Re:- Mr Jims Blog, I have posted a response, which he will not publish of course, which I have reproduced below:-
Warning Off what??
I have again received several responses......not surprisingly,
None of which you have the courage to publish.
As a statement to you all....if you have nothing to say, don't say it.....
Makes about as much sense as some of your scientific reasoning!!!
I will take on constructive criticism,
No you won't.
Those of you who THINK, you know better and can offer a LOGICAL explanation as to why my equipment cannot work, then put your views and comments.
Already have done, still waiting for answers.
The 'blind-test' that you all go on about cannot work successfully with a variety of detectors on the market,
Such as??
(including mine)
Definately yours.
as, this test is designed for most products to fail........
No its not, where is your evidence to support that statement?
it would be like asking someone to show how my car can go just as fast in reverse as it can going forward.....it was never designed to do so and therefore can not..........
Total tosh and avoidance of the point.
the ONLY TRUE test is in the real-world
Not correct, publish your, 'Real world' tests.........
unfortunately, tests conducted by companies like Sandi Labs and those 'believed' to be an acceptable test by 'organisations' like the Randi foundation, will not be suitable.
Of course not, they will show your equipment for the scam it is, your point is...??
This aside, I have no reason to HAVE to prove my point to them as I have no intention nor desire to do so.
You have no point. If this equipment was 'real world' as you state, then you would jump at the chance to prove it and pocket an easy million at the same time.
You can read many articles on his website and read several comments from his supporters.......I encourage you to do this as you will see from the various comments, the kind of similar comments from people I have to cope with........
When you say cope, is that when you just ignore the points and questions made
What I will say is that I am thankful at the overwhelming responses to our equipment that may have (in part) been attributed from their comments on their website as, I have seen a ten-fold increase in the interest for our equipment,
Probably from the people we have alerted to this fraud.
(especially from 'real' end-users).
Of course you have!!!!
So, although I maybe receiving some negative comments,
Only some?
I am also seeing an increase in sales.....so please, form you own opinions as each visit to their (or my) blog, keeps this equipment to the forefront of peoples minds and reaches those people who have a need for this type of technology.....
1 comment:
Re:- Mr Jims Blog, I have posted a response, which he will not publish of course, which I have reproduced below:-
Warning
Off what??
I have again received several responses......not surprisingly,
None of which you have the courage to publish.
As a statement to you all....if you have nothing to say, don't say it.....
Makes about as much sense as some of your scientific reasoning!!!
I will take on constructive criticism,
No you won't.
Those of you who THINK, you know better and can offer a LOGICAL explanation as to why my equipment cannot work, then put your views and comments.
Already have done, still waiting for answers.
The 'blind-test' that you all go on about cannot work successfully with a variety of detectors on the market,
Such as??
(including mine)
Definately yours.
as, this test is designed for most products to fail........
No its not, where is your evidence to support that statement?
it would be like asking someone to show how my car can go just as fast in reverse as it can going forward.....it was never designed to do so and therefore can not..........
Total tosh and avoidance of the point.
the ONLY TRUE test is in the real-world
Not correct, publish your, 'Real world' tests.........
unfortunately, tests conducted by companies like Sandi Labs and those 'believed' to be an acceptable test by 'organisations' like the Randi foundation, will not be suitable.
Of course not, they will show your equipment for the scam it is, your point is...??
This aside, I have no reason to HAVE to prove my point to them as I have no intention nor desire to do so.
You have no point. If this equipment was 'real world' as you state, then you would jump at the chance to prove it and pocket an easy million at the same time.
You can read many articles on his website and read several comments from his supporters.......I encourage you to do this as you will see from the various comments, the kind of similar comments from people I have to cope with........
When you say cope, is that when you just ignore the points and questions made
What I will say is that I am thankful at the overwhelming responses to our equipment that may have (in part) been attributed from their comments on their website as, I have seen a ten-fold increase in the interest for our equipment,
Probably from the people we have alerted to this fraud.
(especially from 'real' end-users).
Of course you have!!!!
So, although I maybe receiving some negative comments,
Only some?
I am also seeing an increase in sales.....so please, form you own opinions as each visit to their (or my) blog, keeps this equipment to the forefront of peoples minds and reaches those people who have a need for this type of technology.....
err, what technology? Its a stick on a swivel.
Post a Comment