An Old Challenge - Whatever Happened?

Being skeptical of something that is foreign to conventional science has NEVER, in and of itself, been enough to stifle a REAL worthwhile idea or newly discovered facet of rational science.  If that were the case, we'd still be beating two rocks together and hoping we get a spark so we could make a fire.

On the other hand, being skeptical of something that is obviously a fraud and a scam, can often make it difficult to push that scam onto the general public.  Further, the scam artist will eventually be called out, from where ever they are hiding, and asked to either put up or shutup.

I recently found one such challenge, while searching through some old Internet archives.  Here is a real challenge issued by James Randi, to a real scam artist.  I wonder what happened here... was the test ever conducted.  What were the results?

---

Winders, you run on and on, bitching about all sorts of wrongs done to you
by me and my "voodoo" powers.  Well, let's get on with it.  Forget the
juvenile crap and let's test the "Omnicrom" or whatever.  I have a
million-dollar prize available to you as soon as the thing actually works.
Cross my heart and hope to die.  Scout's honor.  Honest.  JUST DO IT!
Don't carry on with bleating and weeping, but come forth directly and DO
IT!  Call ANYONE as witnesses, ANY object or substance to detect, wherever
you wish.  Get a platoon of lawyers to stand by.  And a few cops, if you
want.  I SAY THAT THE THING YOU'RE SELLING IS A TOTAL FRAUD.  PROVE ME
WRONG BY DOING A SIMPLE, DIRECT, UNDERSTANDABLE, TEST, AND COLLECT ONE
MILLION DOLLARS!  Is that clear?  Do you understand?  I'm making the
challenge, now you'll run for cover by quoting, offering anecdotal
accounts, claiming that the money isn't there, that I'm a witch, you're
afraid of me, you're sick, that I won't pay up if you win, YOU'LL DO
ANYTHING to avoid a simple test!  I know you guys, always dodging and
weaving, so let's see your very best evasion, now.  Start making excuses
and we'll all sit back and laugh at the faker on the run.

PUT UP OR SHUT UP!  A MILLION DOLLARS SAYS YOU WON'T BE ABLE TO SHOW THAT
THIS SILLY TOY WORKS.  NOW START EVADING....

                               James Randi


Linkback:

You are not allowed to view links.
Please Register or Login

http://www.thunting.com/smf/index.php/topic,35.msg93.html#msg93

		Quote:			Posted by {author}
	Hey Chris...Most people no nothing about a set of L-rods. Did you know that a simple magnet will keep them from working? Did you know that a simple protentiometer will keep the rods from working? What makes you think that these so called easy money test would be fair and honest?...Art

What makes you think the tests would be rigged, or unfair?

BTW, a magnet or a potentiometer or a rock WILL NOT keep dowsing rods from working, unless the operator believes it will in their mind.

The tests don't have to be unfair in order to prove that Wish Science does not work.  You sound like all the poor souls that complain a slot machine is unfair and is rigged.  Slot machines DO NOT have to be rigged or unfair.  They are pre-programmed to only return maybe 97% (or worse) to the player.  Over the long term (many millions of spins) that's exactly what they do, and they make a cool profit for the casino.

A test of an LRL does not have to be unfair to demonstrate that dowsing only produces results that are like guess work.  IF there was any real science or physics involved in an LRL, the test would prove that point.

Why do you suppose an LRL dealer will never submit to a fair test?  It's because there is nothing involved but dowsing and they already know that fact ahead of time.  If they expose that fact to the world by flunking the test, it would be very damaging to the scam they are operating.


Linkback:

You are not allowed to view links.
Please Register or Login

http://www.thunting.com/smf/index.php/topic,35.msg104.html#msg104

...and you just proved you have no idea how LRL testing is conducted, how LRLs really work, or what mechanisms are required before an L-rod will operate.  

I'll repeat my question: What makes you think the tests would be rigged, or unfair?




Linkback:

You are not allowed to view links.
Please Register or Login

http://www.thunting.com/smf/index.php/topic,35.msg134.html#msg134

Hello Art, Are you a user of LRL devices ? If you use them have you found any substantial treasure yet. I know a fellow that has a theory. He says gold interacts with the magnetic field of the Earth and emits a signal at 500 Hz. I am curious how anyone determines these frequencies that are associated with like gold ? ok Art CU later and God Bless.

John Tomlinson, CET
John's Detectors
Best in the West !

Linkback:

You are not allowed to view links.
Please Register or Login

http://www.thunting.com/smf/index.php/topic,35.msg159.html#msg159

		Quote:			Posted by {author}
	I stick by my earlier statement...If your going to use Ideomotor Effects with a LRL your wasting your money...Art

Let's get some facts straight here, and the conversation will go a lot smoother!

LRL stands for long range locator.  LRL does not stand for an L-rod sold with a do-nothing black box filled with a random assortment of electronic components.

Here are some examples of an LRL, ...there are others.

a.) a willow switch
b.) an L-shaped piece of bent wire
c.) an Electroscope Model 301
d.) a weight tied to a piece of string (pendulum)
e.) a Dell Winders Omnitron
f.) a bent coathanger (see b. above)
g.) a Fitzgerald PPL rod
h.) a Y-rod made from small diameter nylon rod

FACT: All of the LRLs listed above REQUIRE an ideomotor response from the operator before they will indicate.

Advocates of the "black box"-assisted dowsing rods can talk about frequencies, and magnetics and fields and FERF all they want; ---but until one of those advocates can demonstrate how their black box-assisted dowsing rods can move without the required ideomotor response; ---all they are doing is just talking.

And talk is cheap.    

Linkback:

You are not allowed to view links.
Please Register or Login

http://www.thunting.com/smf/index.php/topic,35.msg162.html#msg162