There are some real peop[le here.

[ClonedSIM]

I use a needle & Thread for Dowsing. My muscles force it to move. Dell

Fair enough. So what tells your muscles and mind (I'm assuming eye-hand coordination here) to make the needle point to a certain location?

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

Diving for Pleasure and Treasure - Grab it through Amazon!

[ClonedSIM]

Fair enough. So what tells your muscles and mind (I'm assuming eye-hand coordination here) to make the needle point to a certain location?

I don't know! A GUESS might be that Dowsing, is the learned ability of the conscious mind to communicate and obtain searched or stored information inthe subconscious mind thru a trained ideomotor response.
Dell

Now I really like this response! Right to the point, thanks Dell. So it's the subconscious mind causing the ideomotor, but what is the conscious mind seeing as you look at the map? Do you find yourself searching for certain landmarks or structural oddities that may cause an ideomotor movement? Do you get any certain feeling when your hand is over a part of the map that seems odd that might cause the ideomotor?

 

[COUNTRY GIRL]

Well, af1733 all I got was a lot of hot air. It's already warm enough down here, but thanks anyway. I still have my $100.00 bucks. Next?

Hey, there's another dowser in the forum, ignoring posts they don't like and just asking more questions.....

Af, I really believe that deep down inside somewhere you are not a bad guy at all. But.........You just might be the reason some of us REAL people don't post and just watch and learn. I have been reading, taking notes, I have tried what SWR thought I should, but until the weather breaks and I can get more that 3 tries in I'll wait on the results. To post and get beat up or watch and learn? Hmmmmmm.

 

[lucky1777]

Fair enough. So what tells your muscles and mind (I'm assuming eye-hand coordination here) to make the needle point to a certain location?

I don't know! A GUESS might be that Dowsing, is the learned ability of the conscious mind to communicate and obtain searched or stored information in the subconscious mind thru a trained ideomotor response.

Hypnosis, is one method that has been used to communicate with the sub-conscious, although that is not the method I use in Dowsing.

I use a needle suspended on a thread to consciously meter and interpret the ideomotor the trained response. Dell

I don't say much, but this has me confused. How can someone who makes or made dowsing items that are sold to the general public, not know how dowsing works. That would be like Ford telling all its customers, we make the cars and they drive, but we just don't know how they do it. So with that said, I am assuming you know the answer and just don't want to reveal this information to your competition.

 

[ClonedSIM]

Well, af1733 all I got was a lot of hot air. It's already warm enough down here, but thanks anyway. I still have my $100.00 bucks. Next?

Hey, there's another dowser in the forum, ignoring posts they don't like and just asking more questions.....

Af, I really believe that deep down inside somewhere you are not a bad guy at all. But.........You just might be the reason some of us REAL people don't post and just watch and learn. I have been reading, taking notes, I have tried what SWR thought I should, but until the weather breaks and I can get more that 3 tries in I'll wait on the results. To post and get beat up or watch and learn? Hmmmmmm.

You have to understand how frustrating it is when I've spent a lot of my life learning how things work, to hear dowsers report that, through a process that few of them are able to explain, they can find gold and silver and what-have-you. I'm all for people trying new things, but all things have causes and explanations. Those that don't are, for the most part, not widely accepted or practiced.

When something has a cause, you can work with that and create new and even better ways to make it work. But for dowsing to have been around as long as has been reported, if it were a truly viable skill, it would have been figured out by now. There have been more than enough advances is science and technology to find a reason why dowsing should work. But all the accepted avenues have looked at and dismissed dowsing since it doesn't produce repeatable and predictable results. These are the same testing procedures that gave us most things we use on a daily basis, so why should dowsing be held to a different standard?

 

[Carl-NC]

Hi Carl. Show the scientific studies or the links to them, that prove dowsing does not exist. I want to see 3rd party proof that is non biased in nature. Tests that have been conducted by professionals with the proper University credentials in controlled conditions. Not something off some website, big money pressure, or a treasure hunting forum. If you can do that, and the members here accept these studies as proof positive, then I will stand corrected.

An interesting challenge... I will win $100 if "the members here accept these studies as proof positive."

Let's s'poze I post scientific studies in which so-called experienced dowsers completely failed in randomized blind testing, conducted by a university professor. Dr. Hans-Dieter Betz's test of over 500 dowsers comes to mind, where the dowsers performed the same as guessing. Now, despite the fact that this test meets ALL the criteria set forth by you, all you have to do is reject this evidence as being insufficient.

So, what do I think will happen with your challenge? Will any amount of evidence ever be sufficient to replace self-delusional beliefs with reality? I doubt it.

Instead, I'll make a counter-offer. I'll let you prove to the forum that you don't believe you can dowse. Would you like to deny this?

- Carl

 

[aarthrj3811]

Hey Point Hunter....I think that Carl is talking about the Munich Experiments or the Barn Test as it is refered to...Most of the positive Dowsing Studies are at http://forum.treasurenet.com/index.php/topic,19834.0.html

You have to careful and read who is reporting the story....Art

 

[Oroblanco]

SWR wrote

the Pro-Dowsing section is not really taken advantage of. Odd how that works, eh?

A large part of the problem is in the TITLE of that pro-dowsing section, which says "WHY I THINK DOWSING WORKS:
If you think dowsing works, this is the forum to explain why. Skeptics are kindly asked to refrain from posting here."

That pretty well limits what SUBJECTS can be posted in that sub-forum to "why I think Dowsing works" and NOT for open discussions of other content. I think a separate section for dowsers, without such a limit as "WHY IT WORKS" in the header, would achieve much.

Then again, the amount of use is enlightening even though limited to "why it works" - compare it to the "skeptics only" section:

Why it works (pro-dowsing) 56 topics, 325 posts
Why it doesn't work (anti-dowsing) 10 topics, 47 posts.

See a pattern there? The skeptics seem to want to argue with dowsers, post tests, questions that NO ONE has the answers to, and often enough the "debate" sinks into flame wars. Why are there SO FEW posts and topics in the anti-dowsing forum? Do the skeptics NEED dowsers to argue with and attack?

I suggest that a separate sub-forum be set up for the pro-dowsing enthusiasts to post, without limiting the subject matter to WHY I THINK IT WORKS.

Oroblanco

 

[aarthrj3811]

See a pattern there? The skeptics seem to want to argue with dowsers, post tests, questions that NO ONE has the answers to, and often enough the "debate" sinks into flame wars. Why are there SO FEW posts and topics in the anti-dowsing forum? Do the skeptics NEED dowsers to argue with and attack?

Your right Oroblanco...I don't have any answers for most of the questions. All we can do is give our opinions. ...Art

 

[aarthrj3811]

So, what do I think will happen with your challenge? Will any amount of evidence ever be sufficient to replace self-delusional beliefs with reality? I doubt it.

Testing Dowsing
The Failure of the Munich Experiments
German physicists concluded from their massive experimental study that water dowsers unquestionably have a remarkable, mysterious skill. Those results, however, provide the most convincing disproof imaginable that dowsers can do what they claim.
J. T. Enright
Results and Interpretation by the Experimenters
In the final report on their dowsing experiments, submitted to the granting agency (Wagner, Betz, and König 1990), the researchers concluded that most dowsers did not do particularly well in the experiments. That report, however, still painted a very positive picture of the overall outcome. The following quotation is a translation of the German text:
Some few dowsers, in particular tasks, showed an extraordinarily high rate of success, which can scarcely if at all be explained as due to chance ... a real core of dowser-phenomena can be regarded as empirically proven ... (5)
About the Author
J.T. (Jim) Enright is a professor of behavioral physiology, Scripps Institution of Oceanography, University of California at San Diego, La Jolla, CA 92093, where he emphasizes data analysis in teaching critical evaluation of scientific literature. He has conducted research on "biological clocks" and sensory physiology of both crustaceans and humans and has spent several years at research labs in Germany and Austria.
Related Information
Dowsing - looking at scientific evidence
http://www.phact.org/e/dowsing.htm

 

[point hunter]

Hi Carl. I read the Scheuen study conducted by HD Betz and HL Konig. Here is a quick summary of that report:

The final report on the tests concluded:

"The success rate of average dowsers in the tests conducted was poor and in most cases indistinguishable (or nearly so) from chance.
Some few dowsers, in particular tests, showed an extraordinarily high rate of success, which can scarcely, if at all, be explained as due to chance."
(Konig, HL, Betz, HD. "Der Wunschelruten-Report". Quoted in Enright, 1996.)

Sorry, but that study does not meet the criteria set for the $100.00 dollar challenge.

Instead, I'll make a counteroffer. I'll let you prove to the forum that you don't believe you can dowse. Would you like to deny this?

I don't understand your "counteroffer." I stated in my first post I had dowsing experience. How can I prove/deny to the forum members that I can't dowse. Anyway, nice try. Next?

 

[Carl-NC]

How can I prove/deny to the forum members that I can't dowse.

Randi offers a million bucks for anyone who can demonstrate an ability to dowse. You can deny your ability by refusing his challenge. Every other dowser here has already done so. Perhaps you can offer up some fresh alibis as to why you can't do it... already taken are, "Randi is a meany," "I don't need a million bucks," and "Randi's offer to let me design the test protocol is unfair."

If someone offered me a million bucks to whistle, I'd start whistling. No alibis, no excuses.

- Carl

 

[COUNTRY GIRL]

Af, I really believe that deep down inside somewhere you are not a bad guy at all. But.........You just might be the reason some of us REAL people don't post and just watch and learn. I have been reading, taking notes, I have tried what SWR thought I should, but until the weather breaks and I can get more that 3 tries in I'll wait on the results. To post and get beat up or watch and learn? Hmmmmmm.

I don't think anyone that posts in the dowsing threads is, or should be labeled as...a bad guy. For shame.

If dowsers, and youself, wanted to post "skeptic free"...then there is a Pro-Dowsing portion that can be used. But, as you and everyone else has probably noticed...the Pro-Dowsing section is not really taken advantage of. Odd how that works, eh?

Af knows I think he's alright. I just don't understand why every comment made by a dowser or "myself" has to be shoved right back down the throat? Any time someone new shows up in here they get chased out. The unexplainable is fascinating, the ideas floating around are intriguing, at least let the newer folks ask thier questions and get to know you guys before you debate them?

Nice of you to stick up for Af.

Af you started that book yet?

 

[aarthrj3811]

Hey Carl...You have stated that you can Dowse...What's your excuse?...Art

If someone offered me a million bucks to whistle, I'd start whistling. No alibis, no excuses.

 

[Carl-NC]

Hey Carl...You have stated that you can Dowse...What's your excuse?

With observation and intuition removed, my dowsing is only as good as guessing. Obviously, that won't win the jackpot.

- Carl

 

[point hunter]

If someone offered me a million bucks to whistle, I'd start whistling. No alibis, no excuses.

Hi Carl,

I appreciate the invite, but first things first. I want to finish my $100.00 social experiment. Let's resolve this issue that I presented as a skeptic to the forum members. Prove to me that dowsing doesn't work. Show me the studies!

Once we're finished with that, we'll have our discussion of other matters. I could use some extra cash to customize my 4x4.

Who's next?

 

[Peg Leg]

Why don't the DOWSERS make a Statement here RIGHT NOW.
This will show who the SKEPTICS are and who believes in DOWSING who does not.
I will start by saying I BELIEVE.
There is no reason to say anything else.
All the believers have to do is say...... YES
All the SKEPTICS have to do is say ......NO
Thats all there is to say.
Peg Leg
YES

 

[aarthrj3811]

With observation and intuition removed, my dowsing is only as good as guessing. Obviously, that won't win the jackpot.

You say your dowsing is only as good as guessing...Were you only able to fine 10% or 20% of your unknown targets? Were you able to find 60% of the unknown targets? Did you study all the dowsing hints posted here? .....Art

 

[Carl-NC]

Let's resolve this issue that I presented as a skeptic to the forum members. Prove to me that dowsing doesn't work. Show me the studies!

I have stated many times here that it impossible to disprove dowsing. Every time someone tries to do so, those Invisible Pink Unicorns rear their ugly heads.

There are, however, quite a few studies that present evidence both for and against dowsing. It's pretty clear from these studies that (a) the more rigorous the test protocol, the higher the failure rate; and (b) sporadic successes aren't reproducible.

Betz's Scheunen tests represent probably the largest modern tests of dowsers, and meets all of the criteria you put forth. If you thoroughly read all of his analyses, and Enright's as well, the only rational conclusion is that the tests completely failed to produce evidence of dowsing. True, there were 3 or so cherry-picked results that seem to be favorable, but those exact same dowsers failed miserably in other tests (that darned lack of reproducibility). Interestingly, someone did a computer simulation of the Sheunen tests, and the completely random computer results were better than the best of the best dowsers Betz tested.

In any case, since winning your $100 challenge requires you to abandon a strong self-delusional belief, I can guarantee that ain't gonna happen, no matter what evidence is presented. Again, I will let you prove to the forum that you really don't believe in your own dowsing ability, per your own denials. That is a stronger statement than I or anyone else could ever make.

- Carl

 

[aarthrj3811]

I have stated many times here that it impossible to disprove dowsing. Every time someone tries to do so, those Invisible Pink Unicorns rear their ugly heads.

I don't dowse for Invisible Pink Unicorns.

There are, however, quite a few studies that present evidence both for and against dowsing. It's pretty clear from these studies that (a) the more rigorous the test protocol, the higher the failure rate; and (b) sporadic successes aren't reproducible.

In your opinion

Betz's Scheunen tests represent probably the largest modern tests of dowsers, and meets all of the criteria you put forth. If you thoroughly read all of his analyses, and Enright's as well, the only rational conclusion is that the tests completely failed to produce evidence of dowsing.

Funny....The results and interpretations of the experimenters do not agree with Enrights theories..
Results and Interpretation by the Experimenters
In the final report on their dowsing experiments, submitted to the granting agency (Wagner, Betz, and König 1990), the researchers concluded that most dowsers did not do particularly well in the experiments. That report, however, still painted a very positive picture of the overall outcome. The following quotation is a translation of the German text:
Some few dowsers, in particular tasks, showed an extraordinarily high rate of success, which can scarcely if at all be explained as due to chance ... a real core of dowser-phenomena can be regarded as empirically proven ...

In any case, since winning your $100 challenge requires you to abandon a strong self-delusional belief, I can guarantee that ain't gonna happen, no matter what evidence is presented. Again, I will let you prove to the forum that you really don't believe in your own dowsing ability, per your own denials. That is a stronger statement than I or anyone else could ever make.

The Gentleman ask for 3rd party proof...Because he said your proof sucks he has proved dowsing doesn't work??

Randi offers a million bucks for anyone who can demonstrate an ability to dowse. You can deny your ability by refusing his challenge.

Randi's track record speakes for itself...
Gee Carl...strong self-delusional belief...Is that just another excuse to say " I have no proof unless those Dowsers will provide it for me"...Art