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

[aarthrj3811]

Hey Captain.....Give this thread a try.. http://forum.treasurenet.com/index.php/topic,19537.0.html This is how it works for me. Can you think of any skill or art that has a history of 8000 years?...

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

Diving for Pleasure and Treasure - Grab it through Amazon!

[dowser 501]

Yeah Capt. Trips, put that in your pipe and smoke it.

 

[Goldminer]

SWR,
Where in the quote that you have posted is there any mention of a product?

 

[Siegfried Schlagrule]

James Randi, Carl Moreland, or Capt. Trips, can learn to dowse much better than I can. It's not a matter of faith, or wish. it's a matter of determination to learn and practice. Practice and learn.
...
....you have the same inherhent ability as I do, and you can learn to dowse with as much, or more accuracy than I do. Prove it to your self. Nobody can prove it for you. Dell

Fine. I'd be glad to. How? I need to learn the skill from someone. So, can you tell me how to dowse successfully? Please? (I'd love to take that million from Randi. I might even be willing to share it with my teacher.)

Really. If you say I can do it, why don't you tell me the procedure? I want to learn.

I posted complete instructions for map dowsing in this forum called map dowsing lessons. apply the lessons and have a good time. exanimo, ss

 

[Captain Trips]

We are discussing discussing the subject of a challenge which it's sponsor is trying to solicit candidates who have abnormal, super natural abilities. it has already been acknowledged that myself, and others here have no super natural abilities, nor do we use any tools that can defy laws of physics.

Sorry, Dell, but dowsing by it's very nature IS "para-normal." It can not be shown to actually use any known form of physics. It does not use electro-magnetic fields, or it wouldn't be able to find anything electrically or magnetically neutral (such as non-metallic objects) as some claim they can do. It does not use gravitational effects, or it would be thrown off by objects of different densities. And it can not use either the weak or strong nuclear forces as those don't have any effect beyond the radius of a single atom. And those are all four of the forces known to physics -- electro-magnetism, gravity, weak, and strong. It defies the laws of physics in every form. As such, no matter how you may feel about yourself, it does qualify for the Randi Challenge.

Even if you feel you have no super-natural abilities, if you can dowse successfully you can win the challenge. It isn't dependent on what you feel about yourself, just on whether you can do it or not. It's that simple -- if you can dowse, you win. How you do it doesn't matter, but IF you can do it is all that matters.

 

[jeff of pa]

Please From now on,

No mention that any Member who posts in the Dowsing forum,

Makes & sells Products.

This is Free advertising.

So if you suggest any Dowser here Makes (made) & or sells (sold) Anything,
your post Will Disappear.

I'm not open to Debate on this, So DON'T TRY.

Thank You
JEFF

 

[aarthrj3811]

Sorry, Dell, but dowsing by it's very nature IS "para-normal." It can not be shown to actually use any known form of physics. It does not use electro-magnetic fields, or it wouldn't be able to find anything electrically or magnetically neutral (such as non-metallic objects) as some claim they can do. It does not use gravitational effects, or it would be thrown off by objects of different densities. And it can not use either the weak or strong nuclear forces as those don't have any effect beyond the radius of a single atom. And those are all four of the forces known to physics -- electro-magnetism, gravity, weak, and strong. It defies the laws of physics in every form.

If you look in Websters Dictionary you will find that para-nornal or paranormal is not there. When I go to the skeptics dictionary I find 400 entries. I find that it is used to define some thing you don't understand..No prove..Just someones opinion. If you look up physics it is a real science. It is changed often as people are always learning more about our world. I guess you skeptics use a lot of Wish Science in your post...Art

 

[Carl-NC]

I appreciate Beale's reply to SS... he is correct, our testing was informal.

Personally, I prefer the informal tests... it allows us to experiment with conditions and protocol on-the-fly, and is more relaxed. Usually, I wander off and let the dowser have the field alone, for as long as he wants, and simply trust him not to cheat. I can't do that with the challenge.

I've tested a number of dowsers informally and formally (before I created the challenge), probably a dozen or so, I don't recall. Most considered themselves to be very experienced dowsers, and most claimed very high rates of success. In every single case -- in even the simplest test conditions -- they could dowse no better than chance guessing. In every case, they were very surprised at the results. In every case but one, they dismissed the test results as an anomaly. Beale, so far, is the only person who has even considered that the test results might be real.

Many years ago, when I was in Ft. Lauderdale, I stopped by JREF and spent about 2 hrs talking to Randi. Mind you, this was an unannounced visit, yet he was very gracious with his time. At the time, I had just started my own tests of dowsing, quickly finding out that it worked when I knew the target location, and didn't work when the test went blind. I wanted to find out more about dowsing tests, and got 2 hrs of very interesting conversation.

Anyway, one thing that Randi told me was, no matter how many times a dowser fails a test, he will never ever change his views about dowsing. The ideomotor response is too overwhelming, and any chance successes he's ever had* are, to a dowser, absolute confirmation that dowsing must work. So far, he's been right. Beale and I will do some more informal tests, and maybe he will become the first dowser to accept what is really going on. We'll see.

As I said before, my primary interests are in treasure hunting equipment, including LRLs. I've yet to see an LRL that works, and believe that manufacturers should be taken to task to prove their equipment does something useful. However, I am more than willing to help anyone who wants to know whether dowsing (or LRLs) Really Works, by doing informal testing. No challenge, no pressure, no rules, no charge. And the results won't show up on the forums, unless the dowser choses to post them.

- Carl

*especially with water dowsing, which is almost always successful

 

[Sandsted]

Well put Art, dowsing isn't paranormal.

Anyway, I thank dowser...501? for making a try at scientific theory, you at least gave your back up...but I had questions about it and Captain pretty much covered them. What is your response, the the "geo"flux, the moon bouncing...from the sun? A lot of what you say doesn't make much sense, and your defense to all these problems is..."...put that in your pipe and smoke it." First off, I don't understand what you mean by that. Secondly, I'd like to know the truth to your solar flare junk.

Just last Tuesday I went to the Kensington Runestone Park and worked with trails of ancient cement on this trading port right in front of the barn. I, and pretty much everyone with us, were able to dowse fairly well. We marked out several trails, 2 ships (one had a very interesting broken or bent tip) some other trails a 16' dredge, some camals, a bunch of stuff I won't go into much detail on, but we weren't affected at all by your geoflux or solar flares.

Next, how is a double blind test scientific, there's nothing scientific there. YOu are just testing to see whether dowsing works, no science. My real question isn't whether dowsing works, it's How does it work. As I said before, a magic trick, practical joke, an illusion does not stand the test of time, 8,000 years! There are 8,000 year old cave paintings showing men using a forked stick to track bison. Truth will always stand.

As Dell says, it is a mental excersize, many aren't focused enough or don't understand the concept enough to dowse.

In response to these stupid challenges, I think it would be hard to work under a test, where someone is judging you, testing you. If you were near me I could teach you to dowse, I could show you things, but a test is hard. Even dating pennys and coins just to test my self is hard. I've done it, I would never be able to do it in a million dollar challenge, but these tests are hard. And I could really care less whether you believe in dowsing or not. I live in Western Minnesota, right in the heart of hundreds if not thousands of ancient habitations by early peoples and Vikings and dowsing is the greatest tool to studying this history. I've seen my teacher on his land say here is a grave from 1053 A.D. or some year like that and then he probed and dug up preserved bones. He's located a camal from the year 979 A.D. at a abandoned gravel pit, he gave me two of the bones. One is a rib bone, the other I'm not sure. But the camal was a 23 year old male.

I've questioned dowsing and I've been proven wrong, if you doubt it that's not my problem and I don't really care.

OH, but Captain, if you really sincerely want to get some information on dowsing I have to write a bit out for a friend if you want me to send you something give me your email.

But I'll be gone for the next week, so farewell fellow dowsers....and skeptics.

 

[ClonedSIM]

Dell,
Are you aware that your site has disappeared?

 

[dowser 501]

Between dowsing for vikings and mind reading skeptics, plus long winded Dell with long winded massive boring explanations on dowsing techniques, whew, I'm getting out of here.

 

[ClonedSIM]

Dell,
Are you aware that your site has disappeared?

Well, never mind, then! It was down last night with a message that the domain name registration had expired on 8/3, but it was up again this morning.

 

[musstag]

Capt. Trips THANKS for the info, I CAN DOWSE. I'm checking into and will give 10 grand or so IF I get 1 millon.

 

[musstag]

Yep, my grandpa found a gold treasure box that was buried. ( I decided to remove the description, also Dowsers will know what it is without saying much more then what comes next) and it will point to gold in the area, if any is, you have to take several reading points, use it at different spots and find the directions it points too, find where they cross each other. If you try this at home, you may get what you think is alot of FALSE reading, untill you notice that they point to your neighbors bedroom where his wife has stored her gold jewelry. I didn't know what it was all about way back then, also it didn't work for my Dad, I guess thats why I haven't tried it sooner, and there is no natural gold in the soil where I live. . But RECENTLY I have gotten into it. IT doesn't work for my son, but his 10 yr old son can do it. Here is an example, I can bury a gold ring in the yard 2 inches deep, without letting him see where, and my grandson can find it, He has to walk around and when he passes over where the ring is buried he gets what I wil call a "reading" from this device ...., . Thats the simple description, but it is time consuming out in the field looking for gold. In testing I have located as little a 2 specs of gold the size of seseme seeds that were covered lightly with dirt that same way. I don't know how/why it works, maybe it won't always. I will look into this Randi.org site, but we are planning some prospecting trips when the weather cools and the snakes and Posion Ivy and Sumac go dormant.

 

[Captain Trips]

Capt. Trips THANKS for the info, I CAN DOWSE. I'm checking into and will give 10 grand or so IF I get 1 millon.

You're welcome. Just a word of warning: read through their requirements, and be sure you meet them to the letter. After all, it is their money, they have the right to specify their requirements.

Oh, and the tests with your grandson? You are the one who hid the items, but were you present when he was searching? That actually is counter to the idea of "double blind." It is possible that he was picking up on some sub-conscious clue you were giving him. A true test would be for you to hide something when he can't see, and for him to search when you can't see. If he can then find it successfully and repeatedly, I think you have a winner there.

Please don't be offended, thinking I'm accusing you of cheating. I'm not. The concept of the double-blind study is not to assume someone is cheating, but to make sure there is no possibility of anyone picking up clues from anyone else in any manner, knowingly or not.

Good luck! If you can successfully dowse in a double-blind study, that will be wonderful. Just remember to state all of your needed conditions ahead of time. The JREF will work with you to set up a test to show that you can do what you claim. They don't set the conditions, you do.

Oh, and they do not pay for your transportation or lodging, but they can possibly perform the tests somewhere near where you live. They do have specific guidelines, they have to follow them themselves also.

 

[musstag]

Okay, Thanks for these tips, and for this initial post. I don't know about mind reading, I would tend to believe dowsing abilities before I would believe that he or I have unkown mind reading powers. BUT even at that, that may not prove dowsing to you, but even that (mind reading) should be able to compete in the challange!!!! But no, I will try some more test with the Hider of the targets, and not me, removed , not present or in contact with him or I. I am retired and have time and the means to get to Fort Lauadale to do the final test. Yes, conditions of the test, I've been thinking about those, ONE Thing I have to do, would be to sweep the area first and make sure that there is not some Gold, or Silver near by, such as the Neigbors Jewerly..... and all present have no gold or silver on them, including teeth.... and no radios or CB's or electrical devices in use close by, that might give a false reading. I might even request that several metal detectors be used first to be sure the area is clean before they position the gold targets. They can bury them lightly or up to 2 inches in the ground, and the gold target needs to be at least one or 2 gram in weight, or up to ring size or so, I do not have a full oz. of gold to be testing with, so I don't want a piece that big. I would like them all to be nearly the same size if more than one is hidden at a time and at least 8 feet from each other. Out in the gold fields, its ok, if the reading is a foot or so off, due to multiple targets, because you can dig the larger area untill you find the targets, but in this challange, I guess I need to determine the distance of my being able to pinpoint the targets. You can understand that out prospecting or treasure hunting , you don't know all the conditions present BUT, If you find gold several times in 10 readings, You Can be a susscessful prospector!! OK, Thanks again, I will get on that and maybe have some news in a week or two!!

 

[Captain Trips]

I'm sure they will be glad to deal with these conditions. Certainly avoiding false positives is as important as avoiding false negatives.

Tell me, though -- how would you do in a "hidden in a bag" test? Like, a room with ten paper bags, only one of which has a gold ring in it. (Of course, if the room is as clean as you need an open field to be.) I think a large room might be easier to find than a "clean field." But then again, a room in a building might have electrical fields that would interfer.

They will want to work with you to set up the test criteria, I would suggest a bit of flexibility on your part might be helpful to them.

And it sounds like you will be "testing" your grandson in a good manner. Just be sure the person hiding the test objects is the only one who knows the locations, and has no contact with your grandson before he (grandson) does the finding. This would be a good "preliminary" test for the JREF also, just be sure you can pass that. If you don't pass the prelim, you don't go to the finals. (Just like making the cut at a PGA tournament.)

Best of luck to you.

 

[musstag]

HEY, YES THE 10 BAG TEST WOULD SIMPLIFY IT GREATLY!! I can get someone to put gold in one of ten bags.... putting eqaul weight of something small in the others and have another person mix them up so that even they don't know which one is which .... set them out about 8 feet apart. Thanks again. Ok, got to go do some chores, may take a few days but I think I will get some people to start helping me set this 10 bag set up and try it next week at home!

 

[Captain Trips]

musstag --

Check out the JREF site fully. They have a section of their forum dedicated to previous challengers. Could give you pointers on what works and what doesn't.

The reason I suggested the paper bag test is that they've done that very test before, although the people tested didn't do any better than random chance. Definitely try it out yourself, sounds like you have a pretty good protocol thought out. I suggest going through it multiple times, to make the "odds" better. One try successful is 1/10, two is 1/100, etc. The odds of doing a 1-out-of-10 test successfully ten times in a row by random chance is 1 in 10,000,000,000. If you can do a one-out-of-ten test successfully ten times in a row, you'll have definitely proven it isn't random chance! (Make sure to do the double-blinding procedure each time.) Keep practicing, and when you know you can do the "1-out-of-ten ten times in a row) without fail, submit your application to the JREF. And keep your claim simple.

Suggested wording for claim:
"I can successfully find the one bag out of ten that contains a test sample of gold (with the other nine containing an equal weight of sand.) (A good test sample of gold can be as simple as a wedding band.) I can do this as often as I wish, with 100% accuracy. I have already done this in a private double-blind experiment, and feel I am ready to go public with this ability."

There -- simple, straight-forward, clearly stating what you claim and suggesting a test protocol. Of course, you do have to follow their submission rules, which shouldn't be difficult. Read the rules carefully, follow them to the letter, work with (not against) them on finalizing test protocols, and do it!

Oh, if only Dell Winders could come forward like you did and say "I can do that."


You may ask why I'm doing this, if I'm a skeptic. I'll tell you. I am a skeptic that wants to believe, but being a skeptic can't do so without proof. Sounds like you can provide me that proof.

 

[ClonedSIM]

You may ask why I'm doing this, if I'm a skeptic. I'll tell you. I am a skeptic that wants to believe, but being a skeptic can't do so without proof.

Hear Hear! This is an excellent statement, Captain Trips. Kudos!