Dowsing vs LRL’s

To the dowsers/LRLers (same difference), how many times? We do not need to provide the evidence. YOU DO!

Where is it? And not personal testimony which is worthless?

Where is your evidence? Repeatable results of double blind testing. It always amazes me that most of the testimony is of the "I hid something then found it" variety.

Just how wealthy are you guys now? Should be stinking rich, but in fact just stinking of lies, gullibility, desperation and fraud.
 

Great to have such a warm, cheerful, treasure hunter in our midst. Welcome Dick. I know you will add a lot to the discussions.
 

Just wanting to welcome Dick to the show. I didn't get to welcome a lot of the other Dick's, thought I'd make up for it.
 

~Diohuni~
Where is your evidence? Repeatable results of double blind testing. It always amazes me that most of the testimony is of the "I hid something then found it" variety.
Click to expand...

You guys sure like to throw the term double blind testing around..You have suggested that we use one of two so called double blind tests. Neither one of them will prove of value for treasure hunters or skeptics. It will not prove you theories about Electronics or Dowsing is correct. The only thing for sure that they will prove is if one person can or can not use his equipment,..Many of us treasure hunters use double blind testing in our practice..
It seems that all the definitions of Double Blind Testing contain words like persons, groups etc..meaning more than one person…Art


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blind_experiment
A blind or blinded experiment is a scientific experiment where some of the persons involved are prevented from knowing certain information that might lead to conscious or unconscious bias on their part, invalidating the results.
For example, when asking consumers to compare the tastes of different brands of a product, the identities of the latter should be concealed — otherwise consumers will generally tend to prefer the brand they are familiar with. Similarly, when evaluating the effectiveness of a medical drug, both the patients and the doctors who administer the drug may be kept in the dark about the dosage being applied in each case — to forestall any chance of a placebo effect, observer bias, or conscious deception.
http://www.wisegeek.com/what-is-a-double-blind-test.htm
A double blind test is a scientific test in which neither test subjects nor administrators know who is in the control group and who is in the experimental group. The intent is to create an unbiased test environment, ensuring that the results of the testing are accurate and will stand up to analysis by other members of the scientific community. The concept of a double blind test is an excellent example of the scientific method, since it aims to be entirely objective and potentially repeatable.
And the best of all
http://skepdic.com/control.html....
A double-blind test is a control group test where neither the evaluator nor the subject knows which items are controls. A randomized test is one that randomly assigns items to the control and the experimental groups.
The purpose of controls, double-blind, and randomized testing is to reduce error, self-deception and bias. An example should clarify the necessity of these safeguards.
It sure seems that you do not know what a Double Blind Test is..
Persons... subjects…control group… consumers..
 

artie---

aarthrj3811 said:
You guys sure like to throw the term double blind testing around..You have suggested that we use one of two so called double blind tests. Neither one of them will prove of value for treasure hunters or skeptics. It will not prove you theories about Electronics or Dowsing is correct. The only thing for sure that they will prove is if one person can or can not use his equipment,..Many of us treasure hunters use double blind testing in our practice..
It seems that all the definitions of Double Blind Testing contain words like persons, groups etc..meaning more than one person…Art
Click to expand...

EE THr said:
Artie---

aarthrj3811 said:
~Real Deal~
Good morning : It has been stated over and over that they have failed in double blind tests. Which failed? The machine or the testors?
Click to expand...

I keep hearing that..then the next sentence they are begging us to do a double blind test that well only prove if one operator can or can not use his tool. Every definition of Double Blind testing has the same kind of wording..Not a one of them implies that it would be a valid test using only one person..Art
Click to expand...

Maybe I'm misunderstanding your above statements. Let me ask you a couple questions to try and clairfy what you're trying to say.

Why would a person who can't use his LRL properly, even want to take the test? That doesn't make sense to me. Please explain what you are trying to say there.

Also, how could a double blind test (scientifically) be conducted with only one person? By "using only one person," do you mean only the LRL user at the test site? Who would hide the target? Please explain this, also.

Since you have these complaints about the testing procedures offered, it would be good for everyone to fully understand what your complaints are.

:coffee2:
Click to expand...

You also posted this on another thread, and I asked for clarification. You haven't answered that yet, so you can answer it here, if you want.






Are LRLs More Than Just Dowsing?
 

~EE THr~
You also posted this on another thread, and I asked for clarification. You haven't answered that yet, so you can answer it here, if you want.
Click to expand...
Real simple..what needs clarification ?
 

~bill~
I WILL answer the question. All LRL's that use a "swingy thingy" rely on dowsing for responses.
Click to expand...

Thank You bill…I do not agree with you but you have the guts to answer without writing a whole book of Psycho babble…art
 

artie---

OK. So you can't explain why you have a complaint about the double blind tests for LRLs.

Therefore you don't have any legitimate complaint.

So that means that you would be willing to take the test, and prove all the stuff you have been claiming about LRLs.

Good. I'm glad we've gotten that straight. So I won't have to listen to any more whining about there being something wrong with the testing procedures. Thank you for that.





Are LRLs More Than Just Dowsing?
 

aarthrj3811,
It doesn't take guts to tell the truth, it takes knowledge of a subject to relate the information rationally. I have that knowledge after having used dowsing for over 40 years, and experimenting with LRL gadgets for over 25 years.
 

HOLA EE: You posted -->So I won't have to listen to any more whining about there being something wrong with the testing procedures.
*****************
Does that include me ?? I have lots of questions on the testing.

Don Jose de La Mancha
 

RDT---

Well, that would be interesting to hear. You actually make some sense sometimes.

I can't answer them any better than you can just read the same rules that I can, but you've got me wondering what could be considered wrong with them.

So what are your questions?





Are LRLs More Than Just Dowsing?
 

~bill~
It doesn't take guts to tell the truth, it takes knowledge of a subject to relate the information rationally. I have that knowledge after having used dowsing for over 40 years, and experimenting with LRL gadgets for over 25 years.
Click to expand...
I am sorry you lost your abilities..I lost mine for almost a year after suffering a stroke..Practice and changing methods for that year brought me back to about 96 %...Art
 

You must log in or register to reply here.

This a great forum for researching human nature.

⬅️ Previous Thread

A little bit on how LRLs utilize (or rather DONT UTILIZE) dowsing

Next Thread ➡️

Top Member Reactions

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 4 (members: 0, guests: 4)

Latest Discussions

Back
Top