$1,000,000 for anyone who can dowse.

[aarthrj3811]

Yeah, I smell something funny -- all the people who claim they can do something that can't be explained by conventional science. The reason no one has passed the pre-test is because no one who applied has been able to actually DO what they CLAIM! When someone who applies can do what they claim, they will pass.

1010 people have appied in 42 years. Can you tell me how many Dowsers have applied and failed the pre-test?...Art

It's not that they don't want to give away the money. The money has been put in escrow, which means that NO ONE can touch it until it is won. In effect, they have already given it away, as they can no longer access it themselves. So they do not have any motivation to prevent people from succeeding!

The money is in escrow.....There are may kinds of escrows....Where did you read this at.

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

Treasure of Victoria Peak - Grab it through Amazon!

[ClonedSIM]

Yeah, I smell something funny -- all the people who claim they can do something that can't be explained by conventional science. The reason no one has passed the pre-test is because no one who applied has been able to actually DO what they CLAIM! When someone who applies can do what they claim, they will pass.

1010 people have appied in 42 years. Can you tell me how many Dowsers have applied and failed the pre-test?...Art

How many dowsers have applied and failed? What an interesting question, Art! What insight could this information possibly give you? Here's a newsflash, Art. It dowsn't matter how many dowsers have applied and failed, and do you know why?
100% of the dowsers who have applied have failed. Be that number 10 or 100 or 1000, every stinkin' one of them failed.

 

[aarthrj3811]

Hey AF...Do you no for a fact that any dowser has taken the pre-test? Do you know if any dowser has been allowed to take the pre-test. We know for sure that NO-ONE has taken the test for the real money. A whole lot of unproven statements about a challenge that has never been taken. How do you know that there has been any pre-tests? The more you read the web site the more you find that nothing is what it seems to be. Come on AF...You must have at least proof that one doswer has applied and took the pre-test....Big mistake telling us to read about you hero's challenge. When a dowser takes the test it will only mean....One dowser can pass or fail the test.; Don't hold your breath as the odds tell me that the money is save.....Art

 

[Carl-NC]

Hey AF...Do you no for a fact that any dowser has taken the pre-test? Do you know if any dowser has been allowed to take the pre-test.

Wow, Art, this is incredible... you're continuing to deny that Randi has ever tested anyone? Why don't you just phone Randi and ask him?

Come on AF...You must have at least proof that one doswer has applied and took the pre-test....

Art, that proof has ALREADY BEEN PRESENTED, right here on these forums. Are you totally ignoring this account? Is there any proof you'll accept? I don't think so.

Again, just call Randi, and ask him.

- Carl

 

[cptbil]

I have had actual, personal, experiences, actually performed, in the field, on both sides of this debate!
I have had numerous people attempt to dowse (for treasure) and REALLY FAILED at it!
Yet!
On the other hand ...
My grandfather used to dowse water and made a business, of drilling wells!
He made enough, to where he bought a large parcel of land in Arizona and retired.
I, personally, witnessed The U.S. Army, hire a "dowser" in Germany, to find water, for a "base", after their electronices failed to do so!
Oh! Yes!
HE DID find the water !
BUT!
I have never heard or seen of a dowser find any treasure !
BUT!
I have personally, seen them FAIL! many times, FIVE (5) as a matter of fact!
Maybe!
There's some kind of a "feild" around flowing water ?

 

[ClonedSIM]

Hey AF...Do you no for a fact that any dowser has taken the pre-test? Do you know if any dowser has been allowed to take the pre-test.

Wow, Art, this is incredible... you're continuing to deny that Randi has ever tested anyone? Why don't you just phone Randi and ask him?

Come on AF...You must have at least proof that one doswer has applied and took the pre-test....

Art, that proof has ALREADY BEEN PRESENTED, right here on these forums. Are you totally ignoring this account? Is there any proof you'll accept? I don't think so.

Again, just call Randi, and ask him.

- Carl

Thanks for fielding this one, Carl. I'm pretty sure if proof of these tests was slapped across Art's face vigorously, he would still question if the slap he felt was real, or a figment of a skeptic's imagination.

 

[cptbil]

AND!
Secondly !
You are aware of this, "shooting a site with an SX-70 Film" ?
It's supposed to show "ghosts, shadows" &, etc !
Well!
I bought the SX-70 camera, at a second hand store, and loaded up the film and waitied until early, one misty morning..
I live out in the country, in a Historic old Town/area!
My home sits on a small hill, where, there used to be a "spring" !
Indians used to camp here!
I had my back to the rising sun!
I focused on the NE corner of the house.
Where, there is a small OAK Tree, right there, next to the NE corner of the house.
I, lined up the shot, pushed the button !
I let the picture develope ... I pulled itfrom the camera ...

The RESULT HAS FLOORED ME!

THERE "It" Is!
"IT" Being a "golden streak of lightning (?) looks to be about 1" wide and very jagged, coming down the exact middle of the tree, from top to bottom.
The "Lightning Bolt" comes out from the bottom of the tree, at about a 90* angle!
Goes/Went about 50' and disappears/ed into the ground!

Just! What The Heck! Is That ?
All about

 

[Captain Trips]

1010 people have appied in 42 years. Can you tell me how many Dowsers have applied and failed the pre-test?...Art

ALL of the dowswers who applied and agreed to a testing protocol failed the pre-test. Of course, not many agreed on a protocol. Exact numbers? Ask them. They have nothing to hide. (Of course, you may believe they do, but that's only your belief. Their very actions show that this belief is erroneous.)

The money is in escrow.....There are may kinds of escrows....Where did you read this at.

On the JREF site, there is a link to a scanned image of the actual escrow paperwork. You can read it for yourself there.

Believe me -- the JREF has nothing to hide. Why should they? They aren't the ones being asked to provide proof of their claims. They are just trying to act as a truly scientific inquiry agency -- with the million dollars to act as incentive for people to come forward with their claims. These claims can be of any "pseudo-scientific" phenomenon -- including specially treated water, super-duper speaker cables, ghost hunting, mind reading, perpetual motion machines, and (gasp) even dowsing!

It's really this simple (as Carl and I have said countless times now): If you can dowse, you can claim that million dollars for your own. Just tell them what you can do, and then do it. (Of course, the process of claiming it has to be done by a specific method, such as having reliable witnesses supporting your claim, the application paperwork has to be notarized, etc. -- but this is all to protect all parties from a legal viewpoint. It is NOT to allow them to say "you don't get the money.")

 

[aarthrj3811]

Af and Carl.....Thanks for fielding this one, Carl. I'm pretty sure if proof of these tests was slapped across Art's face vigorously, he would still question if the slap he felt was real, or a figment of a skeptic's imagination.
Wow, Art, this is incredible... you're continuing to deny that Randi has ever tested anyone? Why don't you just phone Randi and ask him?
Art, that proof has ALREADY BEEN PRESENTED, right here on these forums. Are you totally ignoring this account? Is there any proof you'll accept? I don't think so.

Again, just call Randi, and ask him.

Do you no for a fact that any dowser has taken the pre-test? Do you know if any dowser has been allowed to take the pre-test. We know for sure that NO-ONE has taken the test for the real money. A whole lot of unproven statements about a challenge that has never been taken. How do you know that there has been any pre-tests? The more you read the web site the more you find that nothing is what it seems to be. Come on AF...You must have at least proof that one doswer has applied and took the pre-test....Big mistake telling us to read about you hero's challenge. When a dowser takes the test it will only mean....One dowser can pass or fail the test.;

You guy's said it all....There is no proof or you would have replied to my questions. They are easy questions. You guys do not know if any dowser has taken the pre-test...By the way ...A pre-test is just a pre-test. It is just a step in the process. ...Art

 

[Sandsted]

Again as I...I think I said it in another thread. But I believe water and recently disturbed soil are the easiest targets to dowse for...most likely because...I don't know...something about electromagnetic fields.

 

[ClonedSIM]

Af and Carl.....Thanks for fielding this one, Carl. I'm pretty sure if proof of these tests was slapped across Art's face vigorously, he would still question if the slap he felt was real, or a figment of a skeptic's imagination.
Wow, Art, this is incredible... you're continuing to deny that Randi has ever tested anyone? Why don't you just phone Randi and ask him?
Art, that proof has ALREADY BEEN PRESENTED, right here on these forums. Are you totally ignoring this account? Is there any proof you'll accept? I don't think so.

Again, just call Randi, and ask him.

Do you no for a fact that any dowser has taken the pre-test? Do you know if any dowser has been allowed to take the pre-test. We know for sure that NO-ONE has taken the test for the real money. A whole lot of unproven statements about a challenge that has never been taken. How do you know that there has been any pre-tests? The more you read the web site the more you find that nothing is what it seems to be. Come on AF...You must have at least proof that one doswer has applied and took the pre-test....Big mistake telling us to read about you hero's challenge. When a dowser takes the test it will only mean....One dowser can pass or fail the test.;

You guy's said it all....There is no proof or you would have replied to my questions. They are easy questions. You guys do not know if any dowser has taken the pre-test...By the way ...A pre-test is just a pre-test. It is just a step in the process. ...Art

Art, did you even bother to click on the link that Carl provided? It linked to another TNet post, which would have taken you here:

http://www.randi.org/jr/032902.html

Looks like the skeptics are much better at providing proof that you are, Art...

 

[ClonedSIM]

And this one isn't the JREF performing the testing, but rather their Australian counterparts:

http://www.randi.org/jr/011102.html

And here's a video, just for kicks:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C8BxmXHRaBI

 

[aarthrj3811]

So you proved someone failed a pre-test........so this guy could not do what he said...What did Randi prove No One has taken the money test yet...Was this just another commerical for the foundation?...Art

 

[Carl-NC]

What did Randi prove?

Amazingly, Randi didn't prove anything. It was the dowser who was supposed to prove he could dowse, but he couldn't do what he thought he could do. This was not an isolated failure.

- Carl

...Tomorrow, Art will again deny that anyone has ever taken the pre-test, and demand proof that they have. *Sigh*

 

[Sandsted]

Carl...these challenges...do prove nothing. If the dowser fails, it proves that that dowser could not do what he said he could do. If the dowser succeeds, it proves that that dowser did what he said he could do.

Neither outcome proves nor disproves dowsing.

These challenges are not scientific (in the sense of actual scientific study) they aren't worth a whole lot, concerning the answer of whether dowsing works or not.

If I said I could fly, you could show me scientific evidence to prove that a human can not fly (with out the aid of any technology).

I say that I can dowse; do you have scientific evidence to prove that humans can not dowse?

I'm going to, for the moment; assume that there is no evidence to say that it's not possible. That is why this subject is controversial, there is no concrete evidence to show how it works and there is no evidence to show that it is not possible, there are theories concerning how it could...yet, due to the controversial state of this subject, one can not assume or conclude that dowsing doesn't work because it's "unscientific" meaning no real scientific answer to how it works.

I've said this before; these challenges are not the way to deal with a controversial subject.

These challenges are like the judicial system. I'm the defendant (dowser) and you’re the prosecution lawyer (yourself and other skeptics). During this case you believe we can solve this controversial case by challenging me, the defendant (dowser), to prove my innocence.

This is not right, these challenges are not right. They will not answer the question...they will truthfully solve nothing...you can not deny this. Sure, one person could do what they said they could. Does this prove dowsing? Technically...no.

Therefore, if these challenges do not prove nor disprove dowsing (as I have shown that they will not) then what are they worth?

They are not worth the bickering, squabbling, insults, and disrespect that has been brought to this forum because of them. I am against them.

My conclusion on dowsing is based off the evidence that I have gained from dowsing. I've successfully dowsed many times and have found many things that, if I had never dowsed, would not have found. I am not fooling myself or basing my conclusion on the words of others. I have physical evidence for my conclusion.

Your conclusion is based on your skepticism, which is not skepticism any longer since you have developed a conclusion on the subject. No longer is it doubt, you are sure of your conjecture.

The difference between us is that I have evidence, you have prejudgments and assumptions.

 

[Korban]

I think that though you have the evidence that proves dowsing to yourself, for there to be accepted proof, it has to be proven in a setting that can be documented, and in a way that satisfies both Pro and Con dowsing in the terms. I dont know anything about this test of Randi's. However I have been reading the dowsing posts quietly. It seems that dowsers cant dowse in a test situation, so how can this ever be resolved or studied? Lets just say that a test is put together. It has 300 people that say they can dowse. Lets say they all fail, just for arguments sake. All parties agreed on the terms. Does this prove that dowsing does not work? Skeptics say yes, and believers say no. That leaves us back at square one.

As Ive said, I am a bit of a skeptic. But i dont think that the people on this forum that believe in dowsing are fakes either, i think you genuinely (pardon the spelling) believe in dowsing. but i also dont think that the explanations brought forth follow the laws of physics either, at least in the case of treasure and map dowsing. We need someone with a lot of money to get all the people on this dowsing forum together and let them show each other what each other knows and see what we come up with...

 

[Carl-NC]

Carl...these challenges...do prove nothing. If the dowser fails, it proves that that dowser could not do what he said he could do. If the dowser succeeds, it proves that that dowser did what he said he could do.

Neither outcome proves nor disproves dowsing.

These challenges don't prove anything, no, but the results of the tests do provide a body of evidence that is relevant. If dowsers consistently succeed in these tests, then we could say that dowsing likely works. If dowsers consistently fail in these tests, then we could say that dowsing likely does not work.

So far, dowsers consistently fail.

These challenges are not scientific (in the sense of actual scientific study) they aren't worth a whole lot, concerning the answer of whether dowsing works or not.

That would be true for someone who wishes to ignore the evidence provided by these tests, because of an overwhelming desire to believe.

I'm going to, for the moment; assume that there is no evidence to say that it's not possible. That is why this subject is controversial, there is no concrete evidence to show how it works and there is no evidence to show that it is not possible, there are theories concerning how it could...yet, due to the controversial state of this subject, one can not assume or conclude that dowsing doesn't work because it's "unscientific" meaning no real scientific answer to how it works.

Absolutely, I agree. It's not up to science to disprove a claim. It's up to the claimant to prove the claim. When dowsers consistently fail to do what they claim they can do, then there is no justification to accept those claims.

These challenges are like the judicial system. I'm the defendant (dowser) and you’re the prosecution lawyer (yourself and other skeptics). During this case you believe we can solve this controversial case by challenging me, the defendant (dowser), to prove my innocence.

Science does not work like a judicial system. In science, an hypothesis is not innocent until proven guilty. Instead, a proposed hypothesis is met with universal skepticism and must defend itself with evidence that shows it is correct. If it is unable to do so -- and especially if it completely fails to do what it claims to do -- then it is discarded. Dowsing was discarded by science a long, long time ago.

This is not right, these challenges are not right. They will not answer the question...they will truthfully solve nothing...you can not deny this. Sure, one person could do what they said they could. Does this prove dowsing? Technically...no.

Therefore, if these challenges do not prove nor disprove dowsing (as I have shown that they will not) then what are they worth?

For people who are just beginning to look at dowsing, the challenges serve the purpose of showing them that dowsing is very likely nothing but an illusion. For people who are thinking about paying large sums of money for dowsing devices, the challenges serve the purpose of showing them that even the manufacturers don't believe those products work.

For those who are deep believers in dowsing, the challenges are just an irritant they they would prefer to dismiss.

My conclusion on dowsing is based off the evidence that I have gained from dowsing. I've successfully dowsed many times and have found many things that, if I had never dowsed, would not have found. I am not fooling myself or basing my conclusion on the words of others. I have physical evidence for my conclusion.

Like I've said before, if you like what dowsing does for you, then use it! No need to waste your time here defending it.

Your conclusion is based on your skepticism, which is not skepticism any longer since you have developed a conclusion on the subject. No longer is it doubt, you are sure of your conjecture.

My conclusions are tentative. If someone successfully demonstrates dowsing to me, then I will change my mind. Amazingly, all I hear are alibis.

- Carl

 

[Carl-NC]

It seems that dowsers cant dowse in a test situation, so how can this ever be resolved or studied? Lets just say that a test is put together. It has 300 people that say they can dowse. Lets say they all fail, just for arguments sake. All parties agreed on the terms.

This has been done. The so-called "Scheunen tests" in Germany had over 500 dowsers participating. Several did slightly better than chance in a first round (which was statistically expected), but when those same people were retested, they could not repeat the results. Jim Enright wrote an outstanding analysis of the data from this test, and showed that the dowsers performed at the same level as guessing.

- Carl

 

[Sandsted]

Carl, concerning your first point, I would not say that it is likely that dowsing works or doesn't work based off one person's test. Concerning that German test, from my memory wasn't that test conducted with random people? I know of another test like that, but in the other test they actually used dowsers rather then randomly selecting test subjects that don't know of dowsing.

Anyway, these tests are not scientific (in the sense of actual scientific study). Do you make any attempt to show, scientifically, that dowsing doesn't work. Have you ever, for a moment, pondered wether there is perhaps any scientific explanation for dowsing?

"Science does not work like a judicial system. In science, an hypothesis is not innocent until proven guilty. Instead, a proposed hypothesis is met with universal skepticism and must defend itself with evidence that shows it is correct. If it is unable to do so -- and especially if it completely fails to do what it claims to do -- then it is discarded. Dowsing was discarded by science a long, long time ago."

You are right, science does not work like the judicial system, but neither does your challenge. You are not conducting a scientific study, you are conducting a monetary based challenge in an attempt to "prove" one side of a controversial subject. Therefore, it is more relevant to the judicial system.

You are not testing a scientific theory and not conducting your challenge scientifically, this is why I compare it to a court and why I have stated that it is unscientific.


I am not here to defend dowsing, I'm defending myself. Statements, accusations, and insults have been made against the group known as "dowsers"...I guess I would consider myself apart of that group, but these statements, accusations, and insults are unjustified concerning myself...therefore...here I am.

Oh, and concerning dowsing being against science, that is false. It is completely scientific, but it is not (in the form that I use) external. There are no spirits turning the rod, it is not demonic, it does not defy the laws of physics.

 

[Carl-NC]

Carl, concerning your first point, I would not say that it is likely that dowsing works or doesn't work based off one person's test.

That's why you look at many tests, as a body of evidence. One failure says little. A thousand failures, with zero successes, says quite a bit more.

Concerning that German test, from my memory wasn't that test conducted with random people? I know of another test like that, but in the other test they actually used dowsers rather then randomly selecting test subjects that don't know of dowsing.

No, they were all experienced dowsers.

Anyway, these tests are not scientific (in the sense of actual scientific study). Do you make any attempt to show, scientifically, that dowsing doesn't work.

That's what the tests do. They show that, under conditions of scientific observation, dowsers cannot do what they think they can do.

Have you ever, for a moment, pondered wether there is perhaps any scientific explanation for dowsing?

There is. It's a physiological phenomenon called ideomotor action.

You are right, science does not work like the judicial system, but neither does your challenge. You are not conducting a scientific study, you are conducting a monetary based challenge in an attempt to "prove" one side of a controversial subject. Therefore, it is more relevant to the judicial system.

My challenge is not intended to be a scientific study. It's just a challenge.

You are not testing a scientific theory and not conducting your challenge scientifically, this is why I compare it to a court and why I have stated that it is unscientific.

My challenge is not intended to be a scientific study. It's just a challenge. However, the dowsing test is conducted scientifically, using a randomized blind protocol.

I am not here to defend dowsing, I'm defending myself. Statements, accusations, and insults have been made against the group known as "dowsers"...I guess I would consider myself apart of that group, but these statements, accusations, and insults are unjustified concerning myself...therefore...here I am.

If you like to dowse, and it does what you want it to do, then what does it matter what others think about it? Just do it.

- Carl