Can lucky number "7" be used in dowsing and in metal detecting for better performanc?

[Tom_in_CA]

Sounds like the straight line you went in, was not much different than our straight line. But ... oh well.

... In my case the target I dug out of the ground was a spent .22 bullet casing that I did not know or even suspect was there.....

And you used a metal detector to pinpoint that .22 casing. Right ? Then a question for you: Is it possible that .... there .... likewise .... might have simply been random .22 shells (and/or other various metal) in this area, to begin with ? Eg.: If you'd walked an entirely different direction , for the same distance, and turned on the detector, might there have simply been metal of some sort, there too ?

Like to use our desert stage stop as an example: While there is a "ground zero" of human influence @ the spot where the actual stop had been , yet .... if we were to move out into the random desert, far from our stop, we do continue to hear random grunts of nails, random bullet shells, etc.... In other words: It's not unlikely to find a .22 shell, at random, at an entire host of country-side places.

So how do you know that your .22 shell wasn't just a random metal find, that someone would expect, by turning on a detector where past-human foot traffic has been ?

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

Agony and Death on a Gold Rush Steamer: The Disastrous Sinking of the Side-Wheeler Yankee Blade - Grab it through Amazon!

[Tpmetal]

This is the dowsing forum, no one has to prove anything to anyone and the constant badgering of members who do believe to prove it to skeptics is getting REAL OLD. I can personally douse power lines, telecom lines., water lines even conduit that has never had anything in them, done so for years and cant care less who believes or doesnt believe, dont need to know why it works either, just knowing it works is enough.

hopefully you didn't mean me? simply answering a question posed earlier in the thread.

 

[lesjcbs]

"...to hear random grunts of nails, random bullet shells, etc....... ?"

GRUNTS?

Tom.

Oh man, I think you need a very long and peaceful rest and psychiatric help before you continue in this discussion.

"GRUNTS"?

WOW.

I will not be interacting with you anymore for a very long time. Bye.

 

[Tom_in_CA]

... GRUNTS?...

Correct. Not sure about your particular brands/models of detectors, but the ones I've used for a few decades now, allow the user to elect for the iron (nails, etc...) to be certain tones, and foil is another tone, and mid tones and high tones and so forth. And the "iron" tones is .... for purposes of the Minelab Explorer II, , and other machines, is often described as "grunts".

Ok, now can we resume the discussion ? Now can you address my question as to whether it's possible (just maybe) that .22 shells could have been present in random landscapes ? No matter which direction a person walks and turns on a detector ? And can you answer the question as to whether you'd turned on a detector to "pinpoint" ?

 

[lesjcbs]

REAL T.

Over on page #97 of the "Digital camera can see gold" thread in post #1447, you seem to claim to be the only person in the world who knows anything about dowsing. Why that attitude?

Along with that, I am surprised the skeptics have not questioned you on your claim you make about having Indians hiding your knife and you then find it while dowsing. Again, I wonder why no challenges coming your way?

 

[aarthrj3811]

Point being : Even though the actual ground zero was out-of-line of site from where we started our hike: The mere fact of research to put us close, and then "hunches" as to where someone might have chosen to put the stop (eg.: close to water, on high ground, etc....) allowed us to practically walk right to the site.

So too could the same phenomenon be occurring with you. You study to where a likely spot is to find goodies. And then you hike around, and visually hone in on "most likely spots". EVEN if the eventual spot you come to was not in the line-of-site of where you started.

The question is . Can you do that more than one time?

 

[lesjcbs]

Here is my dowsing find from two days ago. It is a piece of bent wire.

Notice I have a new Lucky 7 Charm card I keep in my wallet and is with me all the time.

Many more and I mean many more pictures of dowsing finds coming soon.

Stay tuned.

Enjoy.

 

[Tom_in_CA]

...I am surprised the skeptics have not questioned you on your claim you make about having Indians hiding your knife and you then find it while dowsing. Again, I wonder why no challenges coming your way?

I presumed he was reading the dialogue. And could/would attribute or deny this skeptic's explanations to his "knife" story. Also, just as with you and other dowsers: I do not deny the anecdotal "finds" claims anyhow. Yes, the finds-claims and stories abound. But am just sad that it can never be tested.

..... It is a piece of bent wire....

Ok. And still waiting for the answer as to whether you use a detector to "pinpoint" these objects (wire pieces, .22 shells, etc...) And whether or not it's possible that things like pieces of wire, or .22 shells , could simply possibly be, at random, no matter which direction you hiked ?

 

[lesjcbs]

Several years ago when I first joined this dowsing forum, skeptics were challenging dowsers to show their finds as up to that time, none had. So, I started posting pictures of mine. In response, what was clearly a sudden and full blown burst of panic, they accused me of lying, of dreaming, of hallucinating, and recently waiting for a craft store to open. See post # 1 - #6 in the thread called: "Talk, talk, enough talk already". You fill in the blanks.

Now they say prove it by doing a DBT, the results of which is already known that dowsing would not pass the test. For dowsers, it would be like trying to reinvent the wheel and volumes of mocking and ridiculing statements by skeptics would follow. In short, these skeptics would argue with Jesus if he healed them.

The neatest thing about dowsing in the field is by standing still and scanning from side to side, you can first know which direction to go in to find a target before you move one inch. That eliminates going in ever widening circles to eventually hit on something. Sure, one can do that, but who wants to spend hours upon hours in a day searching when dowsing will take you straight to a target in just a very short time, especially when the search area is very large?

So what if pictures of things found in the field outside a DBT are anecdotal evidence? Finding things while dowsing is far better than owning a metal detector that sits in the closet, starring into a computer screen all day, and posting the types of questions like these skeptics do, Such does not a treasure hunter make. BTW all of their questions I answered long ago so I am not going to answer them again now.

But, the most pathetic thing of all is these skeptics who infest these threads, fancy themselves as members of this exciting, attractive, and romantic fraternity that most people only dream of doing called: Treasure Hunting.

Enjoy this picture. More on the way soon.

 

[Tom_in_CA]

.... to show their finds ....

Yes. Finds abound. The million-dollar-question though is: To what do we attribute those finds ? The dowser would say "the rod found it". The skeptic would say that you simply turn on a detector to pinpoint, and .... odds are .... you'll find things, even if you hadn't wave the rod around first. Ie.: metal tends to exist at any place humans existed/lived. Hence it's not surprising to get beeps when you turn on a detector in spots already likely to have targets.

And no, you don't have to "prove" anything, as TH'r said. Actually, you've already said it yourself: That it would not pass a test.

 

[Tiredman]

I have come across articles about treasure hunters and this method over 100 years before detectors were available.

 

[Tom_in_CA]

I have come across articles about treasure hunters and this method over 100 years before detectors were available.

ok. Does the age/time/years of "methods" add more credibility to validity of abilty? Ie.: The longer a method has been practiced/believed in, is the more reputable it is. Right ? Just want to make sure I understand you correctly .

 

[lesjcbs]

I have come across articles about treasure hunters and this method over 100 years before detectors were available.

Tiredman.

I need to clarify that I speak for myself only, and no one else.

As you can tell, the skeptics are still in the panic mode.

 

[Tiredman]

Tiredman.

I need to clarify that I speak for myself only, and no one else.

As you can tell, the skeptics are still in the panic mode.

In the old days treasure hunters were called pot hunters and they tended to just dig holes in likely spots where treasure was rumored to be. Searching evolved with science once willow sticks that worked for water wells were added and eventually other methods such as wire coat hangers or similar devices were employed. Some used fortune tellers and sooth Sayers, reading tea leaves and other methods. But finds were made, look at the holy lands and the crusades, treasures were searched for there and taken back to there home lands. Anytime a empire was conquered its hidden treasure, once found was taken. Searching for treasure has taken place ever since there was treasure. Simple history should settle any questions.

 

[Tom_in_CA]

..... Some used fortune tellers and sooth Sayers, reading tea leaves and other methods. ...

Very interesting post. I wonder if those methods were also "un-discovered" science too ?

 

[lesjcbs]

My reply to post #1480 in the camera thread.

We cannot include random chance anymore because we eliminated that idea a week ago or so.

Each person who dowses has their own opinion as to how it works. It's just like the different model Metal Detectors. Some discriminate, some pin point, some can use different size coils, some use 9 volt batteries, some are VLF, some are PI detectors, some are automatic, some are strictly manual, some are black, some are yellow, some are twin box detectors, some are waterproof, some are multi frequency capable, and the list goes on. Take your pick.

It's the very same with dowsing. Some use L rods, some use pendulums, some use different kinds of body dowsing, some say sunspots, some do long range dowsing, some do short range dowsing, some use rods with a witness chamber, some use metal rods without a witness chamber, some use wooden sticks, some use only one rod, some use short rods, some use long rods, some say their rods move by themselves, and some like me say I move the rods subconsciously from having sensed energy from a target out there.

Far be it from me to criticize other dowsers or to say they are wrong.

So, take your pick.

 

[Tom_in_CA]

.... So, take your pick.

I feel this will be a "moving the goal posts" trick. If I/we pick one method (in the list that you give), then the dowser will simply shuffle off to type # 2. Then type # 3. Then type # 4, etc... And so forth. That is the purpose of a DBT, where the dowser sits down and spells out his ability. Ie.: what he is capable of doing, with whatever-type-instrument he has. And with whatever powers he attributes it to. And then it's simply a matter of testing that person's claimed abilities under DBT. It won't matter what type rod he has. Where he attributes the powers to, etc... He spells out what he has, and under what conditions it works (moon phases, type soils, etc....). Everything is agreed to ahead of time, so that it's going by the dowser's own stated abilities.

So too does the testing side put forth it's suggested protocols/rules, to remove any possbilities of subtle terrain clues, cheating, etc... And the dowser can agree or disagree as to whether or not those are fair safeguards, blah blah. Once both sides agree to the test protocols, they test it.

And no, I don't see the attempt at an analogy to the different types of detectors, to be analogous to this discussion. Because every single one of those detectors can be propped up on a table, and when you wave a soda can in front of all of them, they beep. No matter who waves the soda can. No matter how much experience they have. No matter what type detector it is. No matter if they have belief or bias. The detectors can be shown to work 100% of the time. So I do not follow your attempted analogy here.

 

[Tom_in_CA]

And to put this in context with the other post lesjcbs is referring to:

I had 'dissed his "spanish used dowsing" signature, by pointing out that just because people in the past practiced and believed something, does not, in and of itself, prove the merits of the belief and practice. And to do this, I used "virgins in volcanoes to control weather", as a proof that people, back then, had all kinds of goofy beliefs and practices. That we know today have utterly no merit.

But lesjcbs correctly pointed out a flaw in my reasoning : That no one today practices throwing virgins into volcanoes. But we DO still have people today who practice and believe in dowsing.

Therefore the "virgins" example didn't hold merit.

And I have to admit, you're right ! The example has flaws. Hence all we can do is study claimed results today. And the only way to do that, is DBT. But you're already on record as saying it won't pass DBT.

 

[lesjcbs]

"....Hence all we can do is study claimed results today......"?

Don't forget 8000 years of dowsing history that shows it works. If it did not, regardless of HOW, civilizations in the past would have abandoned it ages ago. But because it works very well in the field, they wisely passed it down from generation to generation to us today.

A new picture of today's find and a fantastic surprise coming tomorrow.

Watch out Tom, as you said I am "tricky."

Stay tuned.

 

[lesjcbs]

As I promised, here is a picture of my dowsing find from yesterday afternoons dowsing session. It is a dime. It was actually the fourth target I hit on. Two others were in a park with a manicured lawn where I don't like to dig and one was quite deep and I did not want to spend the time digging it up.

I wanted to find some wire to show Hunster54 that one can find even junk while dowsing too. Maybe next time.

Notice my new Lucky 7 Charm card. Notice the 7 stars around it. The first one I showed was a card out of a deck but I wanted to get it back into the deck so I got this one to replace it. It is now in my wallet and with me all the time and it works.

Here comes the surprise. I know the skeptics are going to have a fit over this and will panic again to the max. I did not use my rods when I dowsed this dime and the other targets. I used a body dowsing technique instead. Ever hear of it? It is considered the purest form of dowsing.

With body dowsing, you do not use a dowsing instrument. It is also called "deviceles dowsing." You just use your body. With body dowsing, it's just you and the target; no middle component such as rods or pendulums to deal with or depend on to get you near the target. As in times past, I used my MD to pin point. Just like with "L" rods, I was right at about 18" from the dime. One of the targets I was standing on it.

I know you skeptics will have questions but I can tell you right now, I have already answered many of them in the past. So all I will say is I answered that question already. Want to know the answer? You look it up in my past posts.

Here is something for you skeptics to think about and sleep on. Just like many of you, I have owned several detectors over the years. The operating instructions in every one of them says to put the detector on a table and wave several kinds of metallic objects in front of the coil to get to know what they sound like; A nail, a quarter, a pull tab etc. It beeps every time. Then, farther down in the instructions, it says, after you have done that, to get the best performance out of your detector, go into the field and practice, practice, and practice more with it, as your success with it depends on your familiarity with your detector.

Now that is interesting as some around here say that metal detectors, by design, are not dependent on the operator factor. But it is clear, the companies who make metal detectors disagree with such thinking.

With his new detector fired up, my cousin went into the field and did not find a thing, nothing. IN FACT, over time he became so frustrated with it, he sold it to me. This is about the third time I have told this story. I'll bet you know some people just like my cousin.

Here is the bottom line.
1. Detectors work well on a table, but not in the field as hoped. This happens to lots of detector owners.
2. On the other hand, we have dowsing that does not work in a DBT but works very well in the field. This happens to lots of dowsers.

So even though these two are exactly opposite, the common factor in them is practice, practice, and more practice. Yet despite the call to practice, both have their limits and strengths in their own time and place, and to disregard those limits and strengths brings on a conclusion that is wrong. That is what happens to those who naively observe, think, and believe that a failed dowsing DBT has the final say. That is why we say the DBT, by design, is rigged and people like the great magician and self-admitted liar James Randi knows this, and solicits the ignorant to help make a name for himself.

So, enjoy the picture. Many more coming soon.