLATESLATESLATESLATESLA

In response to the report on Carl Moreland's site re the Examiner:

Ok. But where is the electromagnetic amplification with that early attempt of which only a few were made? You can't measure it as is unless you have a gaussmeter the size of a house. This is far and beyond a joke and cannot escape judgement. One needs to value the anatomy as the most controlled oscillator aerial system as well (not the mind at all) re this as well as include the solidity of a visually complete unit. It isn't good enough to cut parts off and leave other important ones out. I would appreciate the removal of the false name re the owner and the shocking, shocking pictures that make it look like a joke. Doing the 'face-cream' pics again would be a start while thinking about removing it altogether. I expected a different interpretation altogether on my return from holidays. The glued? pair ruins the aesthetics of this site. You have not given this perfectly accepted product the treatment it deserves.

No hint of glue Glue visible

Glue smears are not normally visible unless you alter light conditions. This is what has occurred with the shots of the early Examiner.

The photographs of the Examiner have been deliberately and easily altered to create a bad impression.

Take for example this final forum piece that is on the hard drive.

The information presented on the report page re an experimental Examiner (ver 1.0) is completely incorrect.

Glue is no longer used in the Examiner to keep components from shifting.That is a gross caricature of a one-off. Your knowledge of 2002 net contractors/advisors and accounting (ergo VB) is only surpassed by your understanding of embargoed schematic dogma.

This is an interesting post from someone who obviously knows enough to be respected. Caveats are inevitable in the environnent of anti-LRLs but this is a reasonably impartial examination. It's one man's view and needs qualification but is more like what one expects. This is not to say that the poster is for or against their use. Only that there is a scientific basis for the components that are in the Examiner. The concepts touch on what we have discovered to a point. We are grateful that someone has taken the time to look deeper. In fact Schumann's Resonance (ibid) is a vital part of the RT circuitry.

Originally Posted by Qiaozhi

The operating principle of LRLs is not immediately obvious if viewed from the perspective of accepted physics. First hand examination of these devices will reveal an apparently simplistic construction that obscures the complex subtlety of their design.

Two types are described here. The first is similar to the Rangertell Examiner, and the other is an advanced electronic device that operates on the same underlying principle as the Mineoro detectors.

For example, the Rangertell Examiner may appear at first sight to contain just a handful of components that seem loosely connected in some arbitrary fashion. This conclusion is far from the truth, as will be explained fully in the following analysis.

One of the most confusing aspects of the Examiner design is the enameled wire that protrudes through the case and terminates just below the calculator housing without any apparent connection. This type of connection can be explained by reference to the work carried out by Zaev, Avramenko and Lisin on displacement current. According to the authors – "The measurement of the polarisation current in matter can clean up the long-standing dispute about the nature of dielectric permeability of metals, and also make possible the transmission of energy along an isolated conductor without a galvanically closed current circuit. Nicholai Tesla demonstrated this on 1st February 1892 in London but the description of the method applied by him for such a transmission line has not been preserved."

A simple circuit (known as Avramenko’s fork) can be used to demonstrate this method of energy transmission.

Note that there is no connection between the load and a common terminal, such as ground. The load is quite simply isolated from ground, but it still receives power.

This type of circuit is not subject to Kirchoff’s current and voltage laws, and the output current measured in the load is not appreciatively affected by inserting a capacitor of 0.1uF in the line. This is the underlying principle of power derivation within the Examiner LRL, and the reason why the device needs no battery supply other than that provided by the calculator. Power to the circuit (a modified form of Avramenko’s fork) is provided directly by the calculator allowing precise tuning by the operator.

Although the original circuit contained two diodes, the version in the Examiner makes use of resonance techniques and longitudinal wave coupling to boost the energy to a level necessary for long range detection. The human component is also an essential part of the design. Just as a tuning fork (or in this case Avramenko’s fork) has natural frequencies for sound, the planet Earth has natural frequencies, called Schumann resonances, and the human brain has natural frequencies for electromagnetic radiation. It is known that that the Earth’s Schumann resonances are "in tune" with the human brain’s alpha and theta states. But since the Schumann resonance is very low, at about 7.5Hz, the frequencies programmed via the calculator must be down-converted and fine-tuned for effective long-range location to take place. In addition, the Schumann resonance can fluctuate by + or – 0.5Hz depending on the properties of the Earth’s electromagnetic cavity.

The natural frequencies of the human brain are:

Beta waves (14 to 30Hz)

Alpha waves (8 to 13Hz)

Theta waves (4 to 7 Hz)

Delta waves (1 to 3Hz)

This explains the inclusion of adjustable elements in the fork / down-converter circuit.

Although the underlying operating principle is complex and difficult to explain, the demonstrable success of these devices has been shown on a number of occasions. Unfortunately LRLs rarely work out-of-the-box, and may need to become acclimatised to their owner over a period of time. Perseverance is the key to successful hunting with an LRL.

It is important that the end of the wire should protrude through the case, and terminate just below the calculator chip. In most calculators this chip is located near to the center of the unit.

SYNOPSIS FROM TELL

This refers to the prototype Examiner version 1.0 which was an early attempt (only 10 made). The Examiner T-G 7 01 06 is light years ahead of this. The reason for the price is that we have tested exclusive frequencies to Rangertell and spent years testing it in every conceivable environment. The adept geek may build a lookalike but it will not perform anywhere near the real Examiner. Alignment for instance is more important than first appears and you don't get the POS system to determine depth, distance , shape and weight or the R&D frequencies. You can build a reasonable beeping metal detector too for $50. But it won't perform anywhere near the commercially accepted product because there is no R&D. With more than 400 Rangertell units sold which means about 1000 users and no complaints except from a stereotyped skeptic or two, 100 percent acceptance is the answer to that one.

2. You are not of course connecting your head to the stratosphere. You are allowing resonance frequency to fulfill the requirements of the detection frequency in relation to the target. If you enter 7 into a tuned Examiner and walk you will determine the grid pattern that is evident round the Earth every 7 feet .

E&OE.

delete recovered

THE WRONG FREQUENCIES- Radio Control the answer to the 'dowsing' hype

If they must know...

There is an interesting story regarding that particular prototype and "the wrong frequencies". A reason that makes idle criticism look ornery. It has been late in coming because of technical policy. What transpires between the bench and tech support is sometimes clouded. It seems the prototype was a one-off in more ways than one. It's operation and methodology was different.

RT had developed what was considered a great frequency viz 2.7 Hz which went with the above unit in the instructions. One afternoon we decided to see if a nugget attached to a radio-controlled helicopter would effect a swing for the prototype as it flew low over a reef. An amazing swing occurred witnessed by Mr G. Brooker the owner-maker, the chopper swooping at least 15 feet from the gold sample on the ground. The experiment worked. The Examiner was so exciting an instrument all along this was not surprising. We know it is hard for skeptics to believe it...it is unbelievable. But of course it didn't work on another frequency or with the chopper floating with the power cut. Why don't they believe it then?...anyway...

The point of this piece is to tell you what happened next on the ground where samples were thrown to be detected unseen. An inability occurred and the detection was feet out each time. No I thought , this only happened to those who haven't worked out where the interference is coming from. Something wasn't working. Perchance I realised that the radio control frequency is 27 Megahertz (MHz) a harmonic or multiple of 2.7Hz. This was the culprit. Needless to say we abandoned the 2.7 frequency. Unfortunately the instructions had gone out on some units. This is not to say it did not work well, but if the user was anywhere near anything radio-controlled it would not work as well. This could be a toyshop half a mile away in some areas or any modern suburb really. After all some planes etc have a mile range don't they. Even some radio setups in vehicles from hundreds of feet away (case in point, the user who could not get a good response?). Funny, if it wasn't so irritating.

The frequencies were also in multiples based on decimal multiples, a practice we later found less accurate than subsequent frequencies. If though we get no feedback, how are we going to know when to instruct? For all intents and purposes, the users were happy. That is not to say the users of today are in the same boat, just not having asked. Hundreds of users cannot be silent.

It is not fair to single out one unfortunate prototype system from years ago and a few odd frequencies as representative of anything but a quality control matter which did not extend to more than a few locators. Obviously they did not work 100 per cent in some areas leading to wild Chinese whispers, the outcome you can see on this site. We would expect a full retraction in view of the transitory nature of this event.

The unit exploded and incorrectly judged was a radio-controlled job, not the Examiner T-G.

Ant Tech Support

PS: I asked Tell whether the prototype was a radio control experiment. He said " It sure wasn't an Iddier motor ..!!"

______________________________________________________________________________________

HISTORICAL ANALOGY

Early Attempt ver 1.0 Experimental Technology Examiner 2005

Early Ford Attempt Ford these days

Like the old jalopy... you're making the racket!!

YOUR TURGID ARGUMENT IS BASICALLY THAT THE LOWEST-PRICED QUALITY LONG RANGE DETECTOR ON THE MARKET (CHECK IT YOURSELF WWW) IS A DOWSING INSTRUMENT. YOU HAVE BASED THIS ON ONE IN NUMBER [OF 10 EXPERIMENTAL MODELS ]THAT WAS FAULTY .LOOK AT THESE EXPLANATIONS. LRLs HAVE BEEN AROUND FOR 20 ODD YEARS . THE LRLs WE ARE TALKING ABOUT, LIKE THE EXAMINER , ARE DEFINITELY NOT DOWSING PER SE.

________________--

Q. What exactly is a long range locator or detector ?

A. Here are some descriptions from independent websites.

"Another type of treasure finder is the long range detector. These units can detect larger items and treasure chests as far beneath the surface as 20 feet and 2-10 blocks away. These metal detectors, which range in cost between $2,000 and $30,000, are used by professional treasure hunters."

http://www.desertusa.com Article by Joseph Johanek

____________________________________________________________________________

April 2, 1997

How do long range metal detectors work? -- AS

"In a short range metal detector, the detector looks for the direct interaction of its magnetic field and a nearby piece of metal. That nearby metal changes the characteristics of the detector's wire coil in a way that's relatively easy to detect. But in a longer-range metal detector, the electromagnetic coil must actually radiate an electromagnetic wave and then look for the reflection of this electromagnetic wave from a more distant piece of metal. That's because the magnetic field of the coil doesn't extend outward forever--it dies away a few diameters of the coil away from the coil itself. For the metal detector to look for metal farther away, it needs help carrying the magnetic field through space. By combining an electric field with the magnetic field, the long-range metal detector creates an electromagnetic wave--a radio wave--that travels independently through space. Electromagnetic waves reflect from many things, particularly objects that conduct electricity. So the long-range metal detector launches an electromagnetic wave and then looks for the reflection of that wave. "

http://rabi.phys.virginia.edu/HTW/electric_power_generation.html

RT's Secretary

"The skeptics have a simple Disclosure Minimization dogma that is not telling anyone enough."

Hawkeye

tesla77

« Last Edit: Today at 09:06:24pm by tesla77 »

Re: Report on the Rangertell Examiner
« Reply #1 on: Today at 09:17:49am »
Posts: 10

Dear Carl Moreland

Re this report you have finally concocted.......

You appear to have been born to approximate the butt of the righteous!!

Not only have you committed many breaches of etiquette, fact and scientific principle but you have even failed to acknowledge the existence of the electromagnetic field!!.Oh well, you can't win them all.... ... How about a couple though? Pretty please??

In your world Carl the radio antenna on the hill must be connected to, nay, abut the receiver aerial in the users hand or no signal will be received. Ha-ha! You have overlooked the fact that years of experimentation have gone into getting the custom-made Examiner just right. Has it ever occurred to you that you cannot judge the invisible not to mention the unseen manhours involved? Had you weathered the 'visually painful' site and opened a few pages you would have seen photographic evidence of signal-lines putting your entire argument under painful suspicion. So painful that...I'll be damned there's you and a symptom of the aforesaid using the human face as a reference. If that's ' incomprehensible', it's simply over your head as is 99% of what Ranger says. You have destroyed a locating instrument that is the financial answer to the over-priced. Why bicker then?( No-Frills is not a term that would be understood by you so I won't use it.)

No wonder it was useless in your unresponsive hands Carl ...you broke it!
It wasn't bought direct from Rangertell. Didn't you say it was sold dirt-cheap?? to you by a disgruntled moron?

The piece on the manufacturer or owner's identity is libellous and completely false, a lie. There are pen-names and aliases. Net-parlance has not obscured the terms despite your ridiculous misuse of the terms. It has been held world without end that the skeptics use aliases, I mean pen-names. The owner wishes to remain anonymous because you have the bad and known habit of defaming and hence any connection is not on. I will repeat in all sincerity once more Ranger's name has not appeared on any forum or report nor will it in the foreseeable future. It is a Mr B., but not the person you mentioned. If this is not true may God strike me down! Ever occur to you that you are insulting the maker who is known to the customer?If the company was a scam you would be playing into it's hands. What has a net tech got to do with the product ? Why would any self-respecting manufacturer publicize his name when you are waiting to defame and illegally insult his proven goods?I suggest you remove this erroneous reference to a Vincent Blanes or Vic Blaine or it will be seen as wilful libel and deception and you will hear from the maker in due course..for the third time this month, acknowledging your contest and expressing interest in the future as a contestant..for the third time this month! How are you going to run a contest when you don't have the right manufacturer? Ha-ha-ha .This is classic public mischief. As it happens there is a distributor that you may have been told has an interest in these locators with a name very similar to the above.. invited by Ranger because of your insane and cockeyed aim. But he is not the manufacturer now is he. Take that all back or suffer the ignominious punchline that attends those who cannot remember people's names despite being told a thousand times.


The Echolet VB [Vector Based]    Was this fine experimental unit a Rangertell continuing product? Is there some kind of problem with models and affinities here?

More Pictures To Make The Point Clear

             =
       Your claim " LRLs are dowsing " is like saying the above is correct. It just isn't!

You have gone to a lot of trouble but failed in the final analysis, because you cannot acknowledge and be respectful towards the truth. Why do you say you doubt 200 buyers have bought Rangertell units? How would you know? Why do you insult the level of intelligence by lying? PDF programs? It's like Sam's insane reference to one email that could have been used by anyone re a mailing list $5 scam. It didn't even get sent and wasn't illegal by statutes. Why wouldn't the net tech register it having the credit card at the time and then change it later? Does that mean he's the owner? Bahahah. What has anything you have said ring even slightly true when you stoop to such lies and triviality? Why again insult a legitimate degree..how would you know it wasn't? Any evidence other than your blindness and inability to use LRLs?

The customer is right...you are not the customer. Ambiguity intended.

FOOTNOTE: I hope you realise that the Examiner may one day be used by the blind and that anything you say is attracting the appropriate.... contempt!
__________________________________________
"THOUGHTS ON A NUGGET _--_ A Theoretical Postulation
A shipper and assistant scientist does not own a company in the same way the second-in-charge isn't the CEO. Ad hoc treatment of these basics only leads to confusion. The majority input into an invention automatically makes the inventor the head of an organisation. His name would be first on the patent.This is essential respect for the kernel of the product.If Rolls had invented the auto engine in this range of vehicles, would you say Royce was the owner because he had co-developed? Of course not. Did Orville Wright invent the airplane? No. Wilbur and Orville did. Maybe Orville invented the engine and so having the majority input and actually building every part of the airplane himself made him the owner. Wilbur added the rest and co-tested for argument's sake. If the company was in Orville's name then why would Wilbur be the owner? And if Wilbur was the head of another airplane company called Wilburco that made user-independent aircars...Orville wouldn't like it at all. And Wilbur would hate it. It would then be a matter of company law and not Wilbur's company in any way, even loosely. I suspect this idea of partnership is inherent in many companies and so when one addresses comments re what one assumes from hearsay is fact, he could be completely awry in his estimation. Also when one assumes he is dealing with a company of many workers he may in fact be talking about one lonely inventor who is generous enough to share his discovery with the world. Conversely a sole inventor could be insulted by an insistence based on a misreading when a throng of researchers may have gelled into a respectable firm of operatives. So when a name is attached to a website being set up , there is no more reason to feel that the person is the instigator than that he has had the pc and knowledge at the time to set the site up. If there is an advisory statement from a company that the person touted as the head is in fact incorrect is is mathematically obvious that it is more than likely a correct assertion. If the firm has an email or two and a telephone contact number and sells, then there would be no reason to hide anything. The customers can see who and where their money is going. Usually if there is more than one company interest involved identity is not it follows completely straightforward "
Part of an Internet Business Principles Answer I wrote using the LRL scenarios here as an example.

On another theme, incoherent sniping and carrying on has been occurring for more than 12 years re LRLs. This site has a good summation and explains the unusually high temperature associated with this topic for the newbie.
http://sitewatch.longrangelocating.4t.com
Who would like it if each time a forum or group was set up to discuss LRLs the skeptics sat on it and dealt with each new post to disrupt and defame and so ruin legitimate sales...all the way to the eventual closing of the world's greatest forums? Wouldn't counter-noms occur to a prolific and equal extent? It's a corollary of gold detecting that he that informs misses out. The genre is full of stories where the finder has lost his mine etc to a friend who visited it in the night. There is hence a mystique of forum names and identity games on the net as well. The form itself is not ingenuous but guarded, and wisely so. This defeats the skeptics before they can effect. After all who is going to succeed in a court of law with evidence of defamation against a sneaky bankrupt?
Netcrier the Vigilant a.k.a Dalejmeister6543
__________________________________________________________________---
Mr Skeptic

__________________________________________________________________________

A full and detailed rebuttal will be posted on where Carl pointed to as a 'rant' site taking every word and phrase in the report and submitting it to examination. It's www.Rangertell.com/to_the_skeptic.htm (this is a forum cut so refers to this site in this instance) As it grows the same should be readable elsewhere (other sites(s)...since Carl has had his cry and grown up a little. Not much, but a little says Ranger who seemed nonplussed by the comedy of errors.

I ( for owner GBrooker) offered to show Carl the inside of the Examiner with his pics and as you could see I did, well before his messy pictures. It was of course in jest since Carl was expressly denied permission by R-T. It would lead people who knew nothing about LRLs to imagine all kinds of chicanery was employed to create a do-nothing product. If it did nothing then 200 customers would have railed years ago. The 100 percent acceptance means credit needs to be given where it is due. Carl and his likes must be laughed at and felt sorry for because their bodies are not normally conductive as they cannot even dowse. This has been witnessed. They are thus also jealous and/or working for rivals. There are ways to allow anyone but it would require a personal hands-on tuition and measurement set of sessions until their rare body frequencies were determined. If Carl and others are/were prepared to attend these there would be no problem.

Before this, let me post two emails. I thought I'd clear up a few things re this LRL from the horse's mouth. Locator.

Q. Can I use your website address to direct people to those posts and use the IP setup we had last time.

A. No, only ten or so were made. They were no worse than the Examiners of the time but were essentially discontinued because the design changed after that. So from 270 (all told) or so you are looking at about 3% give or take of our units , which is not statistically on the board, and so could we call them truly representative? No. The price of the Examiners has almost doubled since then which tells you something. Today's are different and work on different parameters.They worked very well though as do all our products. I wouldn't place too much store on what's said on the net. In essence, they haven't got a clue and with some it's almost like a medical problem.Anyone can tell you in five minutes of using an Examiner that it works. In the rare event there is no response there is always an identifiable reason and replacement is organized or tuning done etc. No complaints yet, which is encouraging.

Also the wrong instructions were sent out with that particular model.The frequencies were wrong.

EXPERIMENT: Take your Examiner or LRL and set it to the frequency of your local radio or TV station. Walk between the radio or TV receiver and the direction of the aerial, usually on a hill in your district. Doing this without knowing where it is will be a good blind test. You may find there is a carrier aerial on another hill as well as the main one, thus giving you another signal-line. The antenna will swing as you cross the signal-line. The electromagnetic signal from the radio or TV transmitter forms a signal-line in the same way one is formed between your LRL and the target. You can sweep the LRL as per usual (the antenna will not turn by itself) but walking between the two points is superior. RT

This is the diagram from the photo Carl took of the experimental Examiner. He did not allow the photos because he claims they were copyright despite there being no copyright on them ie no written indication. Did he perhaps not see the 'c' in the circle on the Rangertell Examiner and the obvious breach publishing the above in photo form represented? A colored drawing above) I hope will suffice just to keep Carl from imagining he is Rangertell again as is obvious from ebay. On ebay he offered the same unit for sale taking off the Examiner in a defamatory manner and even asking for more than the price listed. He even used a hill picture we had , only his was dome-shaped. This was unspeakably uncalled for. But we still believe his problem lies with the remanence of his metal detectors and so like Sam who is unorthodox of hand, there is a reason.

It is apparent from the exploded pic showing the handle construction that there is no real glue presence to speak of.

Just a few changes from the hundreds made to the original design. What is shown in the report is not representative.

Oops.I think Carl is a. upset ; b. underestimating the gravity of his infringements. Search for Rangertell on ebay and you'll see what I mean?? Poll material someone? I am finding it harder and harder to acknowledge that his $10,000 test would not be a trick. I think I can see why now nobody takes it up.

Carl's pictures were taken in the wrong light, to exaggerate the glue marks. I assume it is the glue but it even looks like a smear has been added...of something like face cream.The glue may have crystallized. Even if this were happening it would not be seen by anyone since all units are glued together making the seam stronger than the box itself. As well the screws are directly connected to the antenna which means that if they were loosened or the box somehow opened with a saw the unit would collapse and so not work. Doctored photos or simply a sensible end to the smear campaign? ..I mean the glue from the wrong angle. Note that in the photo of the control box with exploded handle there is no real glue presence seen. It is an unfortunate angle he had chosen with the two control-box halves, the little glue that there was reflecting the light in an exaggerated manner.

MORE CHANGES AND COMPONENTS TO TEST PHYSICS, ABSORBED INTO THE FINAL EXAMINER

Changes are either accepted and built into the Examiner or shelved for further development. The report neglects hundreds of these small but important changes in the evolution of the product.

Carl mistakenly claims that the above schematic does nothing. Why then does he allow the following survey meter on his site?

A look at the schematic there will tell you that it similar to the Examiner's and of course works. It's actually a lot simpler yet Carl says these units sell for up to $7000USD. Has he ever considered Research and Development time re these products? Note the suggestion in the right-hand box. It talks about using a DC oscillator. So what is the calculator's function in all this? It is in fact a DC oscillator that produces a steady, mathematically modified sin wave frequency signal to be translated by the Tesla coil and circuit in the control-box.

There is no standard configuration in all this electronics. Our values for components form a unique pin-code (like on your bank card) if you like which cannot be imitated because it's taken years to develop. There may be semblant forms but ours has passed the test ...user satisfaction. (Joe the unhappy user was a complete joke since he received a faulty one as we noted on it's return.) If you can't conceive of a faulty unit due to postal treatment if not rough treatment then I'm sorry, you cannot be real. The other was a setup of some kind taken to a lab where dowsing would be looked on as alternative energy form and dismissed. The guy would want his job and neither have the time nor experience to deal with such an invention.Why has it taken 20 years for the forum posters to come to no final conclusion?? The poll recently held was split 17/17. Half thought LRLs would detect more than 100 feet, the other half did not. Minus aliases that the skeptics use (not the LRL backers) and the fact that some thought LRLs would detect to below 100 feet and you have a technical win to the LRL users.

The problem Carl has then must be the power source.He doesn't comprehend the amplification of electromagnetic fields as illustrated in the above schematic works by substituting the body for electrodes in one sense and instead chooses to believe it doesn't function. This is because he cannot even dowse so can only go by what he has read. Poor Carl. He does though feel that the Patents Office is wrong in allowing patents for LRLs since he believes they are only dowsing rods.(see patents pages). If he disagrees with the experts, where is he coming from? Credibility? Hardly.

The componentry under the perforated board is not shown for some reason. More selective pixology.

unique aerial physics...

...not a magic dowsing stick...

...Tesla-based coil system ..

All that was advertised was true. Though the camera lied the import is that it works. It doesn't look like that honestly. Is that you on your licence photo? Is it ever?...the import is that it works.

I will offer you or anyone a free Goldscrew if a method of proving 200 happy customers can be suggested without infringement of privacy of any kind. I can paste a list right now of more than 100 with their emails and names almost completely crossed out. I was playing around the other night. You wouldn't know who they were or where but....it's our policy never to give out any customer information...of any kind. This will never change.

RT's secretary

I'm not the maker and the calculator was only glued in some early models. There is an air-gap now between it and the control box. This allows subtle repositioning as a last resort if a shift occurs, the main reason for signal loss.

Here is a site that Rangers you how to make your own Tesla coil. It's not the same as ours of course. That's a trade secret.

http://www.griffithobs.org/exhibits/Tesla%20Coil%20Exhibit/tcoil.html

The resonant frequency info is good.

Why is Tesla in the background? Where is this technology? What did he invent? Just about everything. Remember these are the first patents ever of these machines.

These are patents. Add to these Radio, fluorescent light, X-rays etc, radio control etc. and you have the 'Father of the 2oth Century' as he is becoming known.

http://www.yurope.com/org/tesla/tabe.htm

Ranger

Will somebody go to voyforums and tell that insolent remailer fool that

A. Rangertell is not fleeing from justice. It is business decorum to remain discreet because of scammers like him peddling for some other manufacturer. Equally since when does a co-developer represent a company in the flurry of aliases and insults that plague this present context if the idea is not nurtured ?

B. Why doesn't he post to this forum instead of those face cream container pics on their own. No, this would terminally hole his argument. What does he represent, a race of bug-eyed creatures whose visual IQ is superior? In this case they wouldn't have a clue anyway and would say "Paul, do you know that resonating two coils does produce a detectable change etc. There was a man called Tesla..."

Further proof SS Watcher etc is getting desparate over there with the few hopeless fireflies that flutter near his idiot candle in the sky. It looks furtive alright!

Ranger

"Most of what escapes scrutiny at the forum is generally known in the real world as downright cheek." --Whitmore

Carl, you know nothing whatsover about this form of electronics. I don't think you are qualified to comment on circuits you haven't seen in action. We are not talking about normal resonance circuits. We are dealing with a unique never-seen-before resonant circuit. This is the first corollary of electronic experimentation.

The Lectra Search appears to be a voltage divided idea, the complete opposite of the Examiner.

Remember we are talking about virgin Tesla coils here that don't conform to electronics textbook explanation until you know what it is you have.

The handle rod does not make contact with the hand. Correct. Complete proof it's not dowsing as you understand it. You need to comprehend that the electromagnetic fields and charges as illustrated in this post much earlier are what occurs due to the circuit configuration. The resonance becomes part of the circuit when you factor in the target and the coils plus the variable controls. If the resistance is not there then the sensitivity, NOT the resonance is altered. It's like a person pushing a swing. It will build up to a point (WITH THE OHMAGE or resistance) until is reaches equilibrium.

The wires going nowhere concept is tired and completely false. There is no connection required because it's a Tesla transformer concept. Carl, I thought you had more imagination. Each wire as I said is there for a reason , nothing resembling an E-scope or Lectra-Search. The windings are precise are are the lengths. There is no wire there that's for show. Why? Every Examiner is glued and thus unopenable. Why stuff them with useless phonies. For you? That Examiner was procured by you at random recall? The fact it was discontinued only proves that you have opened last year's fish and chips and held your nose! Not that it wasn't a fine unit. Some with calculator have different configurations as well. Whereas you didn't specifically claim the Examiner was like the others you inferred there were do-nothing components as in the others. No cigar.

TESLA TESLA TESLA TESLA. That is the basis. You haven't even mentioned the basis.

I would have said something like.

"Ranger claims 200 people are happy with the units. Inside is a Tesla coil system with unusual departures and unorthodox arrangement of components. I don't think he would have had any success giving 14 days trial if it didn't work. Unless a full explanation is given re the placement of the components and what they do there is no real answer we can arrive at. "

Where is the transmitter antenna from the calculator? Do you perhaps think I have a doodling problem ? That is intrinsic. The circuit you've drawn lacks the essential stage, number 1, the transmitting. You have an egg ok. Where is the hen? It's not a claim to evolution either. It's a simple fact.

Honestly Carl, don't show that to anyone because the first thing they will perceive is that without it being built as per the maker's instructions they cannot possibly determine it's efficacy. The maker expressly forbids you.

I, Ranger

I think the reason that Carl cant comprehend the lrl/mfd concept is because he has no imagination, if it isnt written in a tech manual, he cant relate to it. The proof should be based on weather or not a certain unit can or has found treasure, if it works for then thats the best that any user/buyer could ask for.

....................................................................................................................

So what's intellectual property and how much is that worth? Ten dollars? That sounds about what you'd pay in net fees while you attempt to look inside that which has been attested to in the manner you're doing it. It cost a lot more than $5 when we bought it. Plus why do you suppose a unique oscillator cicuit would not exist in either a cheap or expensive calculator. It fit the frequency requirements. Inventors don't just go to the dime store and buy a cheap calculator you know. Hundreds of calculators have been bought and tried. It's also one of the reasons the price is within reach. You're dealing with an invention here, not a scam.

Doesn't the fact it's been discontinued mean anything? You aren't exactly educating people on the pitfalls of buying an LRL ..not least wise knocking one that has drawn no clamor of disapproval except from you and that warlord fella who looks like Randi...!!

So come on Carl . Open up that baby. Point to each component and say 'Didn't do it for me.' Since when did you represent 4 billion potential users? Give it one star out of five. Claim you have subjected it to all the tests amounting to a benchtest on a real bench with a lump of 18k gold that has become so remanent from your 50 metal detectors that it is not even a 4k. You need 24k BTW or it won't work. Since you still haven't told me whether you can use LRLs at all of any description do you expect me to believe you're not just another Randi-ism?

You know I had a dream once of a full-page ad in a ritzy magazine headed" What you can do with a calculator". Now I have a better idea. You Carl in full color at the back of a mine-dump number-crunching, a satisfied look on your face. I could do it with that $10,000 you'll forgo once we get it together.

But enough rhetoric. Back to Round 3. The Examiner Is A Flunkie or Is This The Real Thing? Your move.

I want to see what's inside it myself. Just hope it works for you before you open it , because if you don't tell us it doesn't (oops?) we'll have to repair it for you.

oh boy!!

Tell

The sinwave frequencies that emanate from the calculator and are amplified by the coil in the Examiner are extremely minute and cannot be detected using conventional apparatus. That's why photos of signal-lines are required. The frequencies are tested by counter-proofing and testing which at no stage disproves their authenticity. If any failed the repeatability test and there was no reason that could be determined then the premise would fail. It does not.

It has been noted that a customer (Grizzley from Utah) who received an Examiner with the calculator depositioned in transit was sent another which has been lost or delayed inexplicably in the post. A third is being sent his way. Let's hope they don't send by boat this time as I suspect has occurred with the second.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

..............................................................................................................................................

The spurious claim that a customer has not written two explanatory letters is further evidence of illicit tampering with the truth. All they need do is write to the customer himself . The two false letters written by them were not followed by two false letters conveyed by IBID2000. The customer wrote both on being requested to explain the state of play by RT. All they need do is send the customer a private message on the TN forum. I believe the customer lives in a small town with only two postal officers so if he thinks the mail has been in the same bag that is the likely scenario. This is extraneous though since there is no doubt the skeptics are bogus and their agenda is not worth countering. It only plays into their hands so they can defame and slander again. Asking the customer is a legitimate way the skeptics will not follow up. Get it from the horse's mouth. This though would of course expose them as the liars those who follow the forum know and those who do not can easily miss. That misinformation and scallywagging is the rogues' competing intention. ...............................................................................................................................................

The following week it becomes obvious that these jesters are just competitors lying and cheating their way to connive the odd simpleton that may not read carefully enough and observe the dates of the postings. This time they seize on the signal booster, which has received no criticism resembling that contained in their forged letters which appeared on a site no longer available. See assumptions from similar sources here. http://www.hotboards.com/plus/plus.mirage?who=shipwrecks&id= Mike is critical and unbiased. He does not pander to anyone so his comments are trustworthy. He did not receive the booster until after the tirade against it began on google forum. Clear case of defamation as are all the works of JBlack, Sam Scafferi, Carl Moreland . The others have only been inveigled by these competitors of ill forum repute.Though they use different remailers on google they are held to be the same collection of desperados against LRLs by those who read the forums.

I will tell you if the Examiner you have is the Examiner we know and thus a good representative. However I'm sure you understand that to post information pertaining to design that has been protected by civilian patent is illegal and could lead to reverse engineering. This could lead to the substitution of lookalikes on the market and defeat the purpose you are apparently striving to achieve ( I won't say the destruction of alternatives to standard detectors). Not to mention that to post such information without the manufacturer's consent amounts to desertion of principle of the highest order. I say this particularly in the context of instrumentation designed to search for and identify gold and other precious metals that in some cases is held to be in a technically grey area though the responsibility is on the shoulders squarely of the user. Also defeating your intention is the possibility that prices will rise to counter the defamatory labelling of such a device by the technically challenged who expect pc boards in storey form, not a frugal combination of a few components that through testing and laborious expedition have been seen as the 'pin-code' of an accepted locator.

So I neither give my consent nor encourage the publication of any claim that the Examiner's circuitry is public property. No brainchild has ever been of this type. Even if you could build similar , the windings and values would not correspond with the untappable structure of the unit in question. These have been so arrived at that it is just not possible. The placement of the components is such that it cannot be duplicated.

As I recall that particular model was NOT representative of the Examiner by Rangertell though it worked to the same quality levels as the others. The latest , the T-G is almost twice the price and the best. You have the standard Examiner, not the one that has sold this year. Also there were instructions errors because the configurations were changing so rapidly. The one pictured was the main character I'm afraid in this. My nose is not growing long here. It just so happened that this occurred and..with that model!! This form of detector development is far from easy.

Need I say that , as is iterated on the site, many configurations have been tried with the Examiner. I would estimate at least half a dozen. This does not include slightly different forms. In this case the number could be in the dozens. The configuration in the Examiner picture, with the cradle was not representative. None were since it is a dynamic process.

Two hundred users have been happy with our units. One couldn't hope for a better result. There have been no complaints save for the few faulty units. Perhaps you should send me an email first and I will advise you whether what you have is

a. a real Examiner
b. a representative model.
c. NB: a working Examiner (according to whom?)

If you intend to defy my gentlemanly request that you do not treat the intellectual property of the Christian manufacturer in the way you are threatening, I would solemnly suggest you wait for a set of basics that have not been hitherto seen on this forum re locators. These will explode myths re dowsing and bring to light ideas not before diagrammatically explained. Then keep the picture above as all there is here until there has been more than no complaint about it. Otherwise you will see before you a minimal array that will lead the uninformed observer to imagine that big is beautiful...which anyone who works with fields and combinations knows is an unintelligent concept. It works. Please leave it at that.

I know it doesn't work for you because the Goldscrew we sent you didn't. Everyone who has used the Goldscrew said it worked, except you. We send people Goldscrews to see if they will be able to use the Examiner. I know I'm not wrong in suspecting you will say it does not work. The truth is it does not work for you. I didn't mind your article above. I just hope that you are surprised by the fact it does work and happy like everyone else. The record though implies that you cannot use it because you could not use the Goldscrew. And that is the test we have devised and employ in cases where the user may need closer attention.

Prove me wrong. Tell me you have finally found a working Long Range Locator. If not I suspect that the dowser who found a particular site frequency to be a giveaway (more later perhaps) must surely be close to the truth. Hint: Placebo proof.

Ranger

PS: You said the other day you thought it was worth $50. Now you say it appears well worth $800. What is your net security like Carl? I thought this earlier comment unlike your usual style.

'A locator' infers some other? It might to a Martian. What's your ISP doing Carl?

Fine Carl, if you can use LRLs that work generally. The problem is that I have yet to hear that you have. Enlighten me if you can.

The top techs at Minelab (U.S.) looked at the Examiner and were considerably impressed. They gathered in the carpark and apparently couldn't let go of it when a user took it to show them. These men were the best in the metal detector field anywhere.

The line begins at the proper instructions and a tuning assist. Even I needed the maker to tune my Rodette when I first discovered the units. I was as lost as lost could be without that little turn of the screwdriver. It was like a key that let me into the Garden of Detection. I followed a mullock heap from hundreds of feet away and never looked back.

I remember wanting that locator so much I offered to buy then and there like my life depended on it. Boy was I relieved when the maker said. "Here, play with this." That was some years ago. It cost me $25 and was a basic Rodette predecessor. Since then I've built and co-developed hundreds of types and discovered dozens of new functions and tried everything. Ranger has an idea, and I help it along and build on it. It's a combined effort. All that time tuning and the proper instructions have been the bottom-line. You need to make sure your unit is working well though before you do anything. Let us know if you can't get a response. Where are you in the States? There may be a user nearby that can help you.

If you haven't got the tuning right you won't be at square one. Have you detected anything yet? Any swing? Remember it's a hair at a time literally. The tuning works better the less of a touch-turn is applied.

Ranger said that one you have used a superceded coil basis.

RT

HAHAHAHAH!!

Ranger and Tell are two people and have always been two people. Ranger was Tell's pen-name before it became Ranger. Only one person has written for Rangertell representing the thoughts of two people viz Ranger and Tell.

Ranger is not a Vincent. He doesn't write as Ranger. Never has, he's the inventor.

There is no problem knowing who Ranger and Tell are. Never has been. Only a couple of skeptics Sam JBlack etc and Carl claimed LRLs including the Examiner are mentally driven. The others have gone along for the ride.

It is completely and irrevocably true that the Examiner has been accepted almost 100 per cent.

I can write gold on a piece of paper or use a golden object to slyly trick my hand to find gold too. That is the trap for young players. It means you're not tuned. It means you don't have the frequencies working singularly and don't have the complete perspective. It's not your fault. Just last night I developed a cute LRL that I thought was going to be a winner. I showed it to Ranger and as we were talking I noticed that the resonance in my room had told me a lie, for the minute I negated it, it failed to work. Yet in my room it worked perfectly. It occurred to me again how important knowing what you're doing is with LRLs. The battery in the calculator was affecting the coil to create the perfect deception. It was tracking to a battery pack, that's how we knew. I confess though until that I actually thought I was onto something new. Another night I called Ranger around to see the amazing paper and Ranger locating experience that was unfolding before me. I would write gold and silver and lo and behold the rod would turn. The room was resonating so sensitively I was too delicately balanced. So you see it happens and you need to investigate it. It wouldn't surprise me that you have gone down the wrong resonance path and that's all. Need I say that we examine dowsing to make sure it isn't a trick of the mind that's affecting our units? This must be the understatement of the year. We always mention your ideas Sam and make totally sure you are not right in your belief. But we always keep the skeptics statements in mind as we work , to scientifically disprove them. Not that we wouldn't have but you do have a part to play in locating. You are keeping the bastards honest as they say. We knew before you though since the backgrounds of spooks and mentalism is something that we steered away from, ever since day one.

It isn't mentalism or subconscious cueing or fantasy entertainment and has never been. Otherwise we wouldn't have anything new to offer and it would be as you say... a ripoff!

Nowadays we have a body stabilisation circuit that maintains the body frequency at a stable level. But the calculator is not a mental cue or a dowsing assist. It produces an amplifiable signal that is filtered and induced by the control box circuit to turn the unit into a specifiable compass, according to the specific frequency entered in it. It is modified by key commands to enable the many functions available with the T-G. If you turn it off and tap the remanence off it will not swing. It will appear to if your hand is not a steady one and you have an auto-dowsing habit. Looking at the tip of the antenna will cure this.

RT

Maybe I don't face the critics enough. Have a look at what I think of your summary and hopefully you can make a wallpaper or something out of it so that you remember the nitty-gritty...

That model Examiner didn't work right and has been superceded....

I didn't say it didn't work right. I said it had been superceded, discontinued..old model. Would you look at a T-Model Ford and say that the brakes, not being disk meant that Ford was a naughty boy today?

The wrong instructions were included with that unit.....
No doubt about it. They were and amendments followed.

Unit was damaged in shipment.....
Looks ok to me. Are you sure you're reading me? Once again your incoherent logic escapes the reader.

Hair tuning is required.....
It always is. This is not a one-off damage control either. Hair or a thou tuning is one of the principles of RT products. Always has been.

Defective parts in that particular Examiner....
You're pushing something uphill now, vertically. How would I know without testing it again?

Conventional instrumentation can't measure the induction waves.....
The day it is possible is still a future reality. There are instruments but the best you can readily obtain is the photographic method for signal-lines. The best is still the logical sequence of cause and effect. It is set and it finds, blind.

Oh, and let's not forget the CLASSIC excuse all you dealers use... "That unit was no doubt tampered with before Carl tested it."

That can't possibly be. I didn't say anything of the kind. Any, all or none of the above may have occurred. All I reported was the truth and commented that it would need to be representative of last year's model.

RT

If we listened to you JBlack we would still be riding horses and carts. Maybe they said the Earth was round once and people were executed for maintaining it.

You are still maintaining it is flat. What books do you read? I bet you don't even believe. I figure you're atheist by inclination. You don't have to answer that question.

Ranger

....It's not your fault that what you find in LRLs is condemned before you try it because you think it's impossible? Radios, televisions, mobiles bouncing signals around the world and you can't see a device in all this melee being able to detect a difference in charge and thus expose a target that is giving off more than the matter around it?

It is your fault that you create a false picture of what's inside it but don't provide a test result using a negative user compared with a positive user. Ranges, depths, materials etc. would all be incorporated. Then instead of thinking that because a wire here is soldered wrong or there is black goo on the left of the box it's a scam, we would all be happier. We're talking about how efficiently these units find gold and other materials Carl. Not that they are just dowsing rods and so , since you believe dowsing cannot be proven it is a fantasy.

If you are going to open a unit why don't you proffer a chart with ranges etc achieved by an unbiased positive user? And conversely by you...I mean a negative user.

If I was an electronics engineer I would suspect for a time that they didn't work. But so help me I would offer proof in the form of statistics obtained by someone who could use them.

What's your head oscillating at Carl, or is that just how a skeptic signals he's happy to see one? No seriously..in Hz??

Ranger

Yes, I've already told you this, a year or so ago, when I offered you my $10,000 challenge and you declined.

--Carl

This post was twice deletd by Sam Scaffferi /JBlack who somehow has administrative rights. Complete proof that is not a forum but a skeptic tank like the others around the place.

No introductions. Let's keep the temperature of the forum below simmering to see whether it's possible. You've been referring to someone else but ..enough said. I found this trolling the net.

......
Pls keep my appearance to the one post. Vic

[i](Sorry, Vincent, but I got a complaint and had to alter your post.)[/i] ---JBlack

........................................................................

Let's try that again without the loose interpretation of forum rules Sam. The name was Vic. I know it's a common error. Anyway I found this trolling the net.

http://www.bikeandbuild.org/follow/journals/P2S.php?p=225&more=1&c=1

"Comment from: Sam Scafferi
I was out early in the afternoon (in my truck), scouting out a route that I will ride later in the month, and met several of your group stopped at the town of Clutier, IA. I must say several of them looked like they'd been down "40 miles of bad gravel road". As a fellow biker, I know that gravel roads and skinny-tired road bikes don't mix.

I had a nice chat with them, and gave them a few
directions on the shortest and best route into Mtown.

After I got home (Marshalltown), I jumped on the bike and rode North out of town to see if I could run across others of the group riding into town. I met up with a small group of you near the town of Green Mountain (about 7 miles outside of Mtown). It was really great to meet several of the bikeandbuild group, and to ride a few miles into Marshalltown with a few of you. I promised them a short route into Mtown, with only one small hill and no traffic lights all the way to their destination (the Y). Thanks a lot for letting "an old guy" ride along with you for a few miles. It was fun.

Thanks too for the T-shirt, it will be a nice addition to my collection.

Hope you all have a very nice trip across the USA..... Enjoy and come back again.

July 03, 2004 @ 13:43 "

Below you can see just a few of the many prototypes and models that were built and tested before the Examiner T-G

_______

We tired scientists at stampotech have decided to put you out of your misery Sam Black. Your problem has been known to us for some time so we decided to investigate just what may have been blocking your locating ability and causing you to claim so vehemently that long range locators like the Examiner don't work world without end. Please accept this tiny token of our solemn belief that your experience with LRLs has a simple answer.

Here it is:

http://tinyurl.com/3rwfr

Hooray for Sam Black hooray for Sam Black :D Yes, he's getting closer to the gold as we speak.. :D

In fact we're so adamant you will be pleased with this offering that Ranger is going to offer you a free trial of the Rangertell Signal Booster for 14 days. Carl has been swamped by his metal detectors which more than likely have braked his body aerial and led to the same null response phenomena. Maybe he will get the opportunity too, the same way he was given a Goldscrew to try. Up to the guys.

.........................................................................

(Footnote: The forum posts will not centre as the editing cannot be transferred. I apologise for this. The names had also been replaced for sake of propriety. If you want to read more of the deleted posts let me know). Anon

Some facts have merged that explain many things... Thanks once more to the Super.

Check out www.Rangertell.com/booster.htm in case you were wondering about the attitudes shown about the place. Read the entire page. One day someone hits paydirt in the pantomime.