Real de Tayopa Tropical Tramp
Gold Member
Speak up gentlemen: But go easy on the theories since there appears to be no limit, each person has a dfferent idea., so just how to do it.
Tropical Tramp
Tropical Tramp
xupz said:STEPS TO SUCCESSFULLY DOWSING:
Begin by training your ideomotor response so your widgets react to a known object. After that, convince yourself that hakim's razor couldn't possibly apply and you are in fact special enough to have figured out some kind of magical unkown harry potter like ability that only works in non-test situations.
Apply the following conditional replies to skeptics:
1) If you take a test and fail to perform at claimed ability, Then state the test was flawed. If the test wasn't flawed, continue to come up with excuses as to what may have interfered with your performance. Example: A smurf was near the testing site throwing off my signal lines. Flawless.
2) Should a skeptic persist to ask you to show you can actually perform better than random, avoid the issue by stating you don't need to prove anything to anyone because you know for a fact it works, and of course, you do. The joke is on the skeptic for not believing you, so enjoy a nice laugh at the skeptics expense.
3) If the skeptic should attack with undeniable mathematics, simply ignore them or state they don't apply. There is no need to back your position up with anything, just say they don't apply.
4) If 1,2, or 3 don't apply, try to avoid or tangent the argument to some other meaningless broad topic such as psychology or philosophy of having an open mind. Make sure the skeptic is left not having a clue what you're talking about, afterall you shouldn't either, and move along.
Oroblanco said:Gee I don't see why the skeptic has any thing to be bothered with - dowsing seems to me a pretty harmless activity/pursuit/hobby. If it works, then the dowser is finding what he/she is looking for, if it doesn't work they are having fun wasting time. When someone makes an outrageous sounding claim for dowsing, that person is surely going to attract the ire and attention of the skeptic.
Oroblanco
Oroblanco said:Greetings,
Jean310 wrote:consider that a few clever entrepreneurs have skillfully mixed it with a well thought-out marketing scheme,
Well con-artists are no doubt at work in this area too - I would hope that any treasure hunter would think twice before putting up money for such types. For that type of 'dowser' - the type out to rip people off and who make all kinds of wild claims, I hope the skeptics will continue to expose for what they are.
Oroblanco
JudyH said:Hey Oro....I agree....
But you have to consider that a few clever Skeptics have skillfully mixed it with a well thought-out marketing scheme, where real scientific terminology is mixed with all kinds of pseudo-scientific baloney, in an effort to fool the unsuspecting dowser into believing they are authorities on the testing of dowsing ability....
Judy
JudyH said:I just LOVE it when a skeptic proves my point....
Judy
xupz said:STEPS TO SUCCESSFULLY DOWSING:
Begin by training your ideomotor response so your widgets react to a known object. After that, convince yourself that hakim's razor couldn't possibly apply and you are in fact special enough to have figured out some kind of magical unkown harry potter like ability that only works in non-test situations.
Apply the following conditional replies to skeptics:
1) If you take a test and fail to perform at claimed ability, Then state the test was flawed. If the test wasn't flawed, continue to come up with excuses as to what may have interfered with your performance. Example: A smurf was near the testing site throwing off my signal lines. Flawless.
2) Should a skeptic persist to ask you to show you can actually perform better than random, avoid the issue by stating you don't need to prove anything to anyone because you know for a fact it works, and of course, you do. The joke is on the skeptic for not believing you, so enjoy a nice laugh at the skeptics expense.
3) If the skeptic should attack with undeniable mathematics, simply ignore them or state they don't apply. There is no need to back your position up with anything, just say they don't apply.
4) If 1,2, or 3 don't apply, try to avoid or tangent the argument to some other meaningless broad topic such as psychology or philosophy of having an open mind. Make sure the skeptic is left not having a clue what you're talking about, afterall you shouldn't either, and move along.
************
An excellent of your flawed logic, ridicule what you don't understand sigh
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Operational definitions are inherently difficult — arguably, even impossible — to apply to mental entities, because these latter are generally understood to be accessible only to the individual who experiences them and are therefore not independently verifiable."
=================
Of course I can dowse! It's quite easy, just not very useful. - Carl
\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\
Tropical Tramp