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

[Jean310]

Hey Jean....How does Randi keep all his clones informed? Does he send out tapes every few weeks to make sure the brain-washing sticks? Are you instructed to answer all questions with Quotes from the web site? Randi may be the greatest magician of all time. ...Art

Your frustration is showing, Art.

...........now take your chill pill, and everything will be just fine.

Jean

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

A History of Mining on the Kenai Peninsula, Alaska - Grab it through Amazon!

[aarthrj3811]

Your frustration is showing, Art.

You wish that.......How can people who claim to be so educated be sucked in by a con artist? When proven WRONG they keep talking like he wants them to....The facts are on this thread and you ignore them...He has you, hooked....Art

 

[ClonedSIM]

Your frustration is showing, Art.

You wish that.......How can people who claim to be so educated be sucked in by a con artist? When proven WRONG they keep talking like he wants them to....The facts are on this thread and you ignore them...He has you, hooked....Art

I'm sorry, Art, but other than one quote taken out of context, where is there anything that proves skeptics and Randi wrong? I mean, there's plenty of evidence against dowsing, but against skeptics?

 

[aarthrj3811]

I'm sorry, Art, but other than one quote taken out of context, where is there anything that proves skeptics and Randi wrong? I mean, there's plenty of evidence against dowsing, but against skeptics?

I ask again....where is this evidence...Art

 

[ClonedSIM]

I'm sorry, Art, but other than one quote taken out of context, where is there anything that proves skeptics and Randi wrong? I mean, there's plenty of evidence against dowsing, but against skeptics?

I ask again....where is this evidence...Art

Just look at any of the number of studies that have been posted on these various threads. Not a single one of them offers conclusions that come anywhere near offering proof that dowsing works any better than chance. Add to that common sense. Dowsers refuse to allow their "skills" to be tested, constantly offer "proof" of their skills in the form of fortunes they "found" but will never recover, and would rather debate an issue than ever attempt to settle it one way or the other.

 

[aarthrj3811]

Hey SWR...I got it ...an old magicians trick...is that anything like a Media-Event? Art

 

[Jean310]

Here ya go Art...enjoy watching a fellow Dowser "palm" coins. The camera don't lie ole Buddy

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C8BxmXHRaBI

Here is another dowser; this one uses his dowsing rods to locate a creature.



What next?

 

[ClonedSIM]

The video was a media event, an attempt by dowsers to show everyone how great they were at dowsing. It didn't work, and in the end just darkened the cloud dowsers walk underneath on a daily basis.

 

[aarthrj3811]

Just look at any of the number of studies that have been posted on these various threads. Not a single one of them offers conclusions that come anywhere near offering proof that dowsing works any better than chance. Add to that common sense. Dowsers refuse to allow their "skills" to be tested, constantly offer "proof" of their skills in the form of fortunes they "found" but will never recover, and would rather debate an issue than ever attempt to settle it one way or the other.

af1733....I ask the question ...What is the my odds of beating chance? I am told by you experts it is between 0 and 5 out of 10 ...To be fair I should be able to fin 6 or 7 out of 10...

Tell me this...How is a dowser to prove that dowsing works any better than chance if the chance part of the test is a unknown? Art

 

[Jean310]

Art, would you care to tell us exactly what you were trying to prove in this video. I mean, other than the obvious, which is that you have two dowsing rods in a wooden fixture. When you move the fixture, and thus the rods, they flop around wildly, sometimes together and sometimes in opposite ways.

What was the point of that particular demonstration?

 

[ClonedSIM]

Just look at any of the number of studies that have been posted on these various threads. Not a single one of them offers conclusions that come anywhere near offering proof that dowsing works any better than chance. Add to that common sense. Dowsers refuse to allow their "skills" to be tested, constantly offer "proof" of their skills in the form of fortunes they "found" but will never recover, and would rather debate an issue than ever attempt to settle it one way or the other.

af1733....I ask the question ...What is the my odds of beating chance? I am told by you experts it is between 0 and 5 out of 10 ...To be fair I should be able to fin 6 or 7 out of 10...

Tell me this...How is a dowser to prove that dowsing works any better than chance if the chance part of the test is a unknown? Art

You really don't understand mathematics at all, do you Art?? The odds relating to chance are going to change based on the particulars of the test. Are there 10 targets, are there 50? How many chances do you get to find these targets? You also have to know that the odds as they relate to chance can be calculated for any such test, provided all the information concerning the test is available. Carl offers an excellent example of this in his "A Test for Sandsted" thread. I recommend you read it.
Until you understand this, I'm afraid that you just won't get it, Art.

 

[ClonedSIM]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kt_O2vuDrYo&mode=related&search=

Art, would you care to tell us exactly what you were trying to prove in this video. I mean, other than the obvious, which is that you have two dowsing rods in a wooden fixture. When you move the fixture, and thus the rods, they flop around wildly, sometimes together and sometimes in opposite ways.

What was the point of that particular demonstration?

He put this together to show he could eliminate the ideomotor effect, but until he can demonstrate the rods will move without his direct contact it's just a waste of time...

 

[aarthrj3811]

Hey Jean...Real simple..One of the main claims is that all Dowsing is an Ideomotor response. When the rods are in the holder it is impossible to close them using the hands, wrists or arms. In other words no Ideomotor Response. Some of you experts said the rods would close while in the holder. No way....I could have stepped on a coin and showed that the rods would close without the Ideomotor Response but my camera would not record long enough...Art

 

[aarthrj3811]

You really don't understand mathematics at all, do you Art?? The odds relating to chance are going to change based on the particulars of the test. Are there 10 targets, are there 50? How many chances do you get to find these targets? You also have to know that the odds as they relate to chance can be calculated for any such test, provided all the information concerning the test is available. Carl offers an excellent example of this in his "A Test for Sandsted" thread. I recommend you read it.
Until you understand this, I'm afraid that you just won't get it, Art.

af1733...I understand this ....Your guy is guessing about what the odds are....You jack up how many targets are to be found so if the Dowser guesses better than your guy you still win...Art

 

[aarthrj3811]

He put this together to show he could eliminate the ideomotor effect, but until he can demonstrate the rods will move without his direct contact it's just a waste of time...

af1733.....You have never given me your difinition of Ideomotor Response. So I have to use what I find in the dictionary. It is not clear but it has something to with the movements of the hands and wrist caused by a thought or idea coming from the sub-conscious mind. I don't know what that has to do with direct contact with the rods but I am sure you will come up with some excuse.....Art

 

[Jean310]

Hey Jean...Real simple..One of the main claims is that all Dowsing is an Ideomotor response. When the rods are in the holder it is impossible to close them using the hands, wrists or arms. In other words no Ideomotor Response. Some of you experts said the rods would close while in the holder. No way....I could have stepped on a coin and showed that the rods would close without the Ideomotor Response but my camera would not record long enough...Art

Well, when you were flopping them around, one crossed in front of the other. Why not just put the entire holder in some sort of fixed support, then just lightly touch the fixed support (and the holder) while stepping on a coin.

So........... do another recording, only this time don't publish it until it validates your claim. Should be simple enough, .....if it really works the way you claim.

 

[ClonedSIM]

You really don't understand mathematics at all, do you Art?? The odds relating to chance are going to change based on the particulars of the test. Are there 10 targets, are there 50? How many chances do you get to find these targets? You also have to know that the odds as they relate to chance can be calculated for any such test, provided all the information concerning the test is available. Carl offers an excellent example of this in his "A Test for Sandsted" thread. I recommend you read it.
Until you understand this, I'm afraid that you just won't get it, Art.

af1733...I understand this ....Your guy is guessing about what the odds are....You jack up how many targets are to be found so if the Dowser guesses better than your guy you still win...Art

No, Art, I'm afraid you still don't get it. You didn't give me any numbers to start with, Art. How can I "jack them up"? I asked you how many potential targets your test is starting with, since you didn't give me this information.

You asked me a question, and I'm trying to get you to define your question so I can give you an accurate answer.

You did this, sort of, with your response. You are dowsing in a test against one guesser. Fine, I can work with that. Now tell me how many potential targets we're talking about....

 

[ClonedSIM]

He put this together to show he could eliminate the ideomotor effect, but until he can demonstrate the rods will move without his direct contact it's just a waste of time...

af1733.....You have never given me your difinition of Ideomotor Response. So I have to use what I find in the dictionary. It is not clear but it has something to with the movements of the hands and wrist caused by a thought or idea coming from the sub-conscious mind. I don't know what that has to do with direct contact with the rods but I am sure you will come up with some excuse.....Art

Now this is just dumb, Art.....

I gave you five different definitions of ideomotor from five different sources.

And you know exactly what she means by not having direct contact, as we had this conversation at the end of last week. If the dowsing rods move they way you say they do, then they should move the same way whether you are holding them or not. Ergo, our conversation that began with drilling two holes in a block of wood, dropping the rods into these holes, and wrapping two pieces of steel wire around them and holding onto the other end of the wires. You would still have your "connection" to the rods but would have no control over their movements, ideomotor or not.

You were just afraid to try it.

 

[aarthrj3811]

af1733...Like most of the test you people dream up they will not work. The rods will not work if the human hand is not in contact with it. Some one may be able to do it with wires but I can't....another non answer about chance guessing....Art

 

[ClonedSIM]

af1733...Like most of the test you people dream up they will not work. The rods will not work if the human hand is not in contact with it. Some one may be able to do it with wires but I can't....another non answer about chance guessing....Art

A non-answer? Did you even bother to read my response? I need to know the number of targets you're talking about, and I'll give you an answer. Will some of the skeptics here give Art a hand with this one? He seems to be having problems....

And may I point out:

The rods will not work if the human hand is not in contact with it...Art

and

Some one may be able to do it with wires but I can't....Art

are contradictory statements. It won't work, or you can't do it, but some people can?