Response to comments

Again, it seems that, you all know better than those entities that currently use our equipment.

I have ‘moderated’ some of your responses but if you recall, I have said; “if you have nothing to say, don’t say it” If you have some constructive criticism, then please explain yourself but for those of you who insist that we are just a ‘SCAM’ or ‘FRAUD’ without explaining yourself, you are wasting your time, (and certainly mine).

One ‘gentleman’, (Mr. Richard Saunders), seems to think he is the expert in this technology and has sent an email to all of our distributors stating that ‘we are being hunted down’ and that ‘we will be closed…..’

I would normally ignore these comments as they are being made by someone who has no experience in OUR equipment although he claims that he did a test with the Lebanese Army and that our equipment failed…..Well, Mr. Saunders……I would be very interested in who it was you were ‘conducting’ these tests with as, the Army do not recall any such test and do not appear to support your comments but have ‘endorsed’ our equipment; not condemned it.

I have also been questions as to why I haven’t taken up the JREF $1 Million challenge. Well, firstly, I have no need of the money. Although I am a businessman, I am not solely doing this for the money, (although it helps), but I first developed this product to save lives, (not take them Mr. Saunders), and that it is people just like yourself that are putting people (personnel) at risk by not promoting this product further and allowing developers to invest in this technology. If Mr James Randi wants to put his money to good use, then invest this $1 Million in trying to develop something better! The JREF ‘challenge’, (again as I mentioned in other ‘blogs’, is designed to ensure the equipment, (under their test conditions), will fail. I would be the first to admit that, if I were to take this challenge under their terms and conditions, I would not succeed…..However, I too could make many ‘other’ detector technologies fail by setting my own conditions….but I won’t, Why? Because this would unproductive and place more lives (as Saunders apparently likes to say) at risk……So my challenge is for Mr Randi’s organisation to develop something that THEY, believe works…..
My Question to those sceptics is the following; Do you believe that (and exclude my product and products like these) it is possible for the detection of either Explosives or Narcotic drugs, (or any other substance), to be detected at long-range? (Let us say for example, 100 metres or more). If the answer to this is NO, then I am afraid you are sadly mistaken and that it proves you are just unwilling to educate yourself or to be willing to invest in the technology that could. IF, however, you think it is possible, then explain why you think my product cannot possibly work? You have said it cannot but you do not explain why it cannot.
I, or my company, do not have to prove to you or anyone else in the Randi organisation, that my technology works as; there is nothing but controversy in everything you see as ‘unbelievable’. Additionally, although you have been around (and I refer now to the Randi Organisation) for quite sometime, you have spent the better part of more than 10 years trying to discredit such technology and have not (to date) given any categorical ‘technical’ evidence that discredits the ‘concept’ of such detection methods……..Yes, you have made tests, these tests have failed, (under your conditions), and, in some instances, discredited certain companies; (Sniffex apparently comes to mind), but that these ‘discredits’ had NOTHING to do with the technology.
I stand by my product and my proof is the large number of returning clients that purchase our product and know that the units work for them. If you are then saying that these people are also uneducated then you are criticising the very people that place their lives on the line that could benefit from this technology……so, if anyone is sick……..need I say more.
I would however like to make one comment of thanks…….I would like to thank Mr. Saunders (and the Randi Organisation) for raising the awareness of our product as, since their involvement in the conquest to crush me, they have encouraged several Government entities to contact me with an increased interest in obtaining our products and information and that our resulting sales have actually increased in the past 12 months rather than ‘hindered’ our progress. So, keep up the campaign. Oh, and as a final point…the person who mentioned that he (or she) would take more interest if they were to see me ‘attempt’ to clear a landmine field……I HAVE………in Lebanon after the last invasion a couple of summers ago……..we found over 83 unexploded cluster bombs in the South……..it is documented…….

And the Saga continues.....

Yes, I can see you all now, (not literally of course....I don't want to make you think I'm really a mind-reader!), and can 'imagine' what is being said......."Oh No! not another story about the phenomena of 'divining' principals". Nevertheless, I do get very tired when I see supposed, 'knowledgeable' people, attempting to provide their 'expert' opinions to those who are now being challenged as to whether they are going to be ridiculed by their superiors in choosing equipment that, time-after-time, continues to play the same tune........"it can't possibly work"....."has been proven by independent 'test-authorities' to be no better than random chance, or the flicking of a coin"......"does not operate by any scientific principals" ....and to be honest.....all of these are fair comments......unfortunately, these comments are also seriously flawed and continually doubted.

I have recently seen comments posted to the randi.org website and the reason I have not replied to them directly is because they ask you to 'register' first.......why? If this is such a big concern to them, why don't they really go public........oh sure, you can read what they have to say, but lets' be honest here......who is going to reply to them if they have to register? Only other allegedly 'knowledgeable' people with 1,000's of years experience in the field......certainly not the end-users who will not be able to keep their comments 'private' but that have a wealth of experience 'on-the-ground' and are able to offer hands-on experiences with the products concerned and have, time-after-time, been able to prove their respective effectiveness; So, I decided to make my own 'blog' and to ask for anyone to "constructively" post their real concerns and comments over the workings, (or not), of such devices. Please note that I would 'ideally' want to hear from those people who have had direct experience with these products and not from those who just want to play on the words or direct comments of others. If you don't have anything constructive to say, then don't say it; However, if you genuinely want to understand, (baring in mind I am not going to give away everything.....[no, NOT that I do not know, but that I will not tell you].....then carry-on).

To start the 'ball' rolling, (again don't take me literally here as I am sure their are those 'out-there' that will hang on every word I write and therefore, the 'ball' rolling comment does not refer to me wanting to play games.....yes, you know who you are...), but my first 'blog-comment' is as follows:
Yes, the ADE, Sniffex, Alpha 6, and GT200, (formally known as the 'MOLE').....work.......However, I also know why (under certain conditions) they do not work and I therefore also know why the ADE (especially the ADE651) works the best, (but of course, I would say this...wouldn't I?).
What I will also be doing over the course of the next few months, is to also evaluate the effectiveness of other equipment and devices and to provide you an insight as to their respective effectiveness as well as supply some interesting comments and observations from both end-users as well as 'testing-authorities' that, you may find interesting.......(or not).....
Mr. Jim