InvestorsHub Logo
icon url

high C

10/09/06 3:56 PM

#15037 RE: d4diddy #15036

It wasn't any manipulation . He didn't give it time to dissolve.

Like I say if they could sell Valimed in a suitcase why would they be able to demand 10,20,or30, or whatever thousands.

Get Real ValiMeds 20x10x7 guts would not fit in what I saw.
Enough of your Bhsh4t I;ve got better things to do.
icon url

Crow3

10/09/06 4:17 PM

#15038 RE: d4diddy #15036

"So why have they stopped development of the counterfeit drug detector, money or ASD will not grant them a license for solids?"

They gotta use NIR instead of UV..ASD got the patent on that one, too.. also, no money..also, no big demand..despite all the noise Generated ON THE SUBJECT..
icon url

Xenophon

10/09/06 4:41 PM

#15041 RE: d4diddy #15036

"So why have they stopped development of the trace explosive detector, money or the damn thing would never work like the scamsters originally advertsied?"


"ELF worked 100% in snow, water, ice, vegetation." - MP4316 (aka Malcolm Philips)

Malcolm the Liar also tole us that EM-1x performed with 100% reliability:

"CDEx CEO Statement 4 September 2001: To accomplish this, we tested the ability of the EM-1 to consistently detect RDX and TNT buried in sand, and to discriminate between RDX and TNT. The results show that in 1000 shots over sand without any explosives there were no indications of explosives, in 1000 shots over RDX buried in that sand there were 1000 indications of RDX (perfect score) and in 1000 shots over TNT buried in that sand there were 998 indications of TNT. On the two shots that TNT was not indicated, the EM-1 gave a "reshoot" signal that calls for a second shot of the same area. On each "second shot" the EM-1 detected the TNT. .... And with the publication of these three Reports, I hope I never again hear anyone question whether the underlying technology for the EM-1 works!!!"

CEO Statement 24 April 2002:"In particular, in their final report (posted on the Web Site) Dr. Salzman states:

"I am very impressed by the systems and their potential to significantly improve our national security as well as to disarm former mine fields. I will describe my observations below, but let me say at the outset that I observed a total of some seventeen trials, mostly consisting of five "shots" each and I observed 100% accuracy. That is, there were no false positives and there were no false negatives and each trial produced an unambiguous and definitive result."

The second verification was conducted on April 18, 2002, by a team of Brian Jenkins (a noted expert in the field of antiterrorism), John Ligon (Senior Engineer for the Thunder Mountain Evaluation Center at Fort Huachuca, Arizona) and Michael Conto (an explosive expert and also a current member of the Tucson Police Department and Bomb Squad). The results were positive and the final report is being written. When I receive it, I will also post it on the Web site. (Before I leave this topic, to answer a question that I know will be asked, individuals conducting these verification tests are paid a small fee by CDEX for their time, e.g., for the two tests noted above involving five testing consultants and other support such as for supply of explosives, CDEX has budgeted approximately $7,500 total for all fees and expenses.)"