Sensitivity while dowsing

[JBlack]

The forces of evil lurking in the very depths of the black regions of the occult are constantly teaming up with the perpetrators of pseudoscientific beliefs in order to make my job as difficult as possible. But, alas... Super Joe Black, armed only with his L-shaped piece of coat hanger AND the truth about dowsing, stands tall, defiant and always on the defense of those who might stumble into the clutches of the Evil Wallet Miners, or the Terminally Techno-Challenged.

Thanks for telling us how you feel.....I submit this post with some of? my occult names....shill,? gullible, technically-challenged, pseudoscientists, blithering idiot, jacka$$, sicko, dirty, low life, sneaky, lying, despicable, vindictive,? crooked,? mentally challenged, demented, etc.

Just curious.... were you looking in a mirror when you concocted your list of names, or does that list pretty much sum up the extent of your entire vocabulary?

​

I swear... it's a real toss-up to determine which of you guys is funnier.​

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

Diving for Pleasure and Treasure - Grab it through Amazon!

[Real de Tayopa Tropical Tramp]

.? But until you unearth what you claimed to have found ---in the presence of credible witnesses...

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Q) ?Morning my friend Black. ?When my wife hides my wedding ring 10 times and I find it ?9 times. but, ?since only she and I were present, does that nullify the results since neither of us possibly could be called unbiased or creditable witness under your criteria?

The failure was curious. ?She was baking pies, and I asked had her to hide the ring for practice, as mentioned. ?I found it 9 times but blew it on one. ?I never could get a bearing, it ran all over the place. ?When I finally admitted that I could not lock on and asked her where the ring, was, she looked startled then said "oops, I was so ?busy that I forgot to hide it, here it is in my pocket ?Sheehs.

I admit that was not a "qualifying " test, but we both are confident and comfortable with the results, regardless if it flies in the face of ?brilliant men. and their ?proofs that it can not possibly work.

I have had other run ins with the Establishment, Herpetologists for example. While exploring the upper barrancas of the Fuerte river, I ran across an aquatic serpent that was approx. 80 ft long` greeenish ?- ?long interesting story here - I duly reported it. ?While they didn't laugh me, they did ignore me and my pictures. I apparently was chewing Peyote according to them.

The same thing happened when I sent photos of evidence of past giants here. They were approx 10 ft tall, with reddish hair. The burial caves are still uninvestigated by the establishment??


No, I do not use them to look for treasures, as mentioned, I have a built in Pavlovian reflex due to the establishment telling me that this cannot possibly exist or it would have been found years ago. ?My college learning has conditioned me to accept the establishment as being seated on the the right hand of GOD, even when I have proved them wrong many times.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Have you ever noticed that the most valuable treasures, containing the biggest quantity of gold and silver, lie just inside of a 30 foot chain link fence belonging to the US Government?? ?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

A) I agree, but it happens sometimes. ? The Seri Indians told me of a large treasure that they had recovered from a ship that had run aground on their Island. ?After Smorgasborging the surviving crew, they buried the treasure. ?Since I had their confidence, they told me about it and where it was. But--The entire Island is now controlled by the Military and no-one is allowed to land on it. ?The Seris were transported to the ?mainland where it was forbidden to have any more smorgasborgs. ?Soo I know precisely where a large one is but cannot touch it since it is inside of a military zone. ?sigh.


Jose de La Mancha ?( I tilt windmills ) ? ?- actually it is fun Black, heheh

 

[JBlack]

.? But until you unearth what you claimed to have found ---in the presence of credible witnesses...

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Q) ?Morning my friend Black. ?When my wife hides my wedding ring 10 times and I find it ?9 times. but, ?since only she and I were present, does that nullify the results....

A) Yes.

You have two things to learn. First, please familiarize youself with what constitutes acceptable test protocol(*). Second, (and AFTER YOU HAVE MODIFIED YOUR TEST PROCEDURE TO ELIMINATE ALL INFORMATION LEAKS) then analyze the statistical probability of what you are doing and compare your "consistent" results to that which could be obtained through Chance Guessing. When your results end up "consistently" being 100 or more times better than pure guessing, ---then you might be onto something. (BTW, I just pulled 100 times better out of the air, the actual level required for "significance" could vary with each set of parameters.)

Hint: At this particular point in time, early evening, September 20, 2005, No dowser, when properly tested has ever demonstrated results "significantly" better than Chance Guessing would have produced.

(*) Example of Double Blind Test Protocol - http://www.thunting.com/cgi-bin/geotech/pages/common/index.pl?page=lrl&file=/info/dbtesting.dat

Have a nice day............

 

[Real de Tayopa Tropical Tramp]

Q) ?Morning my friend Black. ?When my wife hides my wedding ring 10 times and I find it ?9 times. but, ?since only she and I were present, does that nullify the results....[/quote]

A) Yes.

? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Q)? Why ?There was no collusion since I was attempting to "learn" if there was any basis in dowsing.? I am satisfied that there is, since the results could not have happened by normal chance, especially the? lost one.? That coming in the sequence? that it did, was far beyond chance.? Unless you admit to the possibility of telepathy, which you also call a pseudo science and deny. Do you call? yourself a? more qualified person?? Why??

? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?

? When your results end up "consistently" being 100 or more times better than pure guessing,

? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

A)? WOW!? 100 times better?? why not just a? 10%?

Sheers.? I have had 3 major aircraft accidents, - non my fault you understand, despite the boards findings? sigh - statistically I should not be here because of the circumstances and results, but here I am bugging you, my esteemed friend.? However I am not about to repeat them to see if the statistics are correct, I am content with the results, even if I have a slight limp.

As I mentioned once, while my Wife under light hypnosis (hyper suggestability) I shuffled a Deck of cards, laid them face down.? ?I would then slightly turn one over so that only I could see the? color,? concentrate on it, then had my wife try to call if they were? red or black. .? Twice she called them all correct, then next all wrong.? When I pointed? out that? the statistics were the same for calling them all right as all wrong, she admitted that when she had an impression of red she would call black on purpose? etc..? ?Further questioning showed that she was simply scared of the results because of her religion and proceeded to deny it.? She would never do try it again sniff. My mistake was in telling her that she had called them correctly.

? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~


Incidentally statistics should allow you to make a killing? at Las Vegas if they are infallable, no?

? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~


aarthr, as They say, the proof is in the pudding. Youhave" your gold no matter what statistics may say, so go happily? on your "ignorant" way getting Gold,? hehehe? congratulations.? Go get more despite statistics!


Jose de La Mancha ( I tilt windmills )

hey Black, it really is fun tilting them, especially if the windmills appear to be biased or a form of belief as hardnosed as a religion or established science. heheh

 

[gldhntr]

blacks posts on these threads is just like a neighbors dog...always yapping, saying nothing, yet you can't shut him up........glad i live in the woods,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,black , if you want to see the real truth simply look at several of the factual posts here...otherwise you will always be decieved by your pre-programed analysis...please do not tout your truth info, SHOW IT TO US !.......let us see all this magnificent information you are hoarding and let us decide for ourselves how you have come to your conclusions......i think your idea of double blind means you shut both your eyes while researching.........gldhntr........

 

[ZumbroKid]

It appears that MR. JBLACK is willing to help anyone with questions or clarifications, even misconceptions. All one has to do is ask, he is that kind of fellow. It is good to have him on aboard.

 

[JBlack]

First, please familiarize youself with what constitutes acceptable test protocol

You seem to be having a little problem with your English again. An acceptable test protocol is an agreement of the two parties. It is not some kind of super duber rules that are set in stone. It could be as simple as I will do the test tomorrow at 8 PM and I won't cheat if you don't. As to information leaks I know that I can't read minds I don't worry about that.

analyze the statistical probability of what you are doing and compare your "consistent" results to that which could be obtained through Chance Guessing. When your results end up "consistently" being 100 or more times better than pure guessing, ---then you might be onto something. (BTW, I just pulled 100 times better out of the air, the actual level required for "significance" could vary with each set of parameters.)

Since I don't use Ideomoter response ( chance guessing ) I don't see any reason why I would need to have someone tell me how I did compared to chance guessing. When my rods close the object is there. Please keep putting your fancy words in print as I am learning to us a Dictionary ...Art

Art, the post above tells me so much about your problems, and why you think the way you do... I hardly know where to begin (so I won't... there is too much material for me to work with). Besides... it's really difficult to debate OR argue with a fool.

Your total lack of understanding, when it comes to evaluating your own dowsing, is exceeded only by your minuscule overall intelligence quotient.

I can certainly understand why you harbor the ideas you do, and your particular "belief system".

As long as you've located your dictionary... here are a couple of words to look up: cat, dog

(Hint: Cat is under the section marked "C", not under "K")

 

[JBlack]

It appears that MR. JBLACK is willing to help anyone with questions or clarifications, even misconceptions. All one has to do is ask, he is that kind of fellow. It is good to have him on aboard.

Good observation.... I try to tailor my answers to match the manner and intent of the questions that were asked, with only a very few exceptions.​

 

[ZumbroKid]

The last reply post is a good example of the kindness of MR. JBLACK. Amazinging I somehow know I'd get a kind reply. Random Chance? Or common sense.

 

[ZumbroKid]

In answer to Dell, no he has been very helpful (JBlack). I have posted in this manner to hopefully set an example of how one or several others could get more help from him. He after all appears to have much info and material items in his truth about drowing collection. Instead of posting at him in the manner that has been going on for sometime. Try saying you regret being so thin skined. He might have a change of heart towards you and the rest of the drowers. Would it help it they said they were sorry Mr. JBlack? We need you on our team!

 

[ZumbroKid]

This is great progress! It takes a real man to post that. My hat is off to you. ?I hope this is the start of a healthy working relationship.

 

[jeff of pa]

 

[JBlack]

Hey ZumbroKid ....I am sorry if I offended you. When a newbie try's dowsing and reports what he found out it is not right to tell him he is wrong. If we were on a metal detector forum and? I told anyone he was a shill, gullible, technically-challenged, pseudoscientists, blithering idiot, jacka$$, sicko, dirty, low life, sneaky, lying, despicable I think I would be booted.
I have stopped posting on this forum many times but will not leave this time. THE TRUTH ABOUT DOWSING is so easy to prove. Just try it using the simple instructions on this forum. If the rods cross for you thats a good thing. If they don't cross then it doesn't work. That's a good starting point. I don't claim to be an expert but I know what I can do. The only thing that is important is YOU. ...Art?

Does this retort surprise anyone? Certainly didn't surprise me. Mr. Flowers (Art) wants everyone to know how stubborn he is, and that he fits the mold perfectly... of the gullible and technically-challenged. Thank you for bringing it to our attention and solidifying our suspicions.

 

[aarthrj3811]

Hey Black......Right on...I am stubborn when I'm right. Unlike you I except the facts when I am wrong . I don't hide who I am or call people names. I have told everyone here what my background is. So some day if you should chose to give us some dowsing facts so we can discuss them in a resonable matter I would like that. If you chose not to act in a suitable matter so be it....Art

 

[ZumbroKid]

I did not feel anyone was not nice to me at all. I must of missed something, but maybe the point is I was not looking for anything aimed at me.

 

[gldhntr]

if the skeptic would get on here in an unbiased manner, ask reasonable questions, give reasonable answers,actually look at the scientific facts, and quit acting as if all dowsers here are complete idiots and theifs, i would not mind him posting here myself...carl is a skeptic also but he has always treated me and several others here with decency and mutual respect....until this happens i will continue to treat as treated, with the exception being that i can back up my posts......gldhntr..........................p.s. - has free been resurected ?..............

 

[JBlack]

if the skeptic would get on here in an unbiased manner, ask reasonable questions, give reasonable answers,actually look at the scientific facts, and quit acting as if all dowsers here are complete idiots and theifs, i would not mind him posting here myself.........gldhntr..........................p.s. - has free been resurected ?..............

That's been tried.... loooooooooooooooong before you (or your alias) entered the scene. It didn't work!

That approach sounds good in theory, but in practice it doesn't fly ---trust me, been there, done that.

Fool me once, shame on me, fool me twice, shame on you.

 

[gldhntr]

couldn't hurt to try.......................gldhntr