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

[ClonedSIM]

Complain! Complain! Complain! Clown, quit trying to dictate others lives and you won't have anything to complain about. Get a life of your own.

Broken record, anyone? Do you have anything intelligent to add to this conversation, Dell?

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

Family Maps of Hinds County, Mississippi, Deluxe Edition - Grab it through Amazon!

[aarthrj3811]

Still waiting for you answer...WHERE IS THE PROOF...Art

 

[ClonedSIM]

Still waiting for you answer...WHERE IS THE PROOF...Art

What proof do you speak of, Art?

 

[ClonedSIM]

Do you have anything intelligent to add to this conversation, Dell?

No! Personally, I don't consider replying to the asine rantings and complaints about others from a clown, as an intelligent, or healthy discussion.

When the sad clown decides to contribute something intelligent ,or positive to the Dowsing forum that is not whining, complaining, or untruthful, then perhaps an intelligent discussion can follow. I look forward to you share your own experience with Dowsing, without dictating negativity to others, and then perhaps folks will take an interest in you and give you the attention you seem to be seeking.

Perhaps if you replied to a post in an intelligent manner, you would get the same. I know you haven't tried it before, but there's a first time for everything, Dell!

Here's something for you to chew on, though. Get those little brain cells working, eh?

Why has no dowser ever found Jimmy Hoffa? Or the supposed riches of the KGC? The Lost Dutchman's Mine? How about the AOL contest running right now with silver and gold bars buried all over the place? How about dowsing out the winners of major sporting events and getting your bets in? Lottery numbers? How about a dowser being a good citizen like metal detectorists try to do and help people locate lost jewelry? The Holy Grail? Atlantis?

 

[aarthrj3811]

What facts about dowsing? There aren't any. Since both pro-dowsing and scientific publications/groups disagree about almost every facet of dowsing, no conclusion can be drawn as to whether dowsing actually works. Do you have facts about dowsing that no one is aware of?

Gee af1733....They are right here on this forum unlike any prove from you....http://twm.co.nz/dowsing_jse_com.html
http://forum.treasurenet.com/index.php/topic,19834.0.html....Art

And again, Art, you're posting links to articles from dowsing publications, not to be considered factual since I can find two reports showing dowsing not to work better than chance for each one you produce showing it does.

af1733....I take you at your word. Wating for the 60 links that you will post....Art

Why bother, Art? I could post links till my keyboard breaks, but as you've proven in the past, you ignore answers you are given, and you don't really understand them in the first place. I could stick 100 links here and you would never bother to go to the sites because, as I've shown, you are close-minded and biased and the sites wouldn't agree with your point of view

af1733....Excuses.Excuses ...Where are the links??

 

[ClonedSIM]

What facts about dowsing? There aren't any. Since both pro-dowsing and scientific publications/groups disagree about almost every facet of dowsing, no conclusion can be drawn as to whether dowsing actually works. Do you have facts about dowsing that no one is aware of?

Gee af1733....They are right here on this forum unlike any prove from you....http://twm.co.nz/dowsing_jse_com.html
http://forum.treasurenet.com/index.php/topic,19834.0.html....Art

And again, Art, you're posting links to articles from dowsing publications, not to be considered factual since I can find two reports showing dowsing not to work better than chance for each one you produce showing it does.

af1733....I take you at your word. Wating for the 60 links that you will post....Art

Why bother, Art? I could post links till my keyboard breaks, but as you've proven in the past, you ignore answers you are given, and you don't really understand them in the first place. I could stick 100 links here and you would never bother to go to the sites because, as I've shown, you are close-minded and biased and the sites wouldn't agree with your point of view

af1733....Excuses.Excuses ...Where are the links??

Why on earth would I take the time to post any links for you, Art? Remember when you wanted the definition of ideomotor? I gave you 7 different definitions, and you ignored them, and turned around a day later and asked for the definition of ideomotor. Remember when you asked how many coins Sandy would have to get right? I gave you my answer no less than 5 times, and you continued to ask the same question. To be honest, I don't feel you're worth the time. Over 50 references to studies and scientific articles that say dowsing works no better than guessing have been posted in this forum, and you've ignored every one of them. I have read every link ever posted here and I respond to each one. You have not afforded my links the same respect as I have afforded yours, so if you want them, they're already there, waiting for months now for you to read them.

 

[ClonedSIM]

Why on earth would I take the time to post any links for you, Art? Remember when you wanted the definition of ideomotor? I gave you 7 different definitions, and you ignored them, and turned around a day later and asked for the definition of ideomotor. Remember when you asked how many coins Sandy would have to get right? I gave you my answer no less than 5 times, and you continued to ask the same question. To be honest, I don't feel you're worth the time. Over 50 references to studies and scientific articles that say dowsing works no better than guessing have been posted in this forum, and you've ignored every one of them. I have read every link ever posted here and I respond to each one. You have not afforded my links the same respect as I have afforded yours, so if you want them, they're already there, waiting for months now for you to read them.

More whines and complaints from the Clown. Poor Baby!

Let's see.... Hmmm, I'm complaining that a 50+ year old man keeps asking Why? like a 4-year-old, no matter how many times you answer his questions. I would say this is a completely founded complaint. Would you disagree?

 

[aarthrj3811]

Why on earth would I take the time to post any links for you, Art? Remember when you wanted the definition of ideomotor? I gave you 7 different definitions, and you ignored them, and turned around a day later and asked for the definition of ideomotor. Remember when you asked how many coins Sandy would have to get right? I gave you my answer no less than 5 times, and you continued to ask the same question. To be honest, I don't feel you're worth the time. Over 50 references to studies and scientific articles that say dowsing works no better than guessing have been posted in this forum, and you've ignored every one of them. I have read every link ever posted here and I respond to each one. You have not afforded my links the same respect as I have afforded yours, so if you want them, they're already there, waiting for months now for you to read them.

Gee af1733....I can't seem to find but one link on the why dowsing doesn't work. It clearly states that dowsing was better than guessing but only slightly so the test was inconclusive. Place tell us where the other 50 (fifty) reports can be found....Art

 

[ClonedSIM]

Let's see.... Hmmm, I'm complaining that a 50+ year old man keeps asking Why? like a 4-year-old, no matter how many times you answer his questions. I would say this is a completely founded complaint. Would you disagree?

I do disagree. There is no law, no rule, no dictator,no moderator that compells you, or any one, to answer any question, or make a reply. So you, or I, have no legitimate reason to complain about what others do, or not do. All we can do is ask, and hope there is respect.

You have a point, Dell, but you aren't being the one being questioned and then ignored. It can get rather infuriating at times to answer the same question incessantly. But you're right, answering once then ignoring subsequent questions is probably the right route.

 

[ClonedSIM]

You have a point, Dell

I'll wear a hat, and hope that nobody notices it.

 

[Real de Tayopa Tropical Tramp]

i just a bit of data whiich tends tos how why dowsers do badly in tests a-la the infamous post #6

Math Anxiety Drains Brain Power
Irene Klotz, Discovery News

Digg This! Del.icio.us

Feb. 26, 2007 — Worrying about a math test will do more than set your stomach churning. Researchers say tying up the brain with - stress-related emotions - actually leaves less short-term memory available for computations.

"Worry is more than a common complaint," said University of Nevada psychologist Mark Ashcraft. "It turns out it really does make a difference in how students are doing in math."

The researchers found that highly proficient students are more susceptible to math stress than their lesser-able colleagues who typically turn to short cuts, such as guessing and estimating, to solve difficult math problems. When anxiety blocks working memory, however, the talented students are left with fewer resources to correctly answer questions

Don Jose de La Mancha

 

[ClonedSIM]

Just to bump this topic since it was brought up.

I thought I would take the $1,000,000,00 challenge myself. However after reading the rules, especially the one that said you had to be some kind of a *media celebrity to qualify, it became clear they didn't want just any ordinary person who could dowse. They wanted a high profile person to discredit for their own reasons. Not just someone who could prove dowsing does work!



12. *This offer is not open to any and all persons. Before being considered as an applicant, the person applying must satisfy two conditions: First, he/she must have a “media presence,” which means having been published, written about, or known to the media in regard to his/her claimed abilities or powers. This can be established by producing articles, videos, books, or other published material that specifically addresses the person’s abilities. Second, he/she must produce at least one signed document from an academic who has witnessed the powers or abilities of the person, and will validate that these powers or abilities have been verified.

GG~

All they're trying to do with this disclaimer is to weed out folks that would end up being a drain of time. I'm not saying this applies to you, but they've has some real nuts submit applications, and if they had to go through all the steps with each individual they receive an application from they'd have no time to review all the cases.

That being said, you can't place any blame on the JREF. It's not as though they sprung this rule on you at the last second; they made it known up front what their criteria are.

And as far as the rule that you dislike so much, would it really be that difficult to get an article written up about you in the local paper? A short article would be the "published material" they want and, if you can dowse well enough to claim the million, you could find a whole slew of reports eager to write an article about you.

 

[Goodyguy]

Just to bump this topic since it was brought up.

I thought I would take the $1,000,000,00 challenge myself. However after reading the rules, especially the one that said you had to be some kind of a *media celebrity to qualify, it became clear they didn't want just any ordinary person who could dowse. They wanted a high profile person to discredit for their own reasons. Not just someone who could prove dowsing does work!



12. *This offer is not open to any and all persons. Before being considered as an applicant, the person applying must satisfy two conditions: First, he/she must have a “media presence,” which means having been published, written about, or known to the media in regard to his/her claimed abilities or powers. This can be established by producing articles, videos, books, or other published material that specifically addresses the person’s abilities. Second, he/she must produce at least one signed document from an academic who has witnessed the powers or abilities of the person, and will validate that these powers or abilities have been verified.

GG~

All they're trying to do with this disclaimer is to weed out folks that would end up being a drain of time. I'm not saying this applies to you, but they've has some real nuts submit applications, and if they had to go through all the steps with each individual they receive an application from they'd have no time to review all the cases.

That being said, you can't place any blame on the JREF. It's not as though they sprung this rule on you at the last second; they made it known up front what their criteria are.

And as far as the rule that you dislike so much, would it really be that difficult to get an article written up about you in the local paper? A short article would be the "published material" they want and, if you can dowse well enough to claim the million, you could find a whole slew of reports eager to write an article about you.

Thank you for not lumping me in with the real nuts and time drainers. However I think you could place me as someone who knows for himself that dowsing does work and is not out to try and convince skeptics that it does. I also am not out looking for any publicity or notoriety.

I would just like to have tried it as an experiment to see If I could pass the test, win the prize and be able to donate most of the money to charity and still remain anonymous. However after reading the rules I knew that would be impossible.

GG~

 

[aarthrj3811]

You got it Goodyguy….People don’t understand how easily magnets, potentiometers or a simple fm signal can stop the rods from closing….i would gladly give anyone a demonstration and all they have to do is come by my house. I have made this offer may times and a few people have come by….Art

 

[Goodyguy]

You got it Goodyguy….People don’t understand how easily magnets, potentiometers or a simple fm signal can stop the rods from closing….i would gladly give anyone a demonstration and all they have to do is come by my house. I have made this offer may times and a few people have come by….Art

The only person who has watched me dowse has been my wife and she was quite surprised at first to see me find the things that she had hidden for me to practice on. I was not surprised however because I used to watch my grandfather find water for people to dig a well, so I have never had any doubt that it works. He would just use a forked weeping willow branch from the tree in his yard.

GG~

 

[ClonedSIM]

Just to bump this topic since it was brought up.

I thought I would take the $1,000,000,00 challenge myself. However after reading the rules, especially the one that said you had to be some kind of a *media celebrity to qualify, it became clear they didn't want just any ordinary person who could dowse. They wanted a high profile person to discredit for their own reasons. Not just someone who could prove dowsing does work!



12. *This offer is not open to any and all persons. Before being considered as an applicant, the person applying must satisfy two conditions: First, he/she must have a “media presence,” which means having been published, written about, or known to the media in regard to his/her claimed abilities or powers. This can be established by producing articles, videos, books, or other published material that specifically addresses the person’s abilities. Second, he/she must produce at least one signed document from an academic who has witnessed the powers or abilities of the person, and will validate that these powers or abilities have been verified.

GG~

All they're trying to do with this disclaimer is to weed out folks that would end up being a drain of time. I'm not saying this applies to you, but they've has some real nuts submit applications, and if they had to go through all the steps with each individual they receive an application from they'd have no time to review all the cases.

That being said, you can't place any blame on the JREF. It's not as though they sprung this rule on you at the last second; they made it known up front what their criteria are.

And as far as the rule that you dislike so much, would it really be that difficult to get an article written up about you in the local paper? A short article would be the "published material" they want and, if you can dowse well enough to claim the million, you could find a whole slew of reports eager to write an article about you.

Thank you for not lumping me in with the real nuts and time drainers. However I think you could place me as someone who knows for himself that dowsing does work and is not out to try and convince skeptics that it does. I also am not out looking for any publicity or notoriety.

I would just like to have tried it as an experiment to see If I could pass the test, win the prize and be able to donate most of the money to charity and still remain anonymous. However after reading the rules I knew that would be impossible.

GG~

Seriously, Goodyguy, you could easily apply for this challenge and meet the criteria without much trouble. A newspaper, any local rag, is always looking for good, uplifting stories. It would be a cinch to call the paper, tell them that you would like to be interviewed about your dowsing, that during the interview you would love if a reporter could take the story and run with it, and you could even ask the reporter if they wanted to bring along an academic (doctor, professor, scientist) who would also witness your dowsing. To top it off, tell them that everything you manage to find during the display would be donated to charity after. You could take care of all the steps necessary for you application in a single afternoon.

 

[aarthrj3811]

http://www.skepticalinvestigations.org/controversies/Auerbach_Randi.htm

http://www.skepticalinvestigations.org/exam/Dace_amazing3.htm

http://www.cfpf.org.uk/articles/background/nicholls.html

A Self-Confessed Liar
To be fair, he has never claimed to be anything other than a showman, best expressed by his own remark,
'I am a charlatan, a liar, a thief and a fake altogether.'
However, those he has maligned find it less amusing and persistent rumours of forthcoming libel cases would seem to be entirely justified. Perhaps more importantly still, the mischief caused by his unsupported explanations can be profound; the effect is to cloud the issues as his 'debunkings' become part of the public lore. It is thus particularly unfortunate that so many top-ranking scientists, desperate to ignore evidence to the extent that they will believe almost anyone who opposes the paranormal, still appear to take his views seriously, quoting his research as if it were really credible.

http://www.valentino-salvato.net/astrology/pdf/CSICOP.pdf

http://www.tricksterbook.com/ArticlesOnline/DeceptionBySubjects.html

http://www.tricksterbook.com/ArticlesOnline/Dowsing.htm

http://www.cas.lancs.ac.uk/glossary_v1.1/dexanova.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Statistical_significance

http://skepdic.com/control.html

http://www.vrg.org/journal/vj99jul/99julcritical.htm

http://www.sciencenews.org/articles/20040228/fob2.asp

http://www.sciencenews.org/articles/20040228/mathtrek.asp

http://prola.aps.org/abstract/PRA/v33/i1/p576_1

http://www.sciencenews.org/articles/20030927/mathtrek.asp

Read-em and weep….Art

 

[ClonedSIM]

Now when is Art going to stop dredging up a quote purposefully taken out of context, stop posting cut-and-pasted articles from the internet, and start thinking for himself?

 

[Goodyguy]

Seriously, Goodyguy, you could easily apply for this challenge and meet the criteria without much trouble. A newspaper, any local rag, is always looking for good, uplifting stories. It would be a cinch to call the paper, tell them that you would like to be interviewed about your dowsing, that during the interview you would love if a reporter could take the story and run with it, and you could even ask the reporter if they wanted to bring along an academic (doctor, professor, scientist) who would also witness your dowsing. To top it off, tell them that everything you manage to find during the display would be donated to charity after. You could take care of all the steps necessary for you application in a single afternoon.

Seriously, Af1733,

Which part of this did you not understand?

"I am someone who knows for himself that dowsing does work and is not out to try and convince skeptics that it does. I also am not out looking for any publicity or notoriety."

"I would just like to have tried it as an experiment to see If I could pass the test, win the prize and be able to donate most of the money to charity and still remain anonymous. However after reading the rules I knew that would be impossible."

GG~

 

[ClonedSIM]

Seriously, Goodyguy, you could easily apply for this challenge and meet the criteria without much trouble. A newspaper, any local rag, is always looking for good, uplifting stories. It would be a cinch to call the paper, tell them that you would like to be interviewed about your dowsing, that during the interview you would love if a reporter could take the story and run with it, and you could even ask the reporter if they wanted to bring along an academic (doctor, professor, scientist) who would also witness your dowsing. To top it off, tell them that everything you manage to find during the display would be donated to charity after. You could take care of all the steps necessary for you application in a single afternoon.

Seriously, Af1733,

Which part of this did you not understand?

"I am someone who knows for himself that dowsing does work and is not out to try and convince skeptics that it does. I also am not out looking for any publicity or notoriety."

"I would just like to have tried it as an experiment to see If I could pass the test, win the prize and be able to donate most of the money to charity and still remain anonymous. However after reading the rules I knew that would be impossible."

GG~

Wow, bitter much??

I was trying to be encouraging, but if that's the way you want to play......

This "I am someone who knows for himself that dowsing does work and is not out to try and convince skeptics that it does..." is in direct contradiction to this, "I would just like to have tried it as an experiment to see If I could pass the test, win the prize and be able to donate most of the money to charity and still remain anonymous."
How could you win the million and give it to charity without convincing some skeptics that dowsing works?? You do understand the point of the challenge, right? And anonymity can be included at the outset of the challenge if you so desire.

As for this..."However after reading the rules I knew that would be impossible..." I just told you how you could accomplish that particular aspect of the challenge rules...

It's as if you're using your demand for privacy as an excuse not to even try..... A dowser looking for an excuse not to dowse......??