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

[Gluk]

""The rods will not work if the human hand is not in contact with it...Art"

and


"Some one may be able to do it with wires but I can't....Art"

are contradictory statements. It won't work, or you can't do it, but some people can?"

Actually, he was providing an exception. Not at all a contradiction.
If I said: "I can't swim"
and then:"I can swim when i use a life-jacket"
It wouldn't be contradictory.

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

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

[ClonedSIM]

Actually, he was providing an exception. Not at all a contradiction.
If I said: "I can't swim"
and then:"I can swim when i use a life-jacket"
It wouldn't be contradictory.

It's not considered swimming if you have to use a life-jacket

WB Gluk 8)

My thoughts, as well.

Art said that it was not possible to use the rods without being in contact with them. He didn't say that he couldn't do it, but that it was not possible. They he turned around and said that someone might be able to get the rods to work as I fronted in my experiment, but not him. In essence, he told me it wasn't possible, but even if it was, he would never try it.

Or, perhaps he has tried it and does not want to tell us that he failed, even though the mechanics at work are perfectly reasonable and understandable.

 

[aarthrj3811]

It's not considered swimming if you have to use a life-jacket

Gee SWR....There are many places where it is required by LAW that if you are in the water you must wear a life-jacket. This would not be considered as swimming? ..Art

 

[Captain Trips]

... The rods will not work if the human hand is not in contact with it .... Art

And, if human hands are in contact with it, then there is at least some effect from an ideomotor response! This is unavoidable -- human hands are in constant motion, even if it is undetectable to most people. (Surgeons know this all too well, and are trained to work with it instead of against it.) Therefore, if human hands are touching something, it too is in some form of motion.

BTW, I don't recall where anyone said dowsing works by the ideomotor motion, but that's what causes the rods to move. I will accept that, IF dowsing does work, then it may do so by subconsciously affecting the ideomotor motion of the hands. But note the "IF" in my statement. We have yet to establish, beyond a reasonable doubt, that dowsing works.

(I remind you of an observation of Carl Sagan's: Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. And dowsing certainly qualifies as "an extraordinary claim." All that we skeptics are really asking for is the "extraordinary evidence.")

 

[aarthrj3811]

Or, perhaps he has tried it and does not want to tell us that he failed, even though the mechanics at work are perfectly reasonable and understandable.

Gee af1733.....I have tried that and many more experiments. They will not work like that for me.....It is perfectly reasonable and understandable that someone may be able to do this but I doublt it....Art

 

[ClonedSIM]

Or, perhaps he has tried it and does not want to tell us that he failed, even though the mechanics at work are perfectly reasonable and understandable.

Gee af1733.....I have tried that and many more experiments. They will not work like that for me.....It is perfectly reasonable and understandable that someone may be able to do this but I doublt it....Art

Gee, Art. I think you just agreed with me.

Let's break this down.

Dowsing won't work unless the dowser is holding the rods.
Ideomotor is not possible unless a dowser is holding the rods.
Dowsing won't work if a dowser is holding wires attached to the rods.
Ideomotor is not possible if a dowser is holding wires attached to the rods.
Every time you take ideomotor away, dowsing is not possible!

Wow. I think we had a breakthrough...

 

[xupz]

Or, perhaps he has tried it and does not want to tell us that he failed, even though the mechanics at work are perfectly reasonable and understandable.

Gee af1733.....I have tried that and many more experiments. They will not work like that for me.....It is perfectly reasonable and understandable that someone may be able to do this but I doublt it....Art

Gee, Art. I think you just agreed with me.

Let's break this down.

Dowsing won't work unless the dowser is holding the rods.
Ideomotor is not possible unless a dowser is holding the rods.
Dowsing won't work if a dowser is holding wires attached to the rods.
Ideomotor is not possible if a dowser is holding wires attached to the rods.
Every time you take ideomotor away, dowsing is not possible!

Wow. I think we had a breakthrough...

Just occured to me, what's a dowser's stance on the ideomotor exactly? I mean they can't possibly deny it exists* as it's well documented, yet they deny the ideomotor is not responsible for the rods moving? Or is it that they acknowledge the ideomotor is responsible for the rods moving, but maintain it's only a response to junk like signals etc? Someone care to clear this up?

 

[aarthrj3811]

Hey SWR....You forgot the County Laws. The ones that make laws about what they call safe boating and rafting. They are the same people who will take your metal detector out of your car or your fishing pole and throw you in jail just for having them near some place they have some law that says you can not use them...Art

 

[ClonedSIM]

Hey SWR....You forgot the County Laws. The ones that make laws about what they call safe boating and rafting. They are the same people who will take your metal detector out of your car or your fishing pole and throw you in jail just for having them near some place they have some law that says you can not use them...Art

Boating, or rafting, is not swimming, Art.

Have you ever tried to swim while wearing a life jacket? Darn near impossible. That's why swimmers don't wear life jackets. How many little kids do you see running around the swimming pool wearing life jackets? Or even the life guards? Or even at the beach??

Why the heck are we still talking about this, anyway?

 

[aarthrj3811]

Just occured to me, what's a dowser's stance on the ideomotor exactly? I mean they can't possibly deny it doesn't exist as it's well documented, yet they deny the ideomotor is not responsible for the rods moving? Or is it that they acknowledge the ideomotor is responsible for the rods moving, but maintain it's only a response to junk like signals etc? Someone care to clear this up?[/quote
Hey xupz....Good Question....I can't speak for all Dowsers. I am told that Ideomotor Response is a reaction to a thought or idea from the sub-concsious mind and that I have no control over this event. My opinion is that the sub-concsious mind can be trained to only respond in the manner that I want it to. If I train it to only allow the rods to cross when a signal is sensed though my foot and that is the only time it will react. I know the sub-concsious can be trained but I don't know if the Dowsing reaction has anything to do with the sub-concsious mind. Using the dowsing frame where you can not cross the rods using movments of the hands and wrist and the rods will still cross when you step on a coin is a bit confusing. Is there some other part of the brain that can cause the rods to close? As you can see I don't have the answers and I don't claim to. All I know is that I can find unknown targets and that some one who is a lot smarter than all of us will give us the answers some day....Art

 

[ClonedSIM]

(I remind you of an observation of Carl Sagan's: Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. And dowsing certainly qualifies as "an extraordinary claim." All that we skeptics are really asking for is the "extraordinary evidence.")

Hi Cappy, was wondering when you were gonna show up..

Carl Sagan had another saying, too.....

" It took Billions and Billions of years...to create the Universe..."

....the Jury is still out on that one...


Judy

The jury's still out? What the heck does that mean? Are you a card-carrying "Young-Earth" society member?

 

[Jean310]

If you haven't seen this particular video, and you read this forum, it will be well worth your time. Yes, it is 30 minutes long, but I guarantee it will be time well spent.

If you're sitting down watching this (and most are), I'd suggest you get a firm grip on your chair because along the way you may just get to laughing so hard, there could be danger of you falling out of your chair.

[video=google;4694530584288972114]http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=4694530584288972114&q=divining&hl=en[/video]

I just have one question; where were you at when this was going on, Max, and how come you didn't take part, and TAKE their prize money? With your look-down rods it should have been like shooting ducks in a barrel.

 

[Jean310]

If you're sitting down watching this (and most are), I'd suggest you get a firm grip on your chair because along the way you may just get to laughing so hard, there could be danger of you falling out of your chair.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=4694530584288972114&q=divining&hl=en

I liked the guy in the kewl hat and awesome horn...dowsing for beer !!

Yes, he was a riot. But my two favorites was the guy who couldn't control his y-rod and it almost looked like he was throwing a fit, and the other was the guy who had to stamp on the ground with his foot.

But, of course the best part was listening to all the excuses at the end.

 

[Carl-NC]

Are you a card-carrying "Young-Earth" society member?

That's "Flat Young Earth," kind Sir. Complete with a metallic dome for holding the sun, moon, and stars, and with windows through which the rains may pour. As precisely and unerringly described by intellectual sheep herders some 3000 years ago, so that ye may believe.

 

[aarthrj3811]

Only skeptics, educated by James “Amazing” Randi and other magicians, are capable of spotting the tricks of the trade. “Scientists are easily fooled,” explained Randi, “because they think they know.” But only skeptics really know.

“Becoming an expert is a pretty simple procedure; tell people you’re an expert. After you do that, all you have to do is maintain appearances and not give them a reason to believe you’re not.”

Electromagnetic fields, for instance, were once perinormal but eventually came to be recognized as real. The question, then, is which phenomena currently dismissed by skeptics as paranormal are actually perinormal. “I mean, what if somebody-what if there really is a perinormal phenomenon which is then embraced within science and will become normal, but at present is classified conventionally as paranormal?”

If a "psychic" phenomenon turns out to be real, then by definition it is physical and therefore not really psychic after all, and thus Randi shouldn't have to pay
Get your SMART PENCILS out people....10 out of 10...Dowsing is not para-normal. It is physical.....Now what are the odds of collecting the money?.....Art

 

[ClonedSIM]

Are you a card-carrying "Young-Earth" society member?

That's "Flat Young Earth," kind Sir. Complete with a metallic dome for holding the sun, moon, and stars, and with windows through which the rains may pour. As precisely and unerringly described by intellectual sheep herders some 3000 years ago, so that ye may believe.

Oh no, Carl. I'm talking about the Young-Earthers, the ones who believe the Earth is only 6000 years old and dinosaurs and man lived at the same time and that the petrification of trees takes only 100 years or so. There's actually a museum in North Carolina that has a Triceratops statue wearing a saddle and being ridden!

But I can see the relation of the two societies. I bet you both groups actually believe in dowsing, as well!

 

[Jean310]

<<< other noise clipped >>>
..Dowsing is not para-normal. It is physical.....Now what are the odds of collecting the money?.....Art

Art, I don't care if you call your dowsing physical, or para-normal or peanut butter and jelly; the FACT remains, if you can't do what you claim to be able to do with your bent wires ---you will not collect the money. The test is not designed to allow you to collect the money if your best dowsing results are on a par with Random Selection.

Tell me you understand that concept.

 

[aarthrj3811]

Hey Jean....Tell me....would you agree with this statement..If a "psychic" phenomenon turns out to be real, then by definition it is physical and therefore not really psychic after all, and thus Randi shouldn't have to pay...Art

 

[Jean310]

Hey Jean....Tell me....would you agree with this statement..If a "psychic" phenomenon turns out to be real, then by definition it is physical and therefore not really psychic after all, and thus Randi shouldn't have to pay...Art

Art, I don't care if you call your dowsing physical, or para-normal or peanut butter and jelly; the FACT remains, if you can't do what you claim to be able to do with your bent wires ---you will not collect the money. The test is not designed to allow you to collect the money if your best dowsing results are on a par with Random Selection.

Tell me you understand that concept, and the general rule of the test.

 

[ClonedSIM]

<<< other noise clipped >>>
..Dowsing is not para-normal. It is physical.....Now what are the odds of collecting the money?.....Art

Art, I don't care if you call your dowsing physical, or para-normal or peanut butter and jelly; the FACT remains, if you can't do what you claim to be able to do with your bent wires ---you will not collect the money. The test is not designed to allow you to collect the money if your best dowsing results are on a par with Random Selection.

Tell me you understand that concept.

Hey Jean....Tell me....would you agree with this statement..If a "psychic" phenomenon turns out to be real, then by definition it is physical and therefore not really psychic after all, and thus Randi shouldn't have to pay...Art

Hey Jean....Tell me....would you agree with this statement..If a "psychic" phenomenon turns out to be real, then by definition it is physical and therefore not really psychic after all, and thus Randi shouldn't have to pay...Art

Art, I don't care if you call your dowsing physical, or para-normal or peanut butter and jelly; the FACT remains, if you can't do what you claim to be able to do with your bent wires ---you will not collect the money. The test is not designed to allow you to collect the money if your best dowsing results are on a par with Random Selection.

Tell me you understand that concept, and the general rule of the test.

How about that? Art ignored a question. What are the odds?