Are LRLs More Than Just Dowsing?

[EE THr]

So far, no real evidence has been presented to show that any LRL is more than just a dowsing device. Furthermore, no real evidence has been presented that dowsing can locate gold or silver, either.

So far no real evidence has been presented to show that LRL's are dowsing devices. Farthermore, no real evidence has been presented that Dowsers can not locate gold and silver.Art

Heh-heh. I always have to laugh when you say, "prove it doesn't work."

What do you want, a random double-blind test of some people not finding stuff with coathangers?


OK, here. Is this what you want?---"Someone couldn't find something with a dowsing rod." Is that what you consider to be proof?

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

Agony and Death on a Gold Rush Steamer: The Disastrous Sinking of the Side-Wheeler Yankee Blade - Grab it through Amazon!

[fenixdigger]

Art;

Thanks for the update on the accuracy of the 10,000 post prediction.

Maybe these guys worked at the Department of Redundency Department.



SHO-NUFF it's got the stuff SHO-NUFF

 

[aarthrj3811]

~EE~

Heh-heh. I always have to laugh when you say, "prove it doesn't work."
What do you want, a random double-blind test of some people not finding stuff with coathangers?
OK, here. Is this what you want?---"Someone couldn't find something with a dowsing rod." Is that what you consider to be proof?

No..Just an answer…

 

[EE THr]

~EE~

Heh-heh. I always have to laugh when you say, "prove it doesn't work."
What do you want, a random double-blind test of some people not finding stuff with coathangers?
OK, here. Is this what you want?---"Someone couldn't find something with a dowsing rod." Is that what you consider to be proof?

No..Just an answer…

What is the question?

 

[aarthrj3811]

Which answer do you want..the one that was ask 100 posts before or the any in between..Art

 

[EE THr]

Which answer do you want..the one that was ask 100 posts before or the any in between..Art

Which ever one you were referring to, con-artie.


P.S. How would you expect me to know the question, if you don't even know?

 

[EE THr]

Now that all the LRL promoters have had their "nonsense party," I think it's time to say that obviously, and by their own admissions, the answer to the topic question is: No. LRLS are nothing more than just dowsing.

And I should add that dowsing, itself, has not been proven in any verifiable double-blind test conditions. Although there is supposed to be some field test for water witching that yielded a 96% success rate, there is no way to confirm that the test was administered scientifically, and there is no way to know that the area being searched wasn't a giant underground river system which would give successful hits no matter where they dug!

So, the swingy-thingies, and the ion chambers, and the pocket calculators with "antennas" stuck onto them, and all of the junk science hype turns out to be nothing more than a big scam.







Don't be a doof---show the proof!
P.S. When will you man-up and take Carl's double-blind test, and collect the $25,000.00?
ref: Are LRLs More Than Just Dowsing?

 

[aarthrj3811]

" I think it's time to say that obviously, and by their own admissions, the answer to the topic question is: No. LRLS are nothing more than just dowsing.

Bad grades in reading comprehension 101 I would think

And I should add that dowsing, itself, has not been proven in any verifiable double-blind test conditions. Although there is supposed to be some field test for water witching that yielded a 96% success rate, there is no way to confirm that the test was administered scientifically, and there is no way to know that the area being searched wasn't a giant underground river system which would give successful hits no matter where they dug!

No answer needed
http://twm.co.nz/dowsing_jse_com.html
http://www.water-diviner.com/articles3.htm
http://wiki.answers.com/Q/How_does_a_water_dowser_work

So, the swingy-thingies, and the ion chambers, and the pocket calculators with "antennas" stuck onto them, and all of the junk science hype turns out to be nothing more than a big scam.

It is a common psychological problem in that insecure people tend to project their personal deficiencies unto another in self defense, they are sure trying to pass theirs lack of knowledge over to you.

 

[fenixdigger]

You know Art, herein is one of the reasons I put the SHO-NUFF LRL experiment up.

IF someone is really interested in the difference, all they have to do is to remove the sample and the experiment switches to
dowsing.

How much better that to SEE for yourself? In the time it takes to make 5 posts, they could have the answer. Of course that wouldn't be an argument.

Is the little rabbit still calling you con-artie? Not that he would stoop to name calling. That transference thing must be like molasses.

 

[aarthrj3811]

Hey fenixdigger..You know the difference between Treasure Hunters and the skeptic clan…If we don’t know an answer we ask for help and then try to apply what we are told to our treasure hunting. A lot like what real scientist do

A scientist in a broad sense is one engaging in a systematic activity to acquire knowledge. In a more restricted sense, a scientist is an individual who uses the scientific method.[1]

The Skeptics just search the skeptic web sites until they find Paranormal, Pseudoscientific, Supernatural Tales about the subject that makes then feel like they are part of a group they call the enlightened Ones..And then they try to transfer the blame to us..

It is a common psychological problem in that insecure people tend to project their personal deficiencies unto another in self defense, they are sure trying to pass theirs lack of knowledge over to you

 

[EE THr]

Art & fenix brothers (there are 8 of them)---

Your replies are all merely attempts at insults, amateur sick-ology, and encouragement to try something which has never been verifiably shown to work.

Art, your water witching evidence has been refuted. It it were true, someone would have won the one million dollar reward from Randi for proving it, by now.

You posted no factual data related to either the topic or my post, at all.

This is just another confirmation that my post, above, is correct in it's conclusions.




Don't be a doof---show the proof!
P.S. When will you man-up and take Carl's double-blind test, and collect the $25,000.00?
ref: Are LRLs More Than Just Dowsing?

 

[aarthrj3811]

Art, your water witching evidence has been refuted. It it were true, someone would have won the one million dollar reward from Randi for proving it, by now.

Maybe you should research the the history of the Randi callenge before you start claiming as proof..Art

 

[EE THr]

Art, your water witching evidence has been refuted. It it were true, someone would have won the one million dollar reward from Randi for proving it, by now.

Maybe you should research the the history of the Randi callenge before you start claiming as proof..Art

Art---

"History" is a record of the past. This is present time.

Here is all the information you need about Randi's Test.

So, quit jabbering, grab your dowsing rods, and go get that million bucks!

(Dowsing is listed on his FAQ page, at section 2.3.)

 

[aarthrj3811]

The James Randi Educational Foundation exposes charlatans and helps people defend themselves from paranormal and pseudoscientific claims. The JREF offers a still-unclaimed million-dollar reward for anyone who can produce evidence of paranormal abilities under controlled conditions. Through scholarships, workshops, and innovative resources for educators, the JREF works to inspire this investigative spirit in a new generation of critical thinkers. | www.randi.org

Has any of these “Charlatans” ever been allowed to take Randi’s Test ?

 

[aarthrj3811]

~EE~
"History" is a record of the past. This is present time.
Correct about both

(Dowsing is listed on his FAQ page, at section 2.3.)

Why would a LRL user need to know about the dowsing test?
~SWR~

"Rules changed to encourage new applications and ensure anyone with actual paranormal abilities could win the million-dollar prize"

Are you now claiming that LRL’s are Paranormal?

~Art~

Has any of these “Charlatans” ever been allowed to take Randi’s Test ?

~EE~
Are you sure that you want add the crime of extortion to your list of offenses?

No..Just an answer to the Question

 

[aarthrj3811]

~SWR~

Are you now claiming that LRL's are normal...and fall within the realm of normal scientific understanding?

Looks to me that our understanding of LRL’s is a lot more than is understood about Normal Scientific Understanding..
http://www.jstor.org/pss/2024924
http://books.google.com/books?hl=en...age&q=normal scientific understanding&f=false
http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Publications/2003/12/18625/29956
http://books.google.com/books?id=ie...&resnum=5&ved=0CDsQ6AEwBA#v=onepage&q&f=false

 

[EE THr]

~SWR~

Are you now claiming that LRL's are normal...and fall within the realm of normal scientific understanding?

Looks to me that our understanding of LRL’s is a lot more than is understood about Normal Scientific Understanding..
http://www.jstor.org/pss/2024924
http://books.google.com/books?hl=en...age&q=normal scientific understanding&f=false
http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Publications/2003/12/18625/29956
http://books.google.com/books?id=ie...&resnum=5&ved=0CDsQ6AEwBA#v=onepage&q&f=false

There are two types of things which Science cannot explain.

1. Something which is real. That is, some phenomenon that actually occurs, but can't be explained.
2. Something which is fictional. That's like an urban legend or a movie character. It doesn't exist.

Finding treasure, or anything else, with an LRL, falls under category #2.

Anyone who would claim, in public, that they wouldn't like to prove their point to everyone, and get paid $25,000.00 for doing so, just has no sense of shame!

 

[EE THr]

~SWR~

Are you now claiming that LRL's are normal...and fall within the realm of normal scientific understanding?

Looks to me that our understanding of LRL’s is a lot more than is understood about Normal Scientific Understanding..
http://www.jstor.org/pss/2024924
http://books.google.com/books?hl=en...age&q=normal scientific understanding&f=false
http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Publications/2003/12/18625/29956
http://books.google.com/books?id=ie...&resnum=5&ved=0CDsQ6AEwBA#v=onepage&q&f=false

So...is this ducking and dodging my question with frivolous internet links?

SWR asks a question...and Art goes into a internet-link-drop-fest.....is this a confirmed case of ducking and dodging?

Ah...Yup!

 

[Real de Tayopa Tropical Tramp]

HI Art, swr as usual is refusing to face himself for the identical comportment that he is accusing you of. EE's psychologists love people like him, generates $$$ for them. And he does have a grave problem of auto-transference. heheh

Don Jose de La Mancha

 

[EE THr]

SWR---

Looks to me that our understanding of LRL’s is a lot more than is understood about Normal Scientific Understanding..

These guys just amaze me sometimes!

Unbelievable!