My beliefs on dowsing

[Tom_in_CA]

Art, true, you may have success, and for you, that's proof enough. Not proof of the source or reasons dowsing works, but proof that it worked, for you. That's fine. But that doesn't pass a scientific double-blind controlled environment scientific test. Imagine if you will, sitting in a college level science course, turning to the chapter on dowsing (if there were such a chapter in the future .... bear with me for illistration sakes). The reader turns to the paragraphs describing the scientific tests done to show repeatability and reads: "Art from Podunkville USA threw a coin over his shoulder 10x in a row, and each time, his rods led him to within a foot of it" Now you can see that doesn't pass scientific muster, right? Sure, good enough for Art from Podunkville in the year 2007, but science has higher degrees of testing for theories. Sorry. I merely quoted direct from the link that you posted: "testable model ..... capable of predicting future occurrences or observations of the same kind" A thing that sometimes happens to some people in some places, is not repeatable nor scientific. It's not saying it can't happen, it's just saying it's not passing the higher degree of scrutiny for something like your wikipedia quote.

Miner49er, thanx for your input. I realize you want to distance yourself from words like "supernatural" and "spiritual", as would most dowsers (lest they get put in the same camp as hocus pocus, fortune telling, mystics, occult, etc...). That's understandable. But it seems you've merely substituted words, that to me, can be construed to merely be substitute words, for the same thing.

To quote from your quote, words and phrases like: "physically obtaining information that is not readily evident at this time or place", "access the superconscious mind", "being aware of and interacting with stimuli within self’s own dimension", "Superconsciousness", "higher dimension" (emphasis mine on this one), "thru meditation" All these phrases seem interchangeable with spiritual and/or beyond-worldly. I mean, you say yourself that these things you attribute dowsing to are things beyond what "we perceive with our five physical senses" Sure, those things may exist, but then again, they may not. Afterall, if they're beyond perception, then they can't be measured, as you've said. So you/I can attribute ANYTHING to them, and it's bullet-proof, because they are not-knowable, thus can not be disproved or proved. Only the results are knowable (dowsing results, in this case).

Think of it miner: pick a practice that even YOU would consider to teetering on occult: Tarot cards? seances? Ouji boards? You name it. Now, what's to stop any of those practioners from saying "heck no, this isn't spiritual or occultic, we are merely 'reaching into our own inner self and consciousness' 'it's not spiritual or occultic" You see how they could use the same lines as you've used? They're merely substituting red-flag words with more palatible words. To be honest, you couldn't stop them from making the same claims you've made, right? If so, why couldn't they cloak themselves in these more palitable terms?

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

Cry Of The Eagle: History And Legends Of The Cherokee Indians And Their Buried Treasure - Grab it through Amazon!

[aarthrj3811]

That's fine. But that doesn't pass a scientific double-blind controlled environment scientific test.

That's fine....Where would all us Dowsers find a Scientific Double-Blind Test that we could take?

 

[Tom_in_CA]

Art, I'm sure someone would want to do it. Would you trust them? If someone came along and each side agreed to the ground rules, would there be dowsers to take the challenge? Or would they suspect the test organizers of planting or removing targets, etc....? This has been the accusation against some tests in the past, by dowsers (not saying it wasn't true, I'm just saying there were these allegations).

 

[Miner49er]

Tom you seem to be twisting words and inserting things that I did not state

{ I mean, you say yourself that these things you attribute dowsing to are things beyond what "we perceive with our five physical senses"} your quote

Consciousness is being aware of and interacting with stimuli within self’s own dimension. This self is conscious of what can be perceived by the five physical senses........ and
Society and science seek to prove that the only reality that exists is the one that we perceive with our five physical senses, (my quote).

Could I ask you to define spiritual and/or beyond-worldly?

 

[aarthrj3811]

Art, I'm sure someone would want to do it. Would you trust them? If someone came along and each side agreed to the ground rules, would there be dowsers to take the challenge? Or would they suspect the test organizers of planting or removing targets, etc....? This has been the accusation against some tests in the past, by dowsers (not saying it wasn't true, I'm just saying there were these allegations).

I saw with my own eyes how a test was spoiled by some people. A test would have to be performed by many people not just one. It would have to be a major event with many people to witness it. …..Art

 

[Tom_in_CA]

Miner, I was quoting directly from you. Again: "Society and science seek to prove that the only reality that exists is the one that we perceive with our five physical senses" Who is the "we" there? From the context of your sentence, it appears to be "society and science" right? So society and science don't perceive those things.

Anything outside of those measurable 5 senses, is immeasurable. Not saying it doesn't exist, I'm saying it can't be measured. You say these things beyond the senses are: "obtainable to anyone who can access the superconscious mind" Do those people (from your quote) have the ability to measure these things in some way? Or is it end results that are measured? (ie: I found a gold coin, therefore I must've gone into the superconscious mind)?

Still wanting to know if you would allow full-blown occultists to use your same defenses. If not, why?

"Could I ask you to define spiritual and/or beyond-worldly?" Sure: things beyond the physical world, beyond our own subconsious (thoughts, self, etc...). "Spiritual" has the root word of "spirit", as in, something that is a distinct entity & personality, non-physical, and not ourselves. Like God, ghosts, spirits, angels, etc... (getting into theology here, which I, at this time, don't want to veer to. Save that for another thread). So, not just you getting in touch with your inner self or something, but a true entity beyond you, that you are appealing to. For example, when, in a seance, they get a "voice" that supposedly talks to them (a dead relative, or a spirit advising them, or whatever), theyt believe they're contacted another person, spirit or whatever, non-physical.

Am I saying that dowsers knowingly teeter in this realm? No. I believe most of them sincerely believe it has a non-spiritual explanation. I believe you can un-knowingly appeal to spiritual powers, and even get results. But like I say, we're going to go into the deep end of theology if we go down this path. Suffice it to say, your explanation is one of "nature". Kind of like a keen sense of smell, that not everyone has, or has developed. In the same way, dowsers have a keen sense to know where coins/treasures are. Nothing spirutual about it, totally natural, just as the guy with keen smell can smell better than the next guy. Of course I dismiss that, but it seems to be where your position is.

 

[Tom_in_CA]

"A test would have to be performed by many people not just one. It would have to be a major event with many people to witness it. …..Art" Great, I'm game. I don't have access to university scientists to suggest or organize such a thing, but would love to see the day someone does it.

I seem to recall that tests have been done. If you google around, tests have been done in the past. But each side dismisses the other. Like: if it appears that dowsing worked, some skeptic will come along and point out faults in the testing procedure (like, not counting the bottom 2/3 of the un-successful dowsers, for instance). And if dowsing DOESN'T appear to work, the dowsers will merely come along and dismiss the results, saying there must've been slight-of-hand, or the earth's gravity must've been off that day, or whatever.

I guess to totally prepare for such cross-accusations, each side would need to agree in advance "NO SOUR GRAPES". No rationalizing that the test standards weren't right that day, or whatever. I would love to see such a test occur. Maybe it has? Anyone know the results? It would have to have been a test where the participants had everything in effect, like I suggest. To point to a test that one side or the other objects to the results (like in the examples I gave), would be tough to pin a "gotcha" on, because the other side doesn't accept it, for whatever reason they cite. But if each side could agree ahead for all the circumstances, locations, methods, etc.... and if the looser of the proposition agrees, beforehand, to go public with an admission of defeat, that would be interesting.

 

[aarthrj3811]

And again Jerry…You propose a test that you know that no one will except…Art

 

[Tom_in_CA]

Art, you say: "You propose a test that you know that no one will except" No one? I know people who would accept it. But let's cut to the chase: Ok, YOU propose the terms of a test everyone would accept. I want to know what is an acceptible test, free from all biases, possible coincidences, hunches, chances, etc... Ie.: repeatable, double-blind, etc..... I'm all ears. Please state what you'll accept.

 

[Tom_in_CA]

Dell, I don't know anything about your past, or tests you've participated in, and any irregularities in the process. That's unfortunate if that happened. If something was skewed, unfair, etc.... then a correct proccess needs to be done. Don't get burned once, and say "therefore I'll never be tested again". Don't be angry at testing in general, but be angry at that one unfair tester/episode. To be angry at testing in general, would seem to make people think it might (just might), be an avoidance of participating in a test. Or, if not you, at least someone else who is proficient.

Are you saying that if someone could pay you $10,000 p/week, and draft out terms you'd agree are fair and impartial, double blind, and a "no sour grapes" clause, you'd go for it?

 

[ClonedSIM]

Art, I'm sure someone would want to do it. Would you trust them? If someone came along and each side agreed to the ground rules, would there be dowsers to take the challenge? Or would they suspect the test organizers of planting or removing targets, etc....? This has been the accusation against some tests in the past, by dowsers (not saying it wasn't true, I'm just saying there were these allegations).

I saw with my own eyes how a test was spoiled by some people. A test would have to be performed by many people not just one. It would have to be a major event with many people to witness it. …..Art

No, you saw a test you "assume" was spoiled. And, if I recall correctly, there were plenty of witnesses at that test.

 

[aarthrj3811]

Fact #1…..A magnet will stop the dowsing rods from closing according to which way the poles are pointed..

Fact #2….A simple ohm potentiometer and a magnet will stop the rods from closing on 48 # of gold.

Fact # 3….VHF signals will block the dowsing rods from working

Fact # 4….Many other things will stop the rods from working properly…Art

 

[ClonedSIM]

Art, you say: "You propose a test that you know that no one will except" No one? I know people who would accept it. But let's cut to the chase: Ok, YOU propose the terms of a test everyone would accept. I want to know what is an acceptible test, free from all biases, possible coincidences, hunches, chances, etc... Ie.: repeatable, double-blind, etc..... I'm all ears. Please state what you'll accept

Here we go again. The same old Skeptic trick, desperately trying to entice a Dowser from this forum to volunteer to be tested for free. Been there, done that, they lied. I was a gullible idiot for trusting a career Skeptic.

O.K. That's fine, i've learned. Let them pay $10,000 + expenses up front for each week they wish to conduct their tests. That's fair! Dell

Here we go again. Same old Dowser trick, desperately trying to convince themselves that tests of their "skills" are only going to produce failure since all tests are rigged against them, no matter the situation.

A dowser that was sure of his skills shouldn't need to be recompensed simply to show off the amazing skills they've spent years honing. Don't you make enough money dowsing, Dell? You would think a man of your "skill" would be able to dig up enough treasure in one afternoon to finance a trip that would result in skeptics everywhere being incorrect.

Maybe you don't believe in dowsing as much as you claim......

 

[aarthrj3811]

No, you saw a test you "assume" was spoiled. And, if I recall correctly, there were plenty of witnesses at that test.

There was lot of Witnesses....I didn't assume anything. I gave my report on the test as to the facts that I saw....Art

 

[ClonedSIM]

Fact #1…..A magnet will stop the dowsing rods from closing according to which way the poles are pointed..

Fact #2….A simple ohm potentiometer and a magnet will stop the rods from closing on 48 # of gold.

Fact # 3….VHF signals will block the dowsing rods from working

Fact # 4….Many other things will stop the rods from working properly…Art

So in all the areas you've hunted in the past there were no magnets or VHF signals? Anywhere? At all? How about the magnets in the speakers of your car? And VHF? The same VHF range commonly used in Television, FM radio, marine and aircraft communications as well as 2-way radio comunication? Any of that can block signals from your rods? Do you dowse mostly on the south pole to avoid these things?

 

[Tom_in_CA]

"Fact #1…..A magnet will stop the dowsing rods from closing according to which way the poles are pointed..

Fact #2….A simple ohm potentiometer and a magnet will stop the rods from closing on 48 # of gold.

Fact # 3….VHF signals will block the dowsing rods from working

Fact # 4….Many other things will stop the rods from working properly…Art"

Art, can you suggest a way that you (or whatever proficient dowser takes the challenge) can be sure that no disturbances will be present? Wouldn't it be satisfactory to pick a remote desert spot free from all outside influences (SE CA is full of such boondocks spots), search the arriving participants to make sure they don't have jamming mechanisims (magnets, transmitters, etc...)? I mean, certainly there MUST be a level playing field that each side can agree to in advance.

Look at fact #4 "many things" seems to be an open invitation for dowsers to simply dismiss any negative results, because they can merely say "well I'll be durned, there must've been an eclipse on mars today" or "shucks, what do you know, the buttons on your shirt 200 yards away must've been disturbing my rods", etc.... Do you see how you've insulated yourself in an infinate web of security? No one can check out dowsings claims, because you've insulated it against all scrutiny. So c'mon, rather than any skeptic telling you what is a fair test, you tell US what a fair, impartial, double-blind, un-skewed test site and procedure would be.

 

[aarthrj3811]

So in all the areas you've hunted in the past there were no magnets or VHF signals? Anywhere? At all? How about the magnets in the speakers of your car? And VHF? The same VHF range commonly used in Television, FM radio, marine and aircraft communications as well as 2-way radio comunication? Any of that can block signals from your rods? Do you dowse mostly on the south pole to avoid these things?

My tests and experiments are posted on this forum. They do not need to be discussed again. There are many ways to block dowsing signals. Ask your friends about VHF signals as they know more about using them against dowsers than I do…Art

 

[ClonedSIM]

No, you saw a test you "assume" was spoiled. And, if I recall correctly, there were plenty of witnesses at that test.

There was lot of Witnesses....I didn't assume anything. I gave my report on the test as to the facts that I saw....Art

But isn't it odd that you're the only dowser to call that particular test null because it was "spoiled." And, if I recall, didn't the test subject perform perfectly after every skeptic had left the area? That was certainly convenient....

You can't deliver facts to save your life, Art, unless you copy them from Wikipedia. You entered the test area already under the impression the test was going to be tampered with, and will wonders never cease, this is what you reported. You are paranoid to the point that you feel every skeptic is out to get you. Personally, since I don't believe that there are any signals being sent to or received by your rods, there would be no need for me to try and tamper with something that doesn't exist.

 

[ClonedSIM]

So in all the areas you've hunted in the past there were no magnets or VHF signals? Anywhere? At all? How about the magnets in the speakers of your car? And VHF? The same VHF range commonly used in Television, FM radio, marine and aircraft communications as well as 2-way radio comunication? Any of that can block signals from your rods? Do you dowse mostly on the south pole to avoid these things?

My tests and experiments are posted on this forum. They do not need to be discussed again. There are many ways to block dowsing signals. Ask your friends about VHF signals as they know more about using them against dowsers than I do…Art

What friends would those be, Art? You seem very confident about this. Please name names....

I know you don't have the guts to answer that question.

 

[aarthrj3811]

I only know of one dowsing test that is being offered to us. It will only prove if one dowser can dowse or not. The fact that NO body has taken the formal test tells me all I need to know….Art

P.S. Nice try but I am not going to break the rules