Bomb Detector same as LRL's 1/23/10 UPDATE

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/04/world...iddleeast/04sensors.html?ref=middleeast

Must be a payoff/kickback scheme with the Iraqi administration


January 23, 2010
UK Bans Export of Bomb Detection Device
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS

Filed at 8:18 a.m. ET

LONDON (AP) -- Britain has banned the export of a hand-held machine marketed as a bomb-detection device in Iraq and Afghanistan because of allegations that it does not work.

The Department for Business Innovation and Skills halted the export of the ADE651 after a BBC Newsnight investigation Friday challenged the claims of the company, ATSC. The broadcaster took key components of the bomb detector to a laboratory, which concluded that a key component intended to detect explosives was akin to technology used to prevent theft in stores.

''Tests have shown that the technology used in the ADE651 and similar devices is not suitable for bomb detection,'' the department said in a statement.

Though the device would not normally need a license because it is nonmilitary technology, the British government banned its export to Iraq and Afghanistan because of the risk that it could hurt British and allied forces.

Britain's Press Association reported that Avon and Somerset Police had arrested the company's director, Jim McCormick, on suspicion of fraud by misrepresentation and released him on bail.

Police did not name the man arrested, as is customary with British criminal investigations, but said that it launched an investigation after the force became ''aware of the existence of a piece of equipment around which there were many concerns.''

''Given the obvious sensitivities around this matter, the fact that an arrest has been made, and in order to preserve the integrity of the investigation, we cannot discuss it any further at this time,'' the force said in a statement.

ATSC, whose number is not listed, has offices in rural Somerset.

Britain's Embassy in Baghdad raised concerns with Iraqi authorities, who bought the ADE651, for security checkpoints. The devices remain in use.

Iraq's Interior Minister, Jawad al-Bolani, told state-run Iraqiya TV on Friday that the instruments ''managed to prevent and detect more than 16,000 bombs that would be a threat to people's life and more than 733 car bombs were defused.''

''Iraq is considered as a market area for many companies producing such devices ... and there are other rival companies trying to belittle the efficiency of these instruments the government is buying,'' Bolani said.

''Not all those who use the instrument are fully trained,'' he added. ''The instrument's efficiency depends on the training of the user.''

Concerns about the device were raised in November, when the New York Times reported that the American military deemed the device useless. The newspaper reported that the Iraqi government purchased more than 1,500 of the devices, at a cost of between $16,500 to $60,000 each.

Iraqi families reacted to the news with outrage. Haider Mohammed, a relative of victims who died in recent bombings in Baghdad, called the detectors ''a toy,'' and demanded the Iraqi government answer for why it was not following the British government's lead.

''We ask the Iraqi government, if this device does not work, why did they buy it?'' Mohammed said. ''Are the lives of Iraqi people so cheap?''

The hand-held device consists of a swiveling antenna mounted via a handgrip. The maker claims it can detect explosives at a distance.

McCormick told the BBC in an earlier interview that ''the theory behind dowsing and the theory behind how we actually detect explosives is very similar.''

The broadcaster took the device to the Cambridge University computer lab, which determined that a ''programmed substance detection card'' that is supposed to detect explosives contained nothing but the type of anti-theft tag used to prevent stealing in department stores.

--------

Associated Press Writer Sameer N. Yacoub contributed to this story.

Sadly, yes, another scam... people will get killed because of this one.

Here in Mexico, the army uses something like this to detect drug like marihuana and cocaine  in cars and trucks. They say it works ??

Sadly, yes, another scam... people will get killed because of this one.

Please explain how a LONG range locator will get people killed, oh logical one? If they use such a device and then overlap with a tighter search with standard equipment, then perhaps that places them in a better position? Or are they heat-seeking and LRL seeking bombs? Sneaky sneaky damn enemies, always one step ahead ...........

Please explain how a LONG range locator will get people killed, oh logical one? If they use such a device and then overlap with a tighter search with standard equipment, then perhaps that places them in a better position? Or are they heat-seeking and LRL seeking bombs? Sneaky sneaky damn enemies, always one step ahead ...........

First, the manufacturer does NOT described it as a "long-range" locator, but rather an "explosives detector." In this particular case, Iraqi security forces are using this device at security checkpoints to look for explosives, and they are replacing sniffer dogs with it. Since the device does not work (besides being self-evident from the fact that it is just a dowsing rod, it has been tested and proven not to work), it is very likely that explosives will get through checkpoints that rely on it. In fact, from  the NY Times:

"The suicide bombers who managed to get two tons of explosives into downtown Baghdad on Oct. 25, killing 155 people and destroying three ministries, had to pass at least one checkpoint where the ADE 651 is typically deployed, judging from surveillance videos released by Baghdad’s provincial governor."

Ergo my response that people will get killed over this scam, as they likely already have.

Do you support this scam?

- Carl

I can only answer that loaded question by saying that I don't support any scams. Do you support any yourself?
I would think that the US and Iraqi armies are more than able to make equipment choices for themselves? Though perhaps you should write and warn them of their folly. Although perhaps there are anomalies to that argument like US servicemen staring at goats or  Iraqis placing their faith in sky-drunk Scud missiles instead of trusty AK-47s. If you are right and those devices do not work, there will be huge lawsuits to follow and possibly more deadly consequences from compromised "allies".
I hope you're wrong. If your army is that dumb on equipment, it would need to change its name to the British Army pronto ;-)

Certainly the US Government is not immune to stupidity, as several agencies bought into the Quadro Tracker scam until it was tested and proven not to work. Quadro was subsequently taken to court and put out of business. I own a couple of these beauties. It amazes me that anyone with a decent education would fall for it (it's laughably amateurish-looking), but they did.

In the case of the ADE651, it was bought by the Iraqis, not the US, although I'll bet my tax dollars were used for the purchase. US officials have been trying to convince the Iraqis of their 'mistake', to no avail. As long as only ordinary Iraqis get killed, nothing is likely to change.

Dowsing is all fun and games until people get killed.

- Carl

Ok, peace Carl (for now ;-) ), I take your US military knowledge on board and will wait and see.

However, your last statement is a tad too generalist, sensationalist and silly to be honest, for a man of your supposed analytical calibre.

I know many dowsers. None of them, or anyone I've ever read about, has ever died from dowsing. Apart from the shock of one another's finds!!

Ps that ADE instrument is termed a long range locator (clearly) on their website. There are scammers in every walk of life, even in conventional arms and detector production. Let's see if you are right on this occasion. Perhaps you are. That would fit in with the general truthfulness of the whole Western campaign on Iraqi soil anyway.

Dowsing is all fun and games until people get killed.

I've been asked many times, "What is the harm in dowsing?"

Well, if all you're doing is wasting time, then the only harm is wasted time. But LRL manufacturers have a nasty way of turning wasted time into wasted money, often a lot of wasted money, often by folks who really can't afford to waste money. I had a former neighbor who put $40,000 of his retirement savings into LRLs, and is now broke and in bad health.

And there is the harm of nonsensical beliefs spilling over into life decisions. I know of another dL'er whose passionate belief in pseudoscience got him killed by Mexican chelation treatments, ironically while he was on a dowsing trip. His wife committed suicide right after.

Now we have a company selling bogus dowsing devices that a country is attempting to use to protect its citizens, with devastating results. And people still defend this crap as legitimate. It's not.

So, yeah, what is the harm in dowsing?

- Carl

So, yeah, what is the harm in dowsing?

- Carl

You said it Carl. That 'thinking out loud / stream of consciousness' thing you just did is a bit rambling though and based on so many 'scientific' anecdotes its unbelievable; but so long as you came to the right conclusion! Good to know anecdotal qualitative evidence is in your bag of tools now.

Meanwhile, I hope that the OPs question is challenged in a healthy manner by LRL afficionados. As Art says, I also will use any and all methods to locate treasure.

I know of another dL'er whose passionate belief in pseudoscience got him killed by Mexican chelation treatments, ironically while he was on a dowsing trip. His wife committed suicide right after.

And it was the gun's fault when 12 people were killed at Fort Hood. Why blame a machine for the evils of man?

And it was the gun's fault when 12 people were killed at Fort Hood. Why blame a machine for the evils of man?

Of course I don't blame the machine, whether it's a gun or a dowsing rod. I'm saying that irrational beliefs sometimes lead to irrational acts, and there's no rationality in trying to stop suicide bombers with dowsing rods.

And it was the gun's fault when 12 people were killed at Fort Hood. Why blame a machine for the evils of man?

Of course I don't blame the machine, whether it's a gun or a dowsing rod. I'm saying that irrational beliefs sometimes lead to irrational acts, and there's no rationality in trying to stop suicide bombers with dowsing rods.

I know what you mean, but I don't think you can say it was his passion for LRL's that got him killed. He could have gotten killed being there metal detecting with a DFX. Would that have shed bad light on the White's DFX?

I know what you mean, but I don't think you can say it was his passion for LRL's that got him killed. He could have gotten killed being there metal detecting with a DFX. Would that have shed bad light on the White's DFX?

I said "passionate belief in pseudoscience." His irrational beliefs got him killed, even if he had died with a DFX in his hand. The fact that he was on a dowsing trip was irony.

I know what you mean, but I don't think you can say it was his passion for LRL's that got him killed. He could have gotten killed being there metal detecting with a DFX. Would that have shed bad light on the White's DFX?

I said "passionate belief in pseudoscience." His irrational beliefs got him killed, even if he had died with a DFX in his hand. The fact that he was on a dowsing trip was irony.

Okay, pseudoscience. If it had been a DFX, would you be here saying this? It wasn't his irrational beliefs that got him killed. It was killers that got him killed. How many dowsers, etc., are on here? None of them have been killed because they dowse.

I know what you mean, but I don't think you can say it was his passion for LRL's that got him killed. He could have gotten killed being there metal detecting with a DFX. Would that have shed bad light on the White's DFX?

I said "passionate belief in pseudoscience." His irrational beliefs got him killed, even if he had died with a DFX in his hand. The fact that he was on a dowsing trip was irony.

Okay, pseudoscience. If it had been a DFX, would you be here saying this? It wasn't his irrational beliefs that got him killed. It was killers that got him killed. How many dowsers, etc., are on here? None of them have been killed because they dowse.

Touche' 

It wasn't his irrational beliefs that got him killed. It was killers that got him killed.

His irrational belief that chelation therapy would cure his problem directly lead to his death. Sure, I'll agree that the Mexican scam doctor promoting chelation therapy shares the blame, just like the manufacturers of LRLs are liable if they make false claims about their products.

How many dowsers, etc., are on here? None of them have been killed because they dowse.

This thread is about the bomb detector scam in Iraq. People ARE getting killed because of an irrational belief that dowsing will detect explosives.

- Carl

[Iraq Swears by Bomb Detector U.S. Sees as Useless]

Yes, there have been deaths attributed to using this device.


Iraq Swears by Bomb Detector U.S. Sees as Useless

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/04/world/middleeast/04sensors.html?_r=1


Dale Murray, head of the National Explosive Engineering Sciences Security Center at Sandia Labs, which does testing for the Department of Defense, said the center had “tested several devices in this category, and none have ever performed better than random chance.”

This thread is about the bomb detector scam in Iraq. People ARE getting killed because of an irrational belief that dowsing will detect explosives.

- Carl

Then why bring up chelation therapy? That has nothing to do with any kind of detecting, or bomb sniffing.

Then why bring up chelation therapy? That has nothing to do with any kind of detecting, or bomb sniffing.

Someone objected to my statement, "Dowsing is all fun and games until people get killed."

Besides the lunacy of dowsing for bombs, I was pointing out that similar irrational beliefs can really be dangerous, per a dowser I knew of.

- Carl

Then why bring up chelation therapy? That has nothing to do with any kind of detecting, or bomb sniffing.

Someone objected to my statement, "Dowsing is all fun and games until people get killed."

Besides the lunacy of dowsing for bombs, I was pointing out that similar irrational beliefs can really be dangerous, per a dowser I knew of.

- Carl

Yet, dowsing doesn't kill. You could say a dowser standing in the middle of the road dowsing was hit by a car because of his dowsing. But he was hit because he was standing in the middle of the road. Using LRL's is harmless. Now, I agree with you, I wouldn't want to put my life in the hands of those bomb detectors mentioned, but that does not mean that there are no LRL's that work. Or at least they can be built. But the point is, you can't blame people's actions on anything but people. If a metal detector was to miss finding a bomb (and we all know they miss things sometimes), and someone was killed, would you say it happened because metal detectors don't work?

Using LRL's is harmless.

Are you serious? Iraqis getting blown to bits because they're trying to use dowsing rods* to find bombs is harmless? Really?

But the point is, you can't blame people's actions on anything but people.

Where have I said otherwise? Where have I tried to blame the device? I previously said, "Of course I don't blame the machine, whether it's a gun or a dowsing rod," so I don't know why you continue to push this point. I already agree, the irrational beliefs of people are the problem, coupled with the intentional fraud of con artists.

- Carl

*I equate the Iraqi bomb detector and most LRLs with dowsing, because that's what they are.

Using LRL's is harmless.

Are you serious? Iraqis getting blown to bits because they're trying to use dowsing rods* to find bombs is harmless? Really?

You're still missing the point. You can't equate the use of dowsing to people bad judgment. Dowsing, IN ITSELF IS HARMLESS. Of course we can get stupid and make almost anything dangerous, but that is our stupidity, not the act of dowsing.

[not]

You're still missing the point. You can't equate the use of dowsing to people bad judgment. Dowsing, IN ITSELF IS HARMLESS. Of course we can get stupid and make almost anything dangerous, but that is our stupidity, not the act of dowsing.

No, I'm not missing the point.

If someone wants to bend some coathangers and go out looking for buried treasure, then this act of dowsing is pretty harmless.

When their beliefs progress to the point where they spend the family savings on nonsense LRLs, then their use of dowsing is not so harmless. (See if you can get Mike-Mont to admit how much money he's spent on LRLs.)

When the use of dowsing rods directly gets people blown up, then these acts of dowsing are definitely not harmless.

[not]

You're still missing the point. You can't equate the use of dowsing to people bad judgment. Dowsing, IN ITSELF IS HARMLESS. Of course we can get stupid and make almost anything dangerous, but that is our stupidity, not the act of dowsing.

No, I'm not missing the point.

If someone wants to bend some coathangers and go out looking for buried treasure, then this act of dowsing is pretty harmless.

When their beliefs progress to the point where they spend the family savings on nonsense LRLs, then their use of dowsing is not so harmless. (See if you can get Mike-Mont to admit how much money he's spent on LRLs.)

When the use of dowsing rods directly gets people blown up, then these acts of dowsing are definitely not harmless.

Apples and oranges. If I spent $50,000.00 on metal detectors, that too would be foolish. But it wouldn't mean metal detectors don't work. If I use my White's metal detector to search for an explosive device and miss it, and someone gets hurt when it explodes, that don't mean my detector can't detect.

I wouldn't put my life in the trust of those LRL's. But I wouldn't  put my life in in the trust of a White's DFX either, unless I had to.

Dear group;
It should be plainly obvious that what Carl-NC is attempting to state is that an unhealthy belief in any psuedo-scientific techology where the exists the danger to human life is foolhardy, such as using dowsing to try and detect explosives. By the same token, is there anyone on this forum who would venture into a mine field and attempt to clear it of obstructions using an LRL or dowsing wand??? This is what Carl-NC is saying everyone. Using an LRL to try and detect EXPLOSIVES is EXTREMELY DANGEROUS and FOOLHARDY in the EXTREME. People are betting their very lives on an unproven scientific principle and also the lives of everyone in the vicinity.
Your friend;
LAMAR

I think most, if not all, agree that bomb detecting with that device is silly. That would be like me trying to find water with my Classic ID. But saying such things can't work, ever, for anything, because some people are misusing them, is not wise.

Dear Mike(monty);
You can't be serious my friend. You would actually put someone in harm's way by placing your trust in a wholly unproven technology??? You must be playing Devil's Advocate right now because I simply cannot fathom the logic from anyone who thinks that using an LRL to detect live B-O-M-B-S is a viable form of detection!
Your friend;
LAMAR

*I equate the Iraqi bomb detector and most LRLs with dowsing, because that's what they are.

Folks, the members of the Skeptic organization's purpose  for attacking LRL's, or Dowsing tools is to attack manufacturers. Their prejudice equates to any use of hand held Rod(s) as being one and the same, without any distinction between their use for  meta-physics applications (Mental Dowsing) or a Physics applications (LRL).  

Their attacks started, and focused on me personally as a MFD manufacturer, on another forum more than 10 years ago when it was posted  by members of the Skeptic organization  that if I did not reveal the schematics for a totally electronic MFD I was using, so they could copy & test, as proof of my truthfulness that MFD worked as I claimed,  they would ruin me, and put me out of business if I didn't comply with their request. They  stated they had every right to do so because I was scamming my customers with Dowsing Rods, and useless electronics and that they were there to put me out of business.

I was not the inventor. The schematics were not mine to give. I did not yield to their demand, and these members of the Skeptic organization have maintained their threat ever since.

The inferences and deception by members of the Skeptic organization against my customers, my character, and life long reputation of honesty, and integrity have continued and it now appears to be making it's entrance on to this new forum.

For anyone who wishes to know, I am 76 years old. I live in Haines City, Florida USA. My Home phone number is 863 422 5454. My life is an open book for any one to investigate, and I am totally honest. My words about the subject of LRL, are from my personal field experience, as a Treasure Hunter.
 
My occupation has been that of a Professional Treasure Hunter/Salvor for 35 years and I am well experienced in the field, and under the water, with all types of detection & locating methods. I utilize both Dowsing, and my own LRL's, as time saving advantages in my searches for unknown, and deeply buried Treasures.

The Skeptics will try to convince viewers through inference, innuendo, and lame analogies, that my customers, have been scammed by me, and that Dowsers successes, which includes my own, are self delusions.

So let the Critics negativity  games begin!  It's all prejudice talk by pretend Scientist with no Scientific substance to back them.  I assure you that when it gets down to LRL's, and the physics of Earth Science, they don't have a legitimate Scientific leg to stand on.   Dell

*I equate the Iraqi bomb detector and most LRLs with dowsing, because that's what they are.

Folks, the members of the Skeptic organization's purpose  for attacking LRL's, or Dowsing tools is to attack manufacturers. Their prejudice equates to any use of hand held Rod(s) as being one and the same, without any distinction between their use for  meta-physics applications (Mental Dowsing) or a Physics applications (LRL).  

Their attacks started, and focused on me personally as a MFD manufacturer, on another forum more than 10 years ago when it was posted  by members of the Skeptic organization  that if I did not reveal the schematics for a totally electronic MFD I was using, so they could copy & test, as proof of my truthfulness that MFD worked as I claimed,  they would ruin me, and put me out of business if I didn't comply with their request. They  stated they had every right to do so because I was scamming my customers with Dowsing Rods, and useless electronics and that they were there to put me out of business.

I was not the inventor. The schematics were not mine to give. I did not yield to their demand, and these members of the Skeptic organization have maintained their threat ever since.

The inferences and deception by members of the Skeptic organization against my customers, my character, and life long reputation of honesty, and integrity have continued and it now appears to be making it's entrance on to this new forum.

For anyone who wishes to know, I am 76 years old. I live in Haines City, Florida USA. My Home phone number is 863 422 5454. My life is an open book for any one to investigate, and I am totally honest. My words about the subject of LRL, are from my personal field experience, as a Treasure Hunter.
 
My occupation has been that of a Professional Treasure Hunter/Salvor for 35 years and I am well experienced in the field, and under the water, with all types of detection & locating methods. I utilize both Dowsing, and my own LRL's, as time saving advantages in my searches for unknown, and deeply buried Treasures.

The Skeptics will try to convince viewers through inference, innuendo, and lame analogies, that my customers, have been scammed by me, and that Dowsers successes, which includes my own, are self delusions.

So let the Critics negativity  games begin!  It's all prejudice talk by pretend Scientist with no Scientific substance to back them.  I assure you that when it gets down to LRL's, and the physics of Earth Science, they don't have a legitimate Scientific leg to stand on.   Dell

Soooooo, what does all this poppycock have to do with Bomb detectors and/or LRLs?

Home phone number...free advertising....and a platform to toot ones horn. All in a days work.

Dell, how is that device in the photo operated? Is there a receiver and transmitter all in one unit? I appears he turns the device and watches for a response on the meter. How slow does he move it? I know it takes a while for the signal line to develop and it seems like he could only move it a few degrees at a time then wait. Is this so?

Dell, how is that device in the photo operated? Is there a receiver and transmitter all in one unit? I appears he turns the device and watches for a response on the meter. How slow does he move it? I know it takes a while for the signal line to develop and it seems like he could only move it a few degrees at a time then wait. Is this so?

I am not qualified to explain it in technical, or scientific terms, but from my observations, when the frequency is broadcast, the harmonic response from the selected target returns to the transmitter generating a detectable Signal line "Field".  Response time, and distance is dependent on favorable operating conditions, and the broadcast power of the transmitter.

The electronic receiver works independently of the transmitter and detects the "field" of the generated Harmonic Signal line from the target that has already been established by the selected  broadcast frequency. The antenna is directional and electronically meters the the direction of the "Signal Line" when it is rotated in line with the target. Rotate the antenna farther and detect the Signal line "Field" to the next Discriminated target. Very similar to turning a radio dial to stations at different locations.

That's my view. Other experienced LRL users may have a different perspective?    Dell

http://news.yahoo.com/nphotos/Iraq/ss/events/iraq/082701iraqplane#photoViewer=/091206/481/643b13cb8a86494b8280e9f673522ec6

Must be SOMETHING to it.....
Saw it again, today..

dea and police use infra red to detect grownig marijuana. i dont think it works on cocain. unless they are growing a cocain tree

who buries a bomb? land mines/ . usually 10 inches deep. i can use my daughters 1970 whites beachcomber to find those

Dowsing is all fun and games until people get killed.

I've been asked many times, "What is the harm in dowsing?"

Well, if all you're doing is wasting time, then the only harm is wasted time. But LRL manufacturers have a nasty way of turning wasted time into wasted money, often a lot of wasted money, often by folks who really can't afford to waste money. I had a former neighbor who put $40,000 of his retirement savings into LRLs, and is now broke and in bad health.

And there is the harm of nonsensical beliefs spilling over into life decisions. I know of another dL'er whose passionate belief in pseudoscience got him killed by Mexican chelation treatments, ironically while he was on a dowsing trip. His wife committed suicide right after.

Now we have a company selling bogus dowsing devices that a country is attempting to use to protect its citizens, with devastating results. And people still defend this crap as legitimate. It's not.

So, yeah, what is the harm in dowsing?

- Carl

I certainly don't see anyone here defending a explosive detector

Art Hartman, is a very successful Treasure hunter/salvor, who uses a pair of L-Rods attached to an electronic device to locate Treasure. About 8 years ago, the Pentagon sent two Scientist down to Ft.Pierce, Florida to investigate if the L-rod device had the potential for detecting explosives.

Art, had never attempted to detect explosives before. He gave the Pentagon scientist a Gold bar to hide  anywhere among the huge amount of garbage of the county landfill. The test was repeated, and twice he located the hidden Gold bar hidden in the landfill within 15 minutes. The scientist expressed their disbelief in a letter to him, and sent him $1,000 for expenses to go to McDill AFB, at Tampa, Fl, for controlled  DB  testing on locating explosives. Needless to say, Art, failed the necessary US requirmentwith slightly less than an 80% average.

Yes, from  my own field tests, I know some LRL's can detect explosives under optimum operating conditions, but I certainly don't  consider them  fool proof in their present stage of development.

I guess I have invested more than $200,000, over the past 25 years in my field studies, and knowledge of so called LRL technologies, so that puts me in Carl's category of gullible fools. Carl, & Randi, have devoted more than a decade of their time to silence my voice, put me out of business, and  attempting to prove me to be a fraud, charlatan, and scam artist, with criminal intent.

They have sure wasted a lot of their time, and I am still here sharing my thoughts, and knowledge with you.. I wonder how much of their money they have wasted, and damage  they have done in hindering LRL R&D  with their nonsensical beliefs and unscrupulous endeavor    Dell  

80% doesn't sound that good for a bomb detector, but if you are searching over a big area that is very good odds. If you have a vehicle right in front of you, you only have to determine yes or no. The odds are going to be much higher success rate. Bombs have been going off for years in that area, so whatever techniques they were using in the past have not been 100% accurate. The reports I read on the recent bombings gave several reasons but none of them blamed the ADE651 locator. I realize the skeptics are quick to blame the locator, but they have no basis for it.     

Considering the configuration and method of application of this Explosive detector I seriously doubt if it averages more than 60% accuracy.  In my opinion there is a more efficient method, costing only a few hundred dollars to build.

In order to obtain lucrative contracts for such a simple technology, I would suspect  hefty kickbacks are included in the pricing. There would be no market, and no manufacturing of such a device if some one in government did not provide it.  So, who is responsible for creating a market and approving the explosive detector for their  countries use?  Who bears the blame for conning the people into a false sense security that can get them killed.  Certainly not the manufacturer, no matter how inefficient  their product may be.

Carl, as usual, you are barking up the wrong tree. If it's a scam, it's a Government scam.  Go get em.    Dell                               

I am not qualified to explain it in technical, or scientific terms, but from my observations, when the frequency is broadcast, the harmonic response from the selected target returns to the transmitter generating a detectable Signal line "Field".  Response time, and distance is dependent on favorable operating conditions, and the broadcast power of the transmitter.

The electronic receiver works independently of the transmitter and detects the "field" of the generated Harmonic Signal line from the target that has already been established by the selected  broadcast frequency. The antenna is directional and electronically meters the the direction of the "Signal Line" when it is rotated in line with the target. Rotate the antenna farther and detect the Signal line "Field" to the next Discriminated target. Very similar to turning a radio dial to stations at different locations.

That's my view. Other experienced LRL users may have a different perspective?    Dell

I gotta know.  So you posted a picture of some kind of machine being used, but you don't say what it is and can only guess at what it's doing through observation.  Then you proceed to write an amazingly detailed description including serveral things you could never see through simple observation.  Why even bother with a photo in the first place?  What were you trying to prove by posting this in conjunction with your post?

[prove]

Below is a photo of a device that is claimed to produce "free energy". Does the existence of this photo prove that device actually produced free energy? Can I now say, "What has been done, can be done," simply because someone said they did it?

Military Mine Detector

[prove]

Below is a photo of a device that is claimed to produce "free energy". Does the existence of this photo prove that device actually produced free energy? Can I now say, "What has been done, can be done," simply because someone said they did it?

Can you show us a machine with components that CAN produce free energy? What would those components look like?

Military Mine Detector

Do you consider this to be a "long range locator" Art?

[prove]

Below is a photo of a device that is claimed to produce "free energy". Does the existence of this photo prove that device actually produced free energy? Can I now say, "What has been done, can be done," simply because someone said they did it?

That is an excellent point, Carl.  I've never accepted Dell's words-to-live-by, as you mentioned above.  It bases itself on "what has been done," rather than on what has been proved to have been done, and your example is ideal to illustrate this.

Maybe something along the lines of "What has been proved to work in the past, can be duplicated," would be more accurate?

I think Amsterdam should have been using the ADE651. Maybe they could have stopped the guy. I don't want to travel by air if they are going to let people on the terrorist watch list fly.

I'm still waiting to be shown the components that CAN produce free energy. Anyone?

Military Mine Detector

Do you consider this to be a "long range locator" Art?

I would certainly hope so!  Looking at it, it doesn't appear to be useful at all for "short-range" detection.  Not nearly long enough!   

I'm still waiting to be shown the components that CAN produce free energy. Anyone?

Better hope they don't exist.

I'm still waiting to be shown the components that CAN produce free energy. Anyone?

Better hope they don't exist.

Okay, we hope they don't exist. Now that we have that covered, what would the they look like if they did exist?

Do you consider this to be a "long range locator" Art?

As a Treasure finder I do not consider it a LRL…Art

I'm still waiting to be shown the components that CAN produce free energy. Anyone?

Better hope they don't exist.

I've never seen anything that is capable of producing energy in a manner that does not require more energy than is ultimately produced.  There's been plenty of attempts to be sure, but if it was out there, we would have heard about it already.

It.s a skeptic, diversion tactic to fill up the forum with nonsense  and cover up useful LRL information. You are seeing a lot of that here.

 The device he's showing looks a bit like a Hydrogen separator. Totally irrelevant to LRL discussions, except in his imagination.  Dell

[any]

It.s a skeptic, diversion tactic to fill up the forum with nonsense  and cover up useful LRL information. You are seeing a lot of that here.

 The device he's showing looks a bit like a Hydrogen separator. Totally irrelevant to LRL discussions, except in his imagination.  Dell

In this instance it's perfectly relevant as Carl was creating a link between your quote and the validity of LRL-type devices.  Should we believe that any machine or device works just because someone says it does?

It really is simple to provide proof that anything works as you describe, but when this request is refused over and over again, one has to wonder why?  Why would someone refuse to prove that something they've built functions as they say, when it would result in fame and fortune for them, especially if the device was one similar to an LRL, capable of amazing feats?

Okay, we hope they don't exist. Now that we have that covered, what would the they look like if they did exist?

The device I pictured is claimed to be an over-unity generator. That is, it would produce more energy than it consumes. It is physically impossible to build such a device, so asking, "What would it look like if it existed?" is equally impossible to answer.

[any]

It.s a skeptic, diversion tactic to fill up the forum with nonsense  and cover up useful LRL information. You are seeing a lot of that here.

 The device he's showing looks a bit like a Hydrogen separator. Totally irrelevant to LRL discussions, except in his imagination.  Dell

In this instance it's perfectly relevant as Carl was creating a link between your quote and the validity of LRL-type devices.  Should we believe that any machine or device works just because someone says it does?

It really is simple to provide proof that anything works as you describe, but when this request is refused over and over again, one has to wonder why?  Why would someone refuse to prove that something they've built functions as they say, when it would result in fame and fortune for them, especially if the device was one similar to an LRL, capable of amazing feats?

And on the other hand, you say they would go out and find all the gold. Which is it, go out and find all the gold, or reveal it to the public for fame and fortune?

Okay, we hope they don't exist. Now that we have that covered, what would the they look like if they did exist?

The device I pictured is claimed to be an over-unity generator. That is, it would produce more energy than it consumes. It is physically impossible to build such a device, so asking, "What would it look like if it existed?" is equally impossible to answer.

You seem to be saying he's using the wrong components for the job, as if you knew what the right components would be. But if this isn't an LRL, why bring it up? Everyone already knows that people make false claims. They do that in ALL advertising, including your detector.

You seem to be saying he's using the wrong components for the job, as if you knew what the right components would be.

There are no right components, because the job is not possible. But the device has been built, and there is a picture of it. If we were discussing the possibility of over-unity generators, I could use this picture to say, "What has been done, can be done." And since I have a picture of one, you cannot deny that such a device is possible.

Right?

Do you consider this to be a "long range locator" Art?

As a Treasure finder I do not consider it a LRL…Art

Soooooo, is this one of those diversion tactics to fill up the forum with nonsense  and cover up useful LRL information that we've been hearing about? Totally irrelevant to LRL discussions, yada yada...blah blah blah   

Do you consider this to be a "long range locator" Art?

As a Treasure finder I do not consider it a LRL…Art

Soooooo, is this one of those diversion tactics to fill up the forum with nonsense  and cover up useful LRL information that we've been hearing about? Totally irrelevant to LRL discussions, yada yada...blah blah blah   

You seem to be saying he's using the wrong components for the job, as if you knew what the right components would be.

There are no right components, because the job is not possible. But the device has been built, and there is a picture of it. If we were discussing the possibility of over-unity generators, I could use this picture to say, "What has been done, can be done." And since I have a picture of one, you cannot deny that such a device is possible.

Right?

Exactly. So why bring up the components?
But we're not discussing over-unity generators, we're discussing LRL's.

I remember seeing Garett, advertisements of "Incredible Depth" for their metal detector.  Never heard a peep from Carl.

I remember when there really was an LRL, scam on the Internet. Where was Carl, pretending to be the great public savior against LRL scam artist?  

It was Dell, that devoted  the time & money, to track the guy down in California, have him arrested,  prosecuted, and sent to prison.  The Skeptic group just laughed, and mocked Treasure hunters, for being so stupid to fall for the scam.  

As you can see the mentality of the Skeptic group hasn't changed.  They are still here to mock Treasure Hunters, who use unconventional methods as an aid in searching for Treasure.  Dell

I remember seeing Garett, advertisements of "Incredible Depth" for their metal detector.  Never heard a peep from Carl.

I remember when there really was an LRL, scam on the Internet. Where was Carl, pretending to be the great public savior against LRL scam artist?  

It was Dell, that devoted  the time & money, to track the guy down in California, have him arrested,  prosecuted, and sent to prison.  The Skeptic group just laughed, and mocked Treasure hunters, for being so stupid to fall for the scam.  

As you can see the mentality of the Skeptic group hasn't changed.  They are still here to mock Treasure Hunters, who use unconventional methods as an aid in searching for Treasure.  Dell

Where are the treasures, Dell, where are they??

And Dell?  When you begin referring to yourself in the third person, it's time for a little vacation......

It was Dell, that devoted  the time & money, to track the guy down in California, have him arrested,  prosecuted, and sent to prison.  The Skeptic group just laughed, and mocked Treasure hunters, for being so stupid to fall for the scam.  

Then you shouldn't have any problems supplying data that will validate your claim. A link...newspaper article or a court/case number will do.

Or...maybe start another LRL scam thread, like with I did 

Go ahead, Check it out. You can find it in the Los Angles county, court records, or check with your buddy, Carl. He is aware of the case.  I don't lie.   Dell

For you guys that are used to locating dimes and nickels…..Large treasure are seldom put in the newspaper…Not if you don’t want some to know about it…Art

For you guys that are used to locating dimes and nickels…..Large treasure are seldom put in the newspaper…Not if you don’t want some to know about it…Art

Is there something wrong with locating dimes and nickels?

For you guys that are used to locating dimes and nickels…..Large treasure are seldom put in the newspaper…Not if you don’t want some to know about it…Art

Is there something wrong with locating dimes and nickels?

I don't think it exists. I say it's a hoax.

No..There is nothing wrong with locating nickels and dimes if that’s what you are happy doing…..I know this guy …..He found 50 gold bars on BLM Land…He  took one bars and went to BLM as he thought that was the right thing to do. They took the bar of gold and followed him every where he went for 3 years because  he would not tell them where the other gold bar were….Keeping things secret can save you a lot of trouble….Art

No..There is nothing wrong with locating nickels and dimes if that’s what you are happy doing…..I know this guy …..He found 50 gold bars on BLM Land…He  took one bars and went to BLM as he thought that was the right thing to do. They took the bar of gold and followed him every where he went for 3 years because  he would not tell them where the other gold bar were….Keeping things secret can save you a lot of trouble….Art

Gosh Art. Was this guy involved with illegal activities? Sure sounds that way   

SWR, Are you involved in illegal activities?   Dell

No….He thought he would get a percentage of his find by going to BLM…BLM is worse than the IRS …
By the way ..He was looking for Arrow Heads  when he found the cave entrance…Art

No….He thought he would get a percentage of his find by going to BLM…BLM is worse than the IRS …
By the way ..He was looking for Arrow Heads  when he found the cave entrance…Art

So...you can look for arrow heads on BLM property now?

You can legal take gold and silver from BLM lands...I guess he should have filed a mining claim...Art

You can legal take gold and silver from BLM lands...I guess he should have filed a mining claim...Art

Couple of things wrong here, Art.  First, SWR asked you about arrowheads.  Second, finding gold bars isn't exactly mining, wouldn't you say?

Exactly. So why bring up the components?

I didn't.

But we're not discussing over-unity generators, we're discussing LRL's.

Somewhere amongst all this, there was an analogy, but I think it got lost.

Exactly. So why bring up the components?

I didn't.

Okay, I guess you're right. But showing it without the cover didn't have anything to do with the components?

Okay, I guess you're right. But showing it without the cover didn't have anything to do with the components?

Nope. Nothing at all.

Exactly. So why bring up the components?

I didn't.

But we're not discussing over-unity generators, we're discussing LRL's.

Somewhere amongst all this, there was an analogy, but I think it got lost.

Don't worry, Carl, the analogy was only lost on one particular individual, it seems.....

You can legal take gold and silver from BLM lands...I guess he should have filed a mining claim...Art

I'll answer my own questions for ya Art....

No, you cannot remove Indian artifacts from BLM lands.

No, you cannot remove rocks, bushes, flowers, plants or gold from BLM lands.

Finding bars of gold in a cave does not fall under a permitted mining claim

All of the above are illegal

 

I'll answer my own questions for ya Art....

No, you cannot remove Indian artifacts from BLM lands.

No, you cannot remove rocks, bushes, flowers, plants or gold from BLM lands.

Finding bars of gold in a cave does not fall under a permitted mining claim

All of the above are illegal

No. you are part wrong….The rules very according to which National Forest you are in…Some do not allow a Metal Detector in your trunck….Art

Okay, I guess you're right. But showing it without the cover didn't have anything to do with the components?

Nope. Nothing at all.

I know we don't always agree, but I thought you were at least honest.

[how]

I'll answer my own questions for ya Art....

No, you cannot remove Indian artifacts from BLM lands.

No, you cannot remove rocks, bushes, flowers, plants or gold from BLM lands.

Finding bars of gold in a cave does not fall under a permitted mining claim

All of the above are illegal

No. you are part wrong….The rules very according to which National Forest you are in…Some do not allow a Metal Detector in your trunck….Art

Umm, so what part was he wrong about?  You didn't offer an explanation as to how he was wrong, only another illegal activity.

You can legal take gold and silver from BLM lands...I guess he should have filed a mining claim...Art

I'll answer my own questions for ya Art....

No, you cannot remove Indian artifacts from BLM lands.

No, you cannot remove rocks, bushes, flowers, plants or gold from BLM lands.

Finding bars of gold in a cave does not fall under a permitted mining claim

All of the above are illegal

 

It's illegal to find bars of gold in a cave?

You can legal take gold and silver from BLM lands...I guess he should have filed a mining claim...Art

I'll answer my own questions for ya Art....

No, you cannot remove Indian artifacts from BLM lands.

No, you cannot remove rocks, bushes, flowers, plants or gold from BLM lands.

Finding bars of gold in a cave does not fall under a permitted mining claim

All of the above are illegal

 

It's illegal to find bars of gold in a cave?

In a national park or on BLM land, it is.

[remove]

You can legal take gold and silver from BLM lands...I guess he should have filed a mining claim...Art

I'll answer my own questions for ya Art....

No, you cannot remove Indian artifacts from BLM lands.

No, you cannot remove rocks, bushes, flowers, plants or gold from BLM lands.

Finding bars of gold in a cave does not fall under a permitted mining claim

All of the above are illegal

 

It's illegal to find bars of gold in a cave?

In a national park or on BLM land, it is.

I don't think so. It is illegal to remove them, but not to just find them.

[remove]

You can legal take gold and silver from BLM lands...I guess he should have filed a mining claim...Art

I'll answer my own questions for ya Art....

No, you cannot remove Indian artifacts from BLM lands.

No, you cannot remove rocks, bushes, flowers, plants or gold from BLM lands.

Finding bars of gold in a cave does not fall under a permitted mining claim

All of the above are illegal

 

It's illegal to find bars of gold in a cave?

In a national park or on BLM land, it is.

I don't think so. It is illegal to remove them, but not to just find them.

True, but let's not mince words.  Technically it's not illegal to "find" anything, but that's not what began this discussion.

The current Law that is now in effect for all government land is called the 1812 Mining Act….These peons that run the National Forest and BLM land try to put all kind of restrictions on people that are illegal. The law is clear as to what you can do on public land…..Find out for yourself….Art

The current Law that is now in effect for all government land is called the 1812 Mining Act….These peons that run the National Forest and BLM land try to put all kind of restrictions on people that are illegal. The law is clear as to what you can do on public land…..Find out for yourself….Art

So what happened to your friend is exactly what should have happened to the gold he found?  Good deal, thanks for bringing it up!

The current Law that is now in effect for all government land is called the 1812 Mining Act….These peons that run the National Forest and BLM land try to put all kind of restrictions on people that are illegal. The law is clear as to what you can do on public land…..Find out for yourself….Art

The law is clear. Removing Indian artifacts is illegal

January 23, 2010
UK Bans Export of Bomb Detection Device
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS

Thanks for bringing this thread up to date. I am sure our resident LRL manufacturers and salespersons will be along shortly to defend these gimmicks.

What did any of that have to do with "Bomb Detector same as LRL"? 

The Department for Business Innovation and Skills halted the export of the ADE651 after a BBC Newsnight investigation Friday challenged the claims of the company, ATSC. The broadcaster took key components of the bomb detector to a laboratory, which concluded that a key component intended to detect explosives was akin to technology used to prevent theft in stores.

How did this reporter know they were the key components..Great Science..Art

You are right. The reporter should have taken the whole unit to have it tested by professionals. Taking a few key components is really just shooting in the dark.

HOWEVER, one reporter's failure to follow a scientific method does not wipe out or invalidate all of the existing scientific testing that has been done on this unit. And that formal testing has concluded that these devices do not work as advertised.

What did any of that have to do with "Bomb Detector same as LRL"? 

er...the Press Release or...?

The Department for Business Innovation and Skills halted the export of the ADE651 after a BBC Newsnight investigation Friday challenged the claims of the company, ATSC. The broadcaster took key components of the bomb detector to a laboratory, which concluded that a key component intended to detect explosives was akin to technology used to prevent theft in stores.

How did this reporter know they were the key components..Great Science..Art

Maybe he read the report from the American version of this scam, the Quadro Tracker

I read today that the ADE 651 had detected 16,000 bombs including 700 car bombs.

I read today that the ADE 651 had detected 16,000 bombs including 700 car bombs.

I read today the ADE-651 may have been a factor allowing suicide truck bombs to pass through checkpoints on three occasions last year, leading to hundreds of deaths.

It really makes me wonder what is the hidden agenda of people who are trying to get the ADE651 removed when it has been proven to be effective. I mean that is borderline terrorist sympathizer.

The problem is that it has not been proven to be effective. Quite the contrary. There have been many people who have shown that it simply does not work. Yet you refuse to believe it because you have a hidden agenda. I don't know why I waste time with this. You will never let yourself see the truth.

Did you happen to see the two stories about bombings in Iraq in just the past two days? Another 50+ people killed by car and truck bombs. Do you still think that the ADE651 is effective? Have you watched any of the videos that debunk this device? Have you watched any of the pro-ADE651 videos that supposedly show its effectiveness yet in reality show how much of a scam it is? Wouldn't it be better to take the stance that Dell has been taking recently which is to admit that SOME of these devices are indeed frauds but to insist that it doesn't mean they all are? Clinging to hope on a device that is nothing more than a plastic box that you put RFID tags into is ludicrous. It's not about being a skeptic. It's about having a shred of common sense. To blatantly defend all makers of LRL's just out of pure pride just shows that you are willing to throw away any ounce of credibility you have to try and defend your flawed way of thinking and to try and further your cause against the skeptics. Well forget about the skeptics. Innocent people are dying. Do you hate skeptics so much that you would be willing to let innocent people die rather than admit that this one particular device is a fraud? If so then I really pity you.

If you want to believe in LRL's then do so. But this device is junk and does not deserve anyone defending it. Innocent people are dying because people like you can't admit when they've made a serious mistake. Continuing to make the same mistake over and over again for the sake of pride is very, very sad. Especially when innocent people are dying because of it.

Don't give me your cock and bull story about how nothing is 100% effective. This device is 0% effective. Anyone telling you that it has worked is severely misguided. They think it worked but in reality they used random chance and a keen eye for profiling to find the bombs. This device did nothing but potentially keep them from acting on their intuition which is probably one of the best "bomb detectors" known to man. This device is allowing bombs to get through because it gives the checkpoint guards a false sense of security.

I don't know why you would even want to put your name behind such a device. The best defense you have is to admit that some LRL's are frauds but that it doesn't mean that they all are. I'm a software architect and engineer. I am happy to tell you that 50% of the people who claim to be computer programmers are complete idiots and are actually quite dangerous. These people are frauds. By pointing out specific cases I gain credibility as an expert in the field. That doesn't mean that I am any better. But at least people look to me for honest advice as to whether or not something can and can't be done. If I put my word behind something it has meaning because I am known for exposing those that hurt my profession.

Finally, if I took a simple shoebox and placed a banana in it and sold it for $30,000 as an LRL that detects bombs would you come rallying to my defense? Why or why not? If innocent people were dying because I sold a device that clearly could not possibly work would you still defend me? What if some of the border guards actually claimed that it appeared to work part of the time? Wouldn't you agree that it would be ridiculous for them to think that and that it would just be a statistical coincidence that they had found any bombs at all while using the device? I would hope you would be willing to admit that my banana LRL was indeed a fraud and that it had no scientific or even spiritual basis in fact. If not, you have serious problems.

At least Dell is occasionally willing to admit that some of these devices do not work as advertised. And I respect him more for that.

I can only conclude that the skeptics are willing to see people die just to save face. They will never admit they are wrong even if it means more people dying.

I can only conclude that the skeptics are willing to see people die just to save face. They will never admit they are wrong even if it means more people dying.

And I can only conclude the same thing about you. You can't possibly have read everything I just posted and still cling to the belief that this particular LRL is worth defending. You are a sad, pathetic, little man.

I value the lives of others so if there is even a shred of doubt that this thing is not working as adverstised I'm willing to investigate it. You are unwilling to do so simply to save face. It has been shown that this device is missing bombs. People have purposely driven trucks full of explosives past it without it giving so much as a wiggle. Are you not at least man enough to admit that this thing is not fullproof and is missing serious targets that the makers claim it should be detecting? Isn't that enough to pull the device or at least start an inquiry as to why it is not working as expected?

At what point will you admit that your hatred of skeptics has caused you to become so closed minded that anything negative said about any treasure hunting device is immediately thrown out as being untrue?

I can only conclude that the skeptics are willing to see people die just to save face. They will never admit they are wrong even if it means more people dying.

Why would you want to see innocent people die, just to defend an LRL contraption that is responsible for the tragic loss of human lives. That is not borderline sick.  That is sick.