Blind dowser.

[aarthrj3811]

have yet to see someone on here asking for the locations of wires, nails, junk, soda cans, or pull tabs. They generally ask for precious metals, and help is nearly always forthcoming quickly in those cases.

We do not search for that stuff

Still though, only 15% more accurate than random chance? Unless you repeated this experiment thousands of times, that's not even a statistically significant difference.

I read a long thread abut Metal detectors...It was clear that you would expect to dig 200 pull tabs before you found a gold ring...that makes the odds 1 in 201...

Have you considered skipping the rods entirely and just going with your hunches?

I never go out unless I have a Dowsed map..that gives me a starting point..With over 7 millions of acres of land to search that cuts down the area a lot...I can pick up large objects for 5 miles..That increases my odds even more

It's worked for me, and again, I now suspect that we're doing the same thing..

Just keep on guessing if it works for you.....Art

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

A Handbook of Civil War Bullets and Cartridges - Grab it through Amazon!

[aarthrj3811]

Hey Dave.....How long would it take you to search this mountain?

 

[lesjcbs]

We do not search for that stuff


I read a long thread abut Metal detectors...It was clear that you would expect to dig 200 pull tabs before you found a gold ring...that makes the odds 1 in 201...

I never go out unless I have a Dowsed map..that gives me a starting point..With over 7 millions of acres of land to search that cuts down the area a lot...I can pick up large objects for 5 miles..That increases my odds even more

Just keep on guessing if it works for you.....Art

AARt: What he's saying is when he forced his rods to cross, which is actually guessing, it did not work for him and it doesn't work for me either. I remember you telling me about that 5 mile shot you made. WOW. . I am up to 90 feet at this time only. Hopefully I can catch up with you some day . But you can bet it won't be from me rushing my rods or trying to guess out a target when I do.

 

[aarthrj3811]

Hey Les...Try reading this http://www.treasurenet.com/forums/dowsing/10838-want-try-dowsing.html.....post #8

 

[Dave Rishar]

We do not search for that stuff

Neither do I, but we all seem to find it. You'll find that I'm more open about it than most. I've even been known to photograph my trash pile when I recovered an astonishing amount of it.

I read a long thread abut Metal detectors...It was clear that you would expect to dig 200 pull tabs before you found a gold ring...that makes the odds 1 in 201...

It was also clear that the ball test was discussing targets, not gold. Someone correct me if I'm wrong about that and we'll discuss it further; otherwise, kindly refrain from attempting to muddy things up.

Since you brought it up though, I actually save my pull tabs...no, really! I've got about a fifth of a mason jar full of them so far, as compared with six rings dug for the year. (One sterling, two gold, three junk.) My ring-to-pull tab ratio is actually much better than I'd suspected, and I'm finding that as I gain experience with the machine, I no longer dig them up frequently. Still, as much as I enjoy digging up jewelry, it's not as much fun to talk about as trash or odd targets are.

If you're following my posts, it should also be clear that I'm willing to dig shallow iffy signals, even though I know that they're probably trash. My good finds are almost always things that one or more people already walked over, and I'm not comfortable with doing the same thing. If I'm not sure, I make sure.

I never go out unless I have a Dowsed map..that gives me a starting point..With over 7 millions of acres of land to search that cuts down the area a lot...I can pick up large objects for 5 miles..That increases my odds even more

Lesjcbs made a compelling argument for how dowsing might work. How does map dowsing work?

Just keep on guessing if it works for you.....Art

Is it guessing or intuition? Whatever you want to call it, I suspect that I'm not the only one in this thread using it.

As for the mountains in your later post, I wouldn't. I've already got my hands full here.

 

[lesjcbs]

Neither do I, but we all seem to find it. You'll find that I'm more open about it than most. I've even been known to photograph my trash pile when I recovered an astonishing amount of it.



It was also clear that the ball test was discussing targets, not gold. Someone correct me if I'm wrong about that and we'll discuss it further; otherwise, kindly refrain from attempting to muddy things up.

Since you brought it up though, I actually save my pull tabs...no, really! I've got about a fifth of a mason jar full of them so far, as compared with six rings dug for the year. (One sterling, two gold, three junk.) My ring-to-pull tab ratio is actually much better than I'd suspected, and I'm finding that as I gain experience with the machine, I no longer dig them up frequently. Still, as much as I enjoy digging up jewelry, it's not as much fun to talk about as trash or odd targets are.

If you're following my posts, it should also be clear that I'm willing to dig shallow iffy signals, even though I know that they're probably trash. My good finds are almost always things that one or more people already walked over, and I'm not comfortable with doing the same thing. If I'm not sure, I make sure.



Lesjcbs made a compelling argument for how dowsing might work. How does map dowsing work?



Is it guessing or intuition? Whatever you want to call it, I suspect that I'm not the only one in this thread using it.

As for the mountains in your later post, I wouldn't. I've already got my hands full here.

If my above explanation on how I think dowsing works is true, everything else that is done with it such as sample witnessing, rod lengths, and materials that rods are made from is to help the dowsers mind shed all the barriers of doubt and fear and thus becomes more tuned for any given target energy, even over very long distances. Here is an example of how this might work. We have a grandson who is now in the army. When he was a small child, he hurt his finger. He came to me for help. I said: Grandpa is going to count to three then blow away the hurt, OK? OK says he. One, two, three, BLOW. It stopped hurting, he stopped crying and went back to playing with a great big smile on his face.

Now an adult would look at me, laugh and say I am crazy and would not accept my cure. Why? Because they think they know better. They have all the known facts. Get the point? In other words, don't confuse me with the facts. Our minds and nervous systems are very sensitive and very powerful and a child's system is not messed up with all the facts, figures, ratios and such that would block such a great cure and treatment for a hurt. Dowsing works when the facts are ignored. The process of learning and programming ones mind to ignore the so called facts, is the hard part.

I understand children learn to dowse very fast. Can you guess why?

 

[lesjcbs]

Hey Les...Try reading this http://www.treasurenet.com/forums/dowsing/10838-want-try-dowsing.html.....post #8

Art: I saw your reference above and the frame design you posted later. The problem I have with the frame is when gldhntr made it and tried it, he was holding onto the handles with his hands.

To show the rods can act on their own power, one would have to brace the frame up with something other than human hands, such as a stick or books and see if the rods move on their own when someone walks around and in front of the rods. I don't think they will

 

[aarthrj3811]

No the rods will not work unless a human is holding them...the whole idea of the frame is that it is impossible to make the rods cross by moving the hands....It they cross when in the frame it sure is not ideomotor response...Art

 

[lesjcbs]

No the rods will not work unless a human is holding them...the whole idea of the frame is that it is impossible to make the rods cross by moving the hands....It they cross when in the frame it sure is not ideomotor response...Art

Anytime human hands are holding onto a device such as this, the rods are not isolated from their movement as they are being held by the frame that is being held by hands. To completely isolate the ideomotor factor, which is what you are trying to do, one must not touch the frame anywhere, which in turn is holding the rods. Further, hands can not only turn right or left, they can also tilt back and forth, right or left while holding anything including this frame.

You said the rods will not work unless a human hand is holding them. Ok, that identifies where the rods must be to turn. So, what do you say turns the rods when in ones hands if not the hands themselves from an ideomotor response?

Also, why the copper tubing which braces and holds the frames shape and into which the rods sit? Why not plastic or wooden tubing?

 

[aarthrj3811]

Something to think about......

[h=1][/h]

---

​

---

​

Divining rods and all common dowsing devices, are the simplest forms of electroscopes. The bent rod for example is just a variation of Gilbert's straw needle electroscope.
The divining rods are charged with static electricity from the dowser's own body. This static electricity can be seen quite adequately with a simple millivolt meter. This voltage is measured between the hands of the dowser, to measure this voltage accurately a diff amp should be used at the input to the voltmeter, "this eliminates stray signals which are common to both hands". The amount of voltage will vary depending on the person. A good dowser will have a high reading, "above 100 mv" while a poor dowser may read as low as,"0 mv.". For males the right hand is usually a negative polarity, and the left hand is positive in polarity. These polarities are usually reversed in females.
The divining rod charged positively will rotate in the dowsers hand to line up parallel to a negatively charged object being dowsed. A divining rod charged negatively will remain perpendicular to a negatively charged object being dowsed. This is because like charges repel, while unlike charges attract. Thus both bent divining rods are not required for dowsing. When two divining rods are used, and they are seen to cross, one of the rods is being moved to line up parallel with the charged object being dowsed. The other rod is moving to line up parallel to the first rod. A second reason for the two rods crossing is that of dowsing over an alternating current source, such as a pipeline or buried cable. these are usually buried shallow and are conducting ground currents as the path of least resistance.
The above statements can easily be proven by, dowsing over negatively and positively charged objects. The devices used in my experiments were, a rubber rod rubbed with cat fur to produce the positive charged object, while a glass rod rubbed with silk was used to produce the negatively charged object.
The reason conventional devices cannot detect these positive and negative charges, is probably because of the array in which the charged object gives off it's lines of force in all directions. Most instruments being omnidirectional devices would not pick up the small incremental changes in voltage along the earth’s surface. But the bent divining rods being unidirectional devices, can only turn to line up parallel to the charged object, when they are directly above the charged object.
The willow crotch is another type of dowsing device, this divining rod begins to pick up an attraction to the charged object prior to reaching the object, having it’s greatest amount of pull directly over the object. After dowsing with the willow crotch , the crotch itself can laid down and dowsed with the bent rods, which will indicate a charge left on each arm of the crotch, one positive and one negative.
A metallic pendulum attached by a wire will take on the charge of the hand it is being held by. A pendulum held by a nonconductive string will take on the charge of the last hand which held the pendulum. The pendulum when rotating above an object of a similar charge will continue to rotate and eventually swing back and forth perpendicular to the object. This pendulum when rotating above an object of the opposite charge will start to swing back and forth parallel to the object being dowsed. Caution here when dowsing an object you have touched the object will usually take on the charge of the last hand that touched it. This can be demonstrated by dowsing over an object such as a table knife depending on which hand touched the knife last an opposite reaction of the dowsing device will be seen.

 

[lesjcbs]

Something to think about......

---

​

---

​

Divining rods and all common dowsing devices, are the simplest forms of electroscopes. The bent rod for example is just a variation of Gilbert's straw needle electroscope.
The divining rods are charged with static electricity from the dowser's own body. This static electricity can be seen quite adequately with a simple millivolt meter. This voltage is measured between the hands of the dowser, to measure this voltage accurately a diff amp should be used at the input to the voltmeter, "this eliminates stray signals which are common to both hands". The amount of voltage will vary depending on the person. A good dowser will have a high reading, "above 100 mv" while a poor dowser may read as low as,"0 mv.". For males the right hand is usually a negative polarity, and the left hand is positive in polarity. These polarities are usually reversed in females.
The divining rod charged positively will rotate in the dowsers hand to line up parallel to a negatively charged object being dowsed. A divining rod charged negatively will remain perpendicular to a negatively charged object being dowsed. This is because like charges repel, while unlike charges attract. Thus both bent divining rods are not required for dowsing. When two divining rods are used, and they are seen to cross, one of the rods is being moved to line up parallel with the charged object being dowsed. The other rod is moving to line up parallel to the first rod. A second reason for the two rods crossing is that of dowsing over an alternating current source, such as a pipeline or buried cable. these are usually buried shallow and are conducting ground currents as the path of least resistance.
The above statements can easily be proven by, dowsing over negatively and positively charged objects. The devices used in my experiments were, a rubber rod rubbed with cat fur to produce the positive charged object, while a glass rod rubbed with silk was used to produce the negatively charged object.
The reason conventional devices cannot detect these positive and negative charges, is probably because of the array in which the charged object gives off it's lines of force in all directions. Most instruments being omnidirectional devices would not pick up the small incremental changes in voltage along the earth’s surface. But the bent divining rods being unidirectional devices, can only turn to line up parallel to the charged object, when they are directly above the charged object.
The willow crotch is another type of dowsing device, this divining rod begins to pick up an attraction to the charged object prior to reaching the object, having it’s greatest amount of pull directly over the object. After dowsing with the willow crotch , the crotch itself can laid down and dowsed with the bent rods, which will indicate a charge left on each arm of the crotch, one positive and one negative.
A metallic pendulum attached by a wire will take on the charge of the hand it is being held by. A pendulum held by a nonconductive string will take on the charge of the last hand which held the pendulum. The pendulum when rotating above an object of a similar charge will continue to rotate and eventually swing back and forth perpendicular to the object. This pendulum when rotating above an object of the opposite charge will start to swing back and forth parallel to the object being dowsed. Caution here when dowsing an object you have touched the object will usually take on the charge of the last hand that touched it. This can be demonstrated by dowsing over an object such as a table knife depending on which hand touched the knife last an opposite reaction of the dowsing device will be seen.

Ok so far, but there is more.


After a man touches a rod with their right hand, that rod is now charged negative. After he touches the other rod with his right hand, that rod is now charge positive. Reversed in females.


OK I understand fully what you are saying, but, there's more to this than you presented here.
Rods being charged in polarity is not enough to turn them. As you said before, they must be in human hands to be turned.


Again: After a man touches a rod with their right hand, that rod is now charged negative. After he touches the other rod with his right hand, that rod is now charge positive. Reversed in females.


In order to isolate any ideomotor input from the person, and that is what we are talking about here, and to see if these charged rods move on their own from being charged accordingly, after firmly touching the rods to charge them, that person must now step back and while not touching the rods, move a target around the frame to see if the charged rods follow. After all, they are charged and should turn on their own from the opposite attraction factor. You will find they will not move.

There is more force needed to turn the rods than being simply charged negatively or positively in polarity, and that force will be human hands, and human hands are controlled by the ideomotor factor.

Personally, I am not bothered by the ideomotor explanation at all. In fact I embrace it.

 

[aarthrj3811]

Ideomotor approaches to motor control focus on the cognitive mechanisms underlying voluntary action selection. Ideomotor theory states that actions are cognitively represented in terms of their anticipated sensory consequences (response effects) and that there are bidirectional associations between movements and ensuing response effects. Accordingly, the anticipation of response effects may serve as a mental cue to activate the corresponding movement. The aim of the present paper is to describe the general principles of ideomotor theory and to review recent empirical work that supports this theory. Specifically, we describe studies on the role of response effects for the selection and initiation of simple actions and for learning and performing action sequences. Finally, we discuss potential implications of these results for sport psychology, in particular with reference to the role of motor imagery in mental practice.

You see Les, that’s what the practice is for....You are training your mind to cross the rods when a signal is found....Have you not trained your mind to hit the brakes when a child walks out in front of your car?....It is automatic no thinking required

 

[lesjcbs]

Ideomotor approaches to motor control focus on the cognitive mechanisms underlying voluntary action selection. Ideomotor theory states that actions are cognitively represented in terms of their anticipated sensory consequences (response effects) and that there are bidirectional associations between movements and ensuing response effects. Accordingly, the anticipation of response effects may serve as a mental cue to activate the corresponding movement. The aim of the present paper is to describe the general principles of ideomotor theory and to review recent empirical work that supports this theory. Specifically, we describe studies on the role of response effects for the selection and initiation of simple actions and for learning and performing action sequences. Finally, we discuss potential implications of these results for sport psychology, in particular with reference to the role of motor imagery in mental practice.

You see Les, that’s what the practice is for....You are training your mind to cross the rods when a signal is found....Have you not trained your mind to hit the brakes when a child walks out in front of your car?....It is automatic no thinking required

OK, so what do you say finds a targets signal, your brain or the rods and what do you say turns the rods?

 

[two bear]

Art - For some time now I have been reading and following you on this dowsing forum. I have been quite for some time now due to work and adventures but I just want to tell you how I constantly read how people bash you and your dowsing claims on this forum. You are always so professional and calm and always back up what you state to anyone who is willing to listen and try things on their own. I don't know why some want to try to call you out constantly, I think they are insecure about themselves or about something they just don't understand. I am a dowser myself, I have a lot to learn, I can teach a lot to anyone willing, and I dowse for things that some may consider to be weird but I am extremely impressed with your professionalism and patience. Keep up the good fight my friend.

 

[aarthrj3811]

My theory is that the signals are picked up by the human body through the foot...Stand on a signal line and raise one foot off the ground. The rods will open just like you broke a circuit...After I had a stroke I could not dowse..I soon had some arteries cleaned and started to have a lot of pain in my head...the doctor said that my Pineal gland was starting to work again and I could dowse again..I don’t know what started to work again.....We still do not know everything that the human brain can do.....

And two bear...I do everything a little different than most...these are my methods..If it does what I want it to and I am having fun that’s what counts... http://www.treasurenet.com/forums/dowsing/10838-want-try-dowsing.html http://www.treasurenet.com/forums/dowsing/10838-want-try-dowsing.html

 

[lesjcbs]

My theory is that the signals are picked up by the human body through the fooyt...Stand on a signal line and raise one foot off the ground. The rods will open just like you broke a circuit...After I had a stroke I could not dowse..I soon had some arteries cleaned and started to have a lot of pain in my head...the doctor said that my Pineal gland was starting to work again and I could dowse again..I don’t know what started to work again.....We still do not know everything that the human brain can do.....

And two bear...I do everything a little different than most...these are my methods..If it does what I want it to and I am having fun that’s what counts... http://www.treasurenet.com/forums/dowsing/10838-want-try-dowsing.html http://www.treasurenet.com/forums/dowsing/10838-want-try-dowsing.html

Hmm, interesting. So what do you say turns the rods, your hands or do the rods turn because they are charged and are attracted to a target of the opposite charged polarity?

 

[woof!]

Good luck, Les.

This is dowsing we're talking about. Don't fall for pseudoscience gobbledegook, and don't trust what you can't verify.

What you have posted about ideomotor response is correct. One of the best explanations I've ever seen. When you strip away all the explanations that are provably false, ideomotor response is what's left. The rods do not move themselves even though it feels like they do. Been there, done that. The sensation is compelling, and it took a while to reason through the underlying physics. The mystery is not what moves the rods (the design of the rods themselves is the answer to that question), the mystery is where the subconscious information comes from if you're blinded and can get a repeatable verifiable locate on an intended target.

Back on the old TNet dowsing-LRL forum (to my knowledge not archived) I posted my attempts to come up with testable hypotheses regarding the question of where the "information" comes from in ground-truthed blind locating. There were various hypotheses-- "God", "Universal Consciousness", "Akashanic Record", "Extraterrestrials screwing around with us", "Quantum-mechanical interaction between target and brain", maybe there were others I don't recall. I decided that ET's were the most plausible hypothesis based on analogy with the known behaviour of living beings, but I couldn't figure out any way to test the hypothesis. The whole matter of approaching this as a scientific question was 'way over the heads of 95% of the forum participants, you've already seen that happen here.

A friend of mine who is well-informed (and highly experienced) in the fields of treasure hunting and of paranormal locating, has (as I understand it from things he's posted) come to the conclusion that if nobody ever knew where it was , the paranormal methods won't work. In other words, if a treasure was buried (obviously someone knew where), if it's still there paranormal methods might prove useful in locating it. "Might". If a flood moved the treasure 200 meters, paranormal methods will prove fruitless. .........If my friend's conclusions regarding the nature of this stuff are true, it's a clue as to the underlying mechanics. I'm not saying that I either agree or disagree with my friend's opinion on this (if indeed I've expressed his opinion correctly, sorry if I misunderstood), merely saying that it's an opinion that was thunk through competently, not gullibilly or ignoramus or flibberdigibbet.

Since "blind dowsing" is the only kind that interests me (the other kind is plain ordinary stuff without any need for a gee-whiz explanation), this thread caught my attention. A decade ago I'd have dived right in, but this is now and in what's left of my life I have other more important business to attend to.

--Dave J.

[EDIT to add stuff]

Back in the bad old days, I used to frequently remind fellow forum denizens that "claimants go home empty-handed". Not only is this the evidence produced by supervised blinded testing, it is corroborated by both common sense and by faith in the ethics of the Universe if one has such faith.

Guys who claim they can dowse for a prize with the cameras rolling have an attitude problem. Once the cameras are rolling, they can't get the desire to succeed out of their head. Therefore ideomotor response is blocked, and they're doomed. This is ordinary psychology, there is no need to invoke paranormal explanations.

Then there's this other problem, the one I call the ethical one: blind dowsing is, in my opinion, not a personal power, it is merely a willingness to become available to another power. To claim that other power as one's own under personal control is a falsehood, and therefore cuts off the source. ........This much is true even if that "source" is ordinary subconscious knowledge, which however isn't of much use in well-blinded dowsing. If one accepts the proposition that blinded dowsing can actually "work", one must (according to this theory) not make false claims about what or who should be given credit for the power. That leads to the realization that dowsing as a contest matter isn't even dowsing, it's a fool holding a dowsing rod that ain't goin' nowhere, right in front of a camera.

 

[Goldminer]

Dave has done it again folks!! Art, and others I believe you should pay attention to his comments (if they continue). His is one of the most thoughtful minds on this subject. Thx Dave
Bill

 

[aarthrj3811]

Thanks Dave.....That’s a pretty good theory...Art

 

[lesjcbs]

Good luck, Les.

This is dowsing we're talking about. Don't fall for pseudoscience gobbledegook, and don't trust what you can't verify.

What you have posted about ideomotor response is correct. One of the best explanations I've ever seen. When you strip away all the explanations that are provably false, ideomotor response is what's left. The rods do not move themselves even though it feels like they do. Been there, done that. The sensation is compelling, and it took a while to reason through the underlying physics. The mystery is not what moves the rods (the design of the rods themselves is the answer to that question), the mystery is where the subconscious information comes from if you're blinded and can get a repeatable verifiable locate on an intended target.

Back on the old TNet dowsing-LRL forum (to my knowledge not archived) I posted my attempts to come up with testable hypotheses regarding the question of where the "information" comes from in ground-truthed blind locating. There were various hypotheses-- "God", "Universal Consciousness", "Akashanic Record", "Extraterrestrials screwing around with us", "Quantum-mechanical interaction between target and brain", maybe there were others I don't recall. I decided that ET's were the most plausible hypothesis based on analogy with the known behaviour of living beings, but I couldn't figure out any way to test the hypothesis. The whole matter of approaching this as a scientific question was 'way over the heads of 95% of the forum participants, you've already seen that happen here.

A friend of mine who is well-informed (and highly experienced) in the fields of treasure hunting and of paranormal locating, has (as I understand it from things he's posted) come to the conclusion that if nobody ever knew where it was , the paranormal methods won't work. In other words, if a treasure was buried (obviously someone knew where), if it's still there paranormal methods might prove useful in locating it. "Might". If a flood moved the treasure 200 meters, paranormal methods will prove fruitless. .........If my friend's conclusions regarding the nature of this stuff are true, it's a clue as to the underlying mechanics. I'm not saying that I either agree or disagree with my friend's opinion on this (if indeed I've expressed his opinion correctly, sorry if I misunderstood), merely saying that it's an opinion that was thunk through competently, not gullibilly or ignoramus or flibberdigibbet.

Since "blind dowsing" is the only kind that interests me (the other kind is plain ordinary stuff without any need for a gee-whiz explanation), this thread caught my attention. A decade ago I'd have dived right in, but this is now and in what's left of my life I have other more important business to attend to.

--Dave J.

[EDIT to add stuff]

Back in the bad old days, I used to frequently remind fellow forum denizens that "claimants go home empty-handed". Not only is this the evidence produced by supervised blinded testing, it is corroborated by both common sense and by faith in the ethics of the Universe if one has such faith.

Guys who claim they can dowse for a prize with the cameras rolling have an attitude problem. Once the cameras are rolling, they can't get the desire to succeed out of their head. Therefore ideomotor response is blocked, and they're doomed. This is ordinary psychology, there is no need to invoke paranormal explanations.

Then there's this other problem, the one I call the ethical one: blind dowsing is, in my opinion, not a personal power, it is merely a willingness to become available to another power. To claim that other power as one's own under personal control is a falsehood, and therefore cuts off the source. ........This much is true even if that "source" is ordinary subconscious knowledge, which however isn't of much use in well-blinded dowsing. If one accepts the proposition that blinded dowsing can actually "work", one must (according to this theory) not make false claims about what or who should be given credit for the power. That leads to the realization that dowsing as a contest matter isn't even dowsing, it's a fool holding a dowsing rod that ain't goin' nowhere, right in front of a camera.

Thanks Dave for your compliment.

ARRt: I am still not clear on what you say turns the rods. Do your hands or do the rods turn because they are charged and are attracted to a target of the opposite charged polarity?

Les