$1,000,000 for anyone who can dowse.

[ClonedSIM]

Lets see 618 post...July 28 to December 10............What a waste of time....To prove what.....That Randi's Challenge would prove nothing....It would prove nothing except that ONE Dowser could not or could find a few targets under a test condition. Was all the name calling worth it to you guy's......Art

I only have one question for you, Art. Just one question, so just one answer, please.

What would you stand to lose by attempting the challenge?

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

Upgraded Night Vision Monocular Digital Infrared Monocular Telescope for 100% Darkness with 8X Zoom - Grab it through Amazon!

[Carl-NC]

Anyway, I came into possession of a book this weekend. "The Dowsing Rod Kit" Compiled by Sig Lonegren.

Yah, I have that one. Found it to be pretty far out in Looney Land. Also have The Pendulum Kit if you want Looney Land Part II.

She writes about the topic concerning sensitivity to the earth. How "considerable research over the past decade has shown quite clearly that the human body is highly sensitive to electromagnetic fields, although we are not consciously aware of their various effects on us.

OK, so let's see the research. (I noticed that the book did not contain a single, solitary reference to any source material for its claims.)

She goes on to talk about how court cases have surfaced dealing with health problems caused by living under power lines and who have been badly affected by the electric fields.

So far, the evidence has not supported this.

"In Britain, experiments with blindfolded students have demonstrated that humans too have a magnetic sense of direction...

Great, let's see the formal report.

Dowsing is dependent on your attitude. Dowsing is not an external art. It is not like flying a plane. You might believe that no one can fly planes (no one can dowse) and you don't believe you can either.

But what if I offer $25,000 for someone to demonstrate the ability to fly a plane... do you think anyone would be able to succeed? (BTW, I have a pilot's license )

A very slight change in electrical skin resistance in the hands causes slight changes in sweating.

More likely, sweating cause changes in electrical skin resistance.

- Carl

 

[Sandsted]

Concerning the plane example, dowsing is much more of a mental activity. It has no physical elements of it (for the most part).

I believe the british study she spoke of was done by Dr. Robin Baker. Search the name, I saw one lengthy article on it but do not have the time nor energy to read it. The point that I make this is to suggest that the body is perhaps a bit more sensitive then the basic 5 senses.

You have the book Carl? You know on page 131 where it says,

"...Simmons, a geophysicist at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, in the US, conducted surveys of magnetic fields around dowsed wells near Boston that yield huge quantities of water. These wells were found to be within a narrow magnetic anomaly-only a few yards (meters) wide-resulting from a geological fracture zone that was channeling the flow of ground water. And then in 1970, Duane Chadwick of Utah State University tested 150 people, and showed that their rod movements were linked with tiny changes in the intensity of the EMF."

This is the type of scientific study I proposed you conduct. Instead of constructing a monetary based challenge made to disprove a controversial subject, why not make an attempt to understand it? If the scientific study yields no evidence as to why or how one would be able to dowse then perhaps one could then study why people are fooled into thinking they can do this.

This is the advice I've offered before, that before you make such a strong conclusion concerning a controversial subject, why don't you make an attempt to know what you're attacking?

Now concerning the book I have seen much better books. But from the flittering that I did I find the chapter on the science of dowsing and some things with earth energies. The ley lines or whatever they are that it speaks of in the book, I have discovered myself. I find them to be slightly wider then what they say, but about 7 feet is correct.

But anyway, some of the information is quite interesting and useful.

 

[cptbil]

I believe that a whole lot of people are missing the POINT!

NOT! Everyone is going to beable to dowse anything!

It, like other skills or capabilities, are not and may be present, except, in only certain people!

For instance, I know a person, who can communicate or feel, what animals do!

He can mentally give his dog commands!
I have seen it work!

Like anything else, not everyone is going to have the same or have equal skills!

I am by nature, a "mechanic" !
It's in The Genes!
Even,
My, "Degree" is in "Engineering"!

And, this mechanical ability has been in the family for generations!
My family name is "Wright" !

Back in days gone by...many families were named for their occupations, etc !
Names like, (a) Miller, (a) Cartwright, (a) Smith, (a) Wright, etc..!

These were and are natural abilities! (Genetic)
Who knows where they came from ?
OR!
Why?

So!
Why not a person (Family) having natural "Physic" abilities, like "Dowsing" ?

Read your BIBLE, ( I'm a Christian) you'll find proof there!
As you will, thruout other, Historical Records !

Any "Law" agin't ?

 

[aarthrj3811]

Hey Sandsted and Cptbil....Thanks for the interesting points of veiw....Art

 

[Carl-NC]

Concerning the plane example, dowsing is much more of a mental activity. It has no physical elements of it (for the most part).

So why are we discussing alleged physical elements of dowsing, like human sensitivity to magnetic fields, and emission of signals from gold?

I believe the british study she spoke of was done by Dr. Robin Baker.

I saw a lot of talk about the study, but no published study.

"...Simmons, a geophysicist at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, in the US, conducted surveys of magnetic fields around dowsed wells near Boston that yield huge quantities of water.

I saw a lot of talk about the study, but no published study.

And then in 1970, Duane Chadwick of Utah State University tested 150 people, and showed that their rod movements were linked with tiny changes in the intensity of the EMF."

I did find that Chadwick never published anything on this experiment. Therefore, until he choses to publish his methods and results, this is hearsay, and there is nothing more to discuss about Chadwick.

This is the type of scientific study I proposed you conduct. Instead of constructing a monetary based challenge made to disprove a controversial subject, why not make an attempt to understand it? If the scientific study yields no evidence as to why or how one would be able to dowse then perhaps one could then study why people are fooled into thinking they can do this.

I completely agree with you on this. However, as I said before, my resources in doing this are limited.

This is the advice I've offered before, that before you make such a strong conclusion concerning a controversial subject, why don't you make an attempt to know what you're attacking?

That, I have done. So far, I've found that dowsing is an exercise in self-deception.

- Carl

 

[ClonedSIM]

Apparently Art's ignoring me, so I'll ask it as an open question.

What would any dowser stand to lose by accepting the challenge?

And, just like Art, it's just one question, so only one answer, please.

 

[aarthrj3811]

What would any dowser stand to lose by accepting the challenge?

What makes you think that any dowser would be accepted for the challenge? Do you think that anyone who may be able to win the $1000000 will ever pass the pre-test? Read the facts and make up your mind. You are the ones who are always talking about ODDs ..LLAD...Art

 

[ClonedSIM]

What would any dowser stand to lose by accepting the challenge?

What makes you think that any dowser would be accepted for the challenge? Do you think that anyone who may be able to win the $1000000 will ever pass the pre-test? Read the facts and make up your mind. You are the ones who are always talking about ODDs ..LLAD...Art

Man, you're pretty awful about following directions, aren't you?

Fine, then please answer either question that you find most appealing:

What do you stand to lose by accepting Randi's pre-test?
OR
What do you stand to lose by accepting Carl's challenge?

Any no more hypothetical questions about this challenge or that pre-test or whatever, mmm-kay? You ignore any answer that is given to you, anyway...

 

[Sandsted]

"So why are we discussing alleged physical elements of dowsing, like human sensitivity to magnetic fields, and emission of signals from gold?"

Because, at what point you recognize these and utilize this (I don't know anything about emissions from gold...never studied it) is in no way physical. It is completely a mental exercise.

"I saw a lot of talk about the study, but no published study."

Don't make excuses Carl. Look it up for yourself, if you refuse to, as you have thus far, then you only prove your ignorance. Study something for yourself. If I told you there was a new challenge that every dowser failed in would you have any trouble looking into it? From what I've seen I would have to conclude that you wouldn't. You make an awful lot of effort to ignore anything that is against you.

You can not say you've studied dowsing and am forced to conclude it is a trick of self-deception. You won't study it! Find the studies for yourself, your conclusion on dowsing doesn't affect me, I'm just here in hopes that you might learn something. But all you do is ignore these, do everything in your power to dismiss them. You will never learn anything with a closed mind.

"I completely agree with you on this. However, as I said before, my resources in doing this are limited."

This is your response? Let me clarify your statement. You won't do a scientific study because you don't have the resources to do so. Well, that's fine, but then because you can't do this you choose to set up a challenge to disprove the subject that you can't study in the first place?!

What you're saying is that because you can't study a controversial subject you're just going to side with one side and set up a challenge to disprove the other?! This is nonsense!

"...before you make such a strong conclusion concerning a controversial subject, why don't you make an attempt to know what you're attacking?"

"That, I have done. So far, I've found that dowsing is an exercise in self-deception."

You just proved above that you have not studied the subject because you don't have the resources, so you then just pick a side and accuse the other side of being self-deceived. Who's deceived Carl?



"What would any dowser stand to lose by accepting the challenge?

Time, money, energy, take your pick.

 

[ClonedSIM]

"What would any dowser stand to lose by accepting the challenge?

Time, money, energy, take your pick.

As much time as we spend here debating the issue, the test could have been performed time and time again.
I don't know if you ever vacation, but you could always take a small side trip to wherever Carl happens to be at the time to perform a test there. And as far as Randi goes, well, he does his best to find someone nearby to perform the pre-test, so the most it would really involve is a car trip.
As far as energy, I really don't have a response for that.

 

[aarthrj3811]

Pretty good answer Sandsted. There is a lot of proof and where to find it here on T-Net http://forum.treasurenet.com/index.php/topic,19834.0.html
When ask for proof we are given two places to find it. I will not list them as they are a waste of time....Art

 

[musstag]

Quote from: Sandsted on Yesterday at 09:58:23 PM
Concerning the plane example, dowsing is much more of a mental activity. It has no physical elements of it (for the most part).
Carl's reply:
So why are we discussing alleged physical elements of dowsing, like human sensitivity to magnetic fields, and emission of signals from gold?


CARL, I know ART has posted that he does not dowse the way Dowser501 does. And I think now this includes not the way Sandsted does, it doesn't work the same for Art or I, we are not mental dowsers, we are using physical elements, which may be responsible for what mental doswer find.

 

[Sandsted]

Yes, but musstag, what causes the rod to move? You or the object? I believe you are mental dowsing without really knowing it.

 

[aarthrj3811]

Hey musstag....For a new Dowser you are doing well. Listen to everyone. Try what they tell you. If you can use the information thats great. If it doesn't fit your methods alway remember it. Someday it may be important to you. Remember one thing...Everyones system is important to them. They have found a way to locate what they are looking for. I have been in the field with Mental Dowsers and have witnessed them locating gold. I will not tell anyone that my method are the only way.. All these methods seem to confuse a lot of people....Art

 

[aarthrj3811]

Hey Sandsted....I think it is how you are using your mind. I think that map dowsing is a pure mental exercise. I also think some peoples rods only respond to mental thought. I also think that the mind can be trained to only respond to outside things. I used the rods for years following a man made signal. I did not know it had anything to do with dowsing. Then I became aware of dowsing. I soon learned that Mental Dowsing and man made signals would not work together. My mind knew that the rods were to close only when a signal entered my foot.

I read a paper by Dr. Paul Doppler. I did some of his experiments and learned where I could find these natural signal lines.This opened up so many new things that I could do with the rods. Before I was limited to gold only by my manmade signal and I started to locate silver and lost objects. It has been a good ride and hope I can keep doing it for a lot more years....Art

 

[Sandsted]

Why do you use two rods?

 

[aarthrj3811]

I did a lot of testing with one rod and soon learned that two rods were a lot more accurate for me. With one rod I could pick up signals 360 degrees from the object but it was hard for me to follow them. With two rods I pick up the signal in the 4 cardinal direction from the object. It is then easy to walk a simple S pattern to the object. Art

 

[Carl-NC]

"So why are we discussing alleged physical elements of dowsing, like human sensitivity to magnetic fields, and emission of signals from gold?"

Because, at what point you recognize these and utilize this (I don't know anything about emissions from gold...never studied it) is in no way physical. It is completely a mental exercise.

Can dowsing be demonstrated? I offer $25,000 for a successful demonstration.

"I saw a lot of talk about the study, but no published study."

Don't make excuses Carl. Look it up for yourself, if you refuse to, as you have thus far, then you only prove your ignorance. Study something for yourself. If I told you there was a new challenge that every dowser failed in would you have any trouble looking into it? From what I've seen I would have to conclude that you wouldn't. You make an awful lot of effort to ignore anything that is against you.

I did look it up. I saw a lot of dowser-talk about the study, but nothing on the study itself.

I recently spent quite a bit of time trying to locate a report on the Chadwick experiment that is so often touted by dowsers as proof that humans can detect magnetic field changes. What I finally found is that no report, no paper, no presentation, ever resulted from those experiments. Since there is no public description of the methods used, or of the data recorded, it is impossible to determine the validity of the claims. The Chadwick experiment is therefore heresay, and not worth further discussion. I thoroughly expect that dowsers will to continue to cite this experiment as "proof."

Regarding references in general, if you wish to cite past studies as evidence for your point-of-view, then it is your responsibility to provide those studies, not mine.

You can not say you've studied dowsing and am forced to conclude it is a trick of self-deception. You won't study it! Find the studies for yourself, your conclusion on dowsing doesn't affect me, I'm just here in hopes that you might learn something. But all you do is ignore these, do everything in your power to dismiss them. You will never learn anything with a closed mind.

I've studied dowsing quite a bit. I've personally bought quite a few dowsing devices, and have built quite a few more. I suspect I'm the only one on this forum who's submitted to randomized blind testing. I've also test several other experienced dowsers -- at least a dozen I can think of, maybe more. Universally, the dowsers were successful when they knew where the target was, and failed miserably when the test went blind. I have seen no exception to that, even when I tested a high-dollar LLAD manufacturer, who also failed miserably, sued me for defamation, and then ran off like a scared rabbit when I showed up for our court date.

I have $25,000 for someone to PROVE ME WRONG.

Don't tell me I "won't study it." I have spent A LOT of money studying dowsing, and it is nothing but folly and fantasy.

"I completely agree with you on this. However, as I said before, my resources in doing this are limited."

This is your response? Let me clarify your statement. You won't do a scientific study because you don't have the resources to do so. Well, that's fine, but then because you can't do this you choose to set up a challenge to disprove the subject that you can't study in the first place?!

You're confusing the fact that I haven't done the experiment YOU want me to do, with a total lack of having studied dowsing. Those kinds of experiments have been done, and have produced failure (Kassel, Betz, Australia, etc.). However, I would still like to eventually conduct my own large-scale experiment, and hopefully I will at some point. Meanwhile, the challenge allows all the dowsers out there to deny their own ability.

What you're saying is that because you can't study a controversial subject you're just going to side with one side and set up a challenge to disprove the other?! This is nonsense!

According to your definition of how I should study dowsing.

"...before you make such a strong conclusion concerning a controversial subject, why don't you make an attempt to know what you're attacking?"

"That, I have done. So far, I've found that dowsing is an exercise in self-deception."

You just proved above that you have not studied the subject because you don't have the resources, so you then just pick a side and accuse the other side of being self-deceived. Who's deceived Carl?

According to your definition of how I should study dowsing.

"What would any dowser stand to lose by accepting the challenge?

Time, money, energy, take your pick.

Time: 2 hours
Money: 58 cents
Energy: near-zero

Potential payoff: $1,000,000.00

Let's try again. Why won't the dowsers ON THIS FORUM give Randi's challenge a try? No excuses. No alibis.

- Carl

 

[Sandsted]

"Can dowsing be demonstrated? I offer $25,000 for a successful demonstration."

I've already said at least 20 times why a test like this can not be done.

"Regarding references in general, if you wish to cite past studies as evidence for your point-of-view, then it is your responsibility to provide those studies, not mine."

This is not my responsibility. You're the one with the problem. I'm not the one that needs the evidence, I'm just telling you of studies that I've become known to. If you refuse to face them that's your problem. I looked at several articles concerning those studies I spoke of, NONE of them were at a dowser site or written by a dowser.

You can find the studies for yourself or you can ignore them, I don't care.

"...it is nothing but folly and fantasy."

You can not make this statement. You have not studied dowsing, you've made challenges to have people fail at dowsing and then call it a study. This is proof of nothing Carl and even if the people were sucessful it would still be proof of nothing.

Study what you're attacking Carl.

"According to your definition of how I should study dowsing."

Carl, my "definition" or to be correct my opinion on how you should study dowsing is a good opinion. You can't dowse in situations where you have to prove yourself like one is forced to in your challenge. It is flawed in its construction. It will never, in all of its lifetime, prove anything and is a complete waste of time.

"Time: 2 hours
Money: 58 cents
Energy: near-zero"

Alright the time is good, I don't know how you think you can calculate the money to be 58 cents, but if that's true then that is good. Energy is more then zero...but this is if you believe that I don't even have to leave my property. Can Randi send someone to my doorstep, 173 miles North of Minneapolis? But even if he did, I don't believe I would be able to dowse under your conditions.