Dowsing rod frame

[Darke]

I'm not trying. This is just interesting to me. Just for the sake of discussion, why do you think dowsing cannot work? Simply stated.
I'm not a dowser, by the way.

Not speaking for Carl but the main skepticism towards dowsing is it can't be repeated under scrutiny. Just like psychic phenomenon it fails repeated in blinded experiments. I learned with the forked branch method and like Carl has stated the response can be more than a little weird when experienced.

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

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

[Carl-NC]

Very few dowsers so that is understandable. Lack of dowsers maybe due to it seeming akin to using a Ouija board or consulting a fortunr teller.

If treasure dowsing worked to any extent, everyone would be using it.

Now here's a thought...

Some utility workers use dowsing, and often claim decent success with it.
Water dowsers are (or were) reasonably prevalent, and had decent success with it.

Why would water dowsing or utility dowsing have (presumably) decent success, but treasure dowsing does not seem to share in that success?

The article I linked seems to indicate we are smarter than we think, according to scientific studies.

Not smarter, but there is information that is better tapped at the subconscious level.

 

[Darke]

Not smarter, but there is information that is better tapped at the subconscious level.

The amount of information we store on a daily basis would be staggering in terms of bytes. It's unfortunate we don't have a defrag for the brain yet. What we can recall compared to what we process pretty small. And usually our perception overwrites what we actually saw for most events.

 

[Hillbilly Prince]

Not speaking for Carl but the main skepticism towards dowsing is it can't be repeated under scrutiny. Just like psychic phenomenon it fails repeated in blinded experiments. I learned with the forked branch method and like Carl has stated the response can be more than a little weird when experienced.

That would be interesting. What claims do dowsers make? That sometimes they can find coins, water, treasure? More often than not?
Scepticism can be easily understood if no one can replicate results consistently.
I don't tend to be sceptical about most things, unless a claim is over the top. Many people claim to see ghosts. I have to think, with the billions who have passed, shouldn't we be swimming in ghosts? But there may be a completely scientific explanation for a ghost sighting which may appear a century or two from now.
I thought Tom is a sceptic?
If someone can dowse, does it follow they can dowse maps and photos, or be successful with other methods of dowsing?

 

[Darke]

That would be interesting. What claims do dowsers make? That sometimes they can find coins, water, treasure? More often than not?
Scepticism can be easily understood if no one can replicate results consistently.
I don't tend to be sceptical about most things, unless a claim is over the top. Many people claim to see ghosts. I have to think, with the billions who have passed, shouldn't we be swimming in ghosts? But there may be a completely scientific explanation for a ghost sighting which may appear a century or two from now.
I thought Tom is a sceptic?
If someone can dowse, does it follow they can dowse maps and photos, or be successful with other methods of dowsing?

Most claim they can find pretty much anything. And sometimes they do. More than just random? That's hard to discern without a large enough sample.

I like the paranormal and have built many a rod for ghosthunters. I've even accompanied them on sure thing events. And I still haven't seen a ghost or any legendary creatures, not even a sign of Bruce Campbell. I think I might be scaring them away lol.

Tom is definitely a skeptic. His replies had a different reasoning.

Dowsing is mostly a learned technique so you can do any type if you learn the nuances. Or put in the time to judge responses as most would say. Although like most things innate talent can be the difference between good and great.

 

[Carl-NC]

Just for the sake of discussion, why do you think dowsing cannot work?

1. Dowsing has been investigated in some manner for 300-400 years. Time & again, science has concluded that it is a false response. Even in the very first published account of dowsing (De Re Metallica, 1556) Agricola recognized it as a superstition, or possibly devious mis-direction. In the 1850's ideomotor action was defined and was identified as the mechanism behind the actual dowsing "reaction." Tests since then have repeatedly confirmed this.

2. Treasure dowsing has woefully poor results. If you consider all the major recoveries of caches, hordes, wrecks, and so forth over the last 60 years, which of the following methods has the WORST record: metal detectors, magnetometers, side scan sonar, accidental trawler snags, tractor plowing, random digging, dowsing? If treasure dowsing worked, there would be some very wealthy dowsers.

3. My own personal experience in working with and testing quite a few dowsers (probably 15-20, lost count) is that they are very insistent that they can locate, say, gold with high reliability. And they can, as long as they already know where the gold is located. But when even the slightest rigors of testing are applied (blind target placement) their success falls to chance guessing. EVERY SINGLE TIME. And every single time, they are shocked by that outcome.

4. I design metal detectors & magnetometers for a living. Between the company I work for and all of our competitors, not a single one makes dowsing-based products. If dowsing had a snowball's chance I guarantee we would be in heated competition to understand and develop the method.

There are probably more reasons, but I'm tired.

 

[Carl-NC]

And usually our perception overwrites what we actually saw for most events.

Which is why eye-witnesses often make lousy eye-witnesses.

 

[Tom_in_CA]

... if no one can replicate results consistently....

You are not well-versed in all the reasons why. Each of which will have you playing wack-a-mole to try to un-ravel. Which, of course, will be impossible. But trust me : Any non-replicable test will have durned-good reasons why the test isn't/wasn't fair, was skewed, etc.....

..... why do you think dowsing cannot work? Simply stated....

Burden of proof shifted ?

 

[signal_line]

Carl makes some good points here. I know what he is saying about people who claim "100% accurate", etc. then can't prove it. It all goes back to the necessity of meditation to reach a Zen-like state, and real feedback on a daily basis. Even then there are no guarantees the person can find crap in a toilet bowl. Odds say not. Like I've said before much of what people refer to as dowsing is little more than reading the person who hid the test target. That's not dowsing. Maybe it can work but not many reports of finds.

Most all the books on dowsing are so watered down just total ignorance. I mean the people who wrote those books are ignorant. Yeah, it's human nature to be lazy, to take the path of least resistance. That's where dowsing is today. It's not the dowsing that's the issue here, it's the people who claim to be dowsers. LRL, too.

Authors I like:

Christopher Hills--Nobody compares to Hills. Absolute number one on the list.
Sam "Lobo" Wolfe
Bill Cox/Verne Cameron

Got others but this is a good start.

 

[signal_line]

I like Bill Cox books but it is blurred with the psychic. I know there was an era there late 60's (probably way back before this) where there was this blurring. Dell Winders has a sharp mind when he pointed out there is a huge difference between what he called mental vs physical dowsing. The proper terms are astral vs etherical (also called pre-physical). Of course the psychic stuff is so unreliable and inaccurate, but WTH, nobody says you can't take a stab in the dark, but the problem is many people portray this as the same thing as dowsing and try to claim it is accurate. Not anywhere near the same. I mean regular dowsing is so hit-and-miss. The psychic stuff is, well like the job reference a former boss gave for an ex-employee (with a double meaning), "You'll be lucky to get him to work for you." LOL And it won't happen without daily meditation and feedback.

 

[Tom_in_CA]

....'people who claim "100% accurate", .... ....

... no guarantees the person can find crap in a toilet bowl. ....

It's true that if you turn someone loose with a detector in a park, that ... he might find nothing of value.

But If you took 100 random people off the street. Who had utterly no experience with metal detectors. And if you propped up a detector on a table, and set it up with a threshold hum. Then you give those 100 random people a quarter, and tell them to wave it in front of the coil. What will happen ? The detector will beep for all 100 of them. No matter their experience. No matter their "zen-like concentration", etc....

 

[Dell Winders]

Drake, I respectfully disagree that your products meet the true definition of Dowsing.

In Dowsing, discrimination and movement of the Rod(s) or Pendulum, is considered a Metaphysics (mental) Ideomotor Response. Your products do not meet that criteria and work according to physics in that you are utilizing Frequency Discrimination, NOT Mental Discrimination to detect the fields of specific targets. Dell

 

[Darke]

Drake, I respectfully disagree that your products meet the true definition of Dowsing.

In Dowsing, discrimination and movement of the Rod(s) or Pendulum, is considered a Metaphysics (mental) Ideomotor Response. Your products do not meet that criteria and work according to physics in that you are utilizing Frequency Discrimination, NOT Mental Discrimination to detect the fields of specific targets. Dell

I don't include the enhancement boxes as parts of the rod. Those are add ons that can be utilized at the discretion of the user since it's up to them to build them or not. They can be added to any dowsing rod. Except for resellers it's up the buyer to decide what goes into the shell for a power load or in the case of the refillable rods the user can experiment with what works for them. That why the boxes are in the LRL forum and not here. Even though they are completely metaphysical in nature.

 

[aarthrj3811]

Thank you for telling us we are doing the right things

relating to ideas about life, existence, and other things that are not part of the physical world

metaphysical speculation about God

Synonyms and related words

Words used to describe thoughts, beliefs and ideas:deterministic, abstract,

 

[signal_line]

It's true that if you turn someone loose with a detector in a park, that ... he might find nothing of value.

But If you took 100 random people off the street. Who had utterly no experience with metal detectors. And if you propped up a detector on a table, and set it up with a threshold hum. Then you give those 100 random people a quarter, and tell them to wave it in front of the coil. What will happen ? The detector will beep for all 100 of them. No matter their experience. No matter their "zen-like concentration", etc....

So that proves a metal detector has a flatter learning curve. What about a pulse induction unit for finding gold in a city park? Anybody who has used one knows that answer. There's a learning curve.

I don't know what all your ranting is about. My guess is you got suckered by one of the money grubbers--believed their half-truths then got a rough let-down. Probably thought you were smarter than the average Joe, just like everybody else. Well, you probably are but you are on the wrong path. I don't recall the saying, but something like negative people do not reach their goals.

 

[aarthrj3811]

Which is why eye-witnesses often make lousy eye-witnesses.

With your way of thinking I guess we should let the thousands of prisoners out of jail who were convicted by eye-witnesses evidence...Art

 

[Darke]

With your way of thinking I guess we should let the thousands of prisoners out of jail who were convicted by eye-witnesses evidence...Art

That's not what he's saying. He's saying that people recall events in their favor, not as they actually happened most of the time. That's why there's always their side, your side and the truth. In court cases the testimony doesn't need to be perfectly accurate it just has to back up physical evidence.

 

[Carl-NC]

With your way of thinking I guess we should let the thousands of prisoners out of jail who were convicted by eye-witnesses evidence...Art

A case based on eye-witnesses alone, with corroborating physical evidence, is a weak case. A case based on a single eye-witness and nothing else, is an exceptionally weak case. And there have been quite a few innocent people sentenced to long prison terms based on eye-witness testimony, some of which were overturned when DNA analysis became prevalent. Here's a couple of good articles to read if you doubt what I say:

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/do-the-eyes-have-it/
https://www.psychologicalscience.org/uncategorized/myth-eyewitness-testimony-is-the-best-kind-of-evidence.html

Many tests have shown the general fallibility of memories and what people think they saw or experienced. It extends to selective memory where positive outcomes are more prominently remembered than negative ones which, of course, is applicable to the topic at hand. All of this has been known for quite some time.

 

[Tom_in_CA]

.... Many tests have shown the general fallibility of memories and what people think they saw or experienced....

I watched a TV documentary "Unsolved History" once, about UFO's/Roswell. To sort out the fabled stories of 1947 incident, that has now made Roswell the UFO capitol of the world . In that case, various eye-witness accounts started the entire thing.

And in this documentary, they recreated field test conditions of some supposed crash site. And led a group of volunteers through a supposed nature hike area . In which actors played the parts of a staged setup. And when done, asked each hiker, independently of each other, to report what they'd seen. And the reports came back all mixed up, and sometimes contradictory. Some people saw innocent explanations, or missed seeing certain things at all. Others had wild ideas of what certain mundane things could be.

I can't find a video link of this fascinating study on memories, interpretations, etc... But here's a link of persons talking about that episode/study :

https://www.reddit.com/r/tipofmyton..._video_demonstrating_a_psychology_experiment/

 

[seasiat7]

I watched a TV documentary "Unsolved History" once, about UFO's/Roswell. To sort out the fabled stories of 1947 incident, that has now made Roswell the UFO capitol of the world . In that case, various eye-witness accounts started the entire thing.

And in this documentary, they recreated field test conditions of some supposed crash site. And led a group of volunteers through a supposed nature hike area . In which actors played the parts of a staged setup. And when done, asked each hiker, independently of each other, to report what they'd seen. And the reports came back all mixed up, and sometimes contradictory. Some people saw innocent explanations, or missed seeing certain things at all. Others had wild ideas of what certain mundane things could be.

I can't find a video link of this fascinating study on memories, interpretations, etc... But here's a link of persons talking about that episode/study :

https://www.reddit.com/r/tipofmyton..._video_demonstrating_a_psychology_experiment/

Tom, educate yourself a little more about the Roswell incident. It was the Air Force who initially admitted to the nation that they had recovered a flying saucer and three alien bodies. You can find the old newspaper article online if you look. Afterwards, for whatever reason, they decided to fabricate a ridiculous story about it being a weather balloon. Several people directly involved with the incident came out and talked about what actually happened on their death beds. It was the real deal for sure.