???????????????

[aarthrj3811]

It seems that some people can only ask question that can not be answered. As a simple Treasure Hunter it seems that I am just a pon in some kind of fairy tale that is being played out. I don’t live in never never land so the facts mean nothing to these people. The true fact is that we can locate objects at depths and distances that don’t fit into their narrow experiences. So that makes us some kind of fruit loop people that they can make fun of for amusement…Art

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

DR.ÖTEK Metal Detector, Waterproof Gold Detector, Pinpoint & Terrain Modes, Professional Metal Detector - Grab it through Amazon!

[Tom_in_CA]

But you must at least admit, that, by the same token that unknown future science may proove how dowsing scientifically works (once the brain and subconscious are understood better), so too may future science proove the impossibility of it - that is, that it is not scientific, and thus spiritual in nature. In other words, each side (the pro's and the con's) can each lean on "future science that may back up their view". So with that, I suggest that each side no longer mention unknown future science, and we stick to currently known science.

Agreed?

Sorry, I am not a trained Scientist, nor can I speak for science. I will continue to speak honestly of what I have witnessed and learned about Dowsing from personal experience. How about you, do you agree to do the same? Dell

Dell and Dowser, I don't get it. Can you see that each side (both the pro's and the con's) can rely on "undiscovered science" to equally defend their position. It is a draw. It does neither side an proof, because .... doh .... it's not discovered yet! Yes, your success (Dell) IS discovered, and so therefore yes, let's talk about successes, vs random chance, etc.... Those type things are presently, here and now, discuss-able.

But to say "future science may proove my point" is an argument from silence. We can only talk about that which is known and available , testable, etc... to us now. Science may as equally proove dowsing is scientific, just as science may equally proove it is un-scientific, at some point in the future. (and in which case, is spiritual in nature).

So, are we agreed to have neither side use this "invisible dog" defense in the future?

Hi Art, we don't ask questions that can't be answered. They can be answered. But unfortunately, they will not bode well for dowsing being scientific or natural. Yes, my narrow experience does not include the supernatural. I suppose if I were to "open my mind to these forces", then sure, I could do some stuff to.

You asked me in a previous reply, "So if it is d/t spiritual means, what's wrong with that?" (or something to that effect). I answered you that I would answer this question, if you would confirm that your question, implies that you now agree with me. You never answered that question. So I too, have not answered yours. Wanna clarify now?

 

[aarthrj3811]

It is a draw. It does neither side an proof, because .... doh .... it's not discovered yet! Yes, your success (Dell) IS discovered, and so therefore yes, let's talk about successes, vs random chance, etc.... Those type things are presently, here and now, discuss-able.

Successes vs random chance…… Random chance odds are just someone’s guess based on some theoretic formula based on coin flips. Your chances of successes with a metal detector are the same as the chances for a set of dowsing rods…

About the other question….I stated that I don’t know. If it is supernatural it makes no difference to me….Art

 

[dowser]

If a Dowser takes a test and fails, it is only he that fails, not Dowsing. There is allways another Dowser standing in line saying he can do it. But if he takes the test and passes, what then?

 

[Tom_in_CA]

"About the other question….I stated that I don’t know. If it is supernatural it makes no difference to me….Art" Ok then, I will not answer your "what's wrong with dabbling into spiritual forces" question. Because I'm too smart for this. I know that you would merely ignore the answer, and go back to saying it's natural, or scientific (discovered or undiscovered), so I will not waste time.

Dowser, who is it that's taken the test "and passed it"? I'd be very interested in hearing some of these incidents, to know for myself, if they can be void of random chance, hunches, etc.... One time I asked this question on another dowsing forum, and was told that dowsers don't pony up their treasure stories, because of IRS issues, potential thieves might come, etc... That seemed odd to me, since metal detectorist post their finds all the time. Even valuable ones. Even caches. Why not dowsers? Why isn't there a "finds" section to this dowsers forum, just as there is a finds section to the detecting forum?

I've got 11 gold coins so far, and untold thousands of silver coins. There, now the IRS can come audit me, thieves can look me up, etc.... Let's hear some dowsing success stories. Not random rocks, a few flakes of gold, etc... but real treaures, old coins, etc... and the nature of the finds. Anyone got any links from the year's past of this or other forums?

 

[Carl-NC]

Every aeronautical engineer will tell you that it is not possible for the bumble bee to fly.

I defy you to produce even a single aeronautical engineer who will seriously make this claim. This is an old myth that gets trotted out when someone wants to claim that science can't explain everything, usually involving some sort of pseudoscience nonsense.

Besides, I can watch bumblebees successfully fly. But every time I watch a dowser, they fail.

- Carl

 

[Tom_in_CA]

Dell, ok, then you agree that it is not the rods, in and of themselves "moving" towards a target, but rather, the operator moving the rods via the ideomotor effect? Good, we're making progress. Then I guess I have to wonder why some persons can sense a coin or treasure great distances away. This "mental instruction" sounds kinda like ESP or remote viewing. I mean, what is the difference between the dowsers ability to know those things, vs ESP or remote viewing? (things that you'd find in the occult isle of the bookstore)

No, I can't be certain of "Gold, currency or any item buried" I only said that, d/t my experience in metal detecting, I can look at a spot, and tell you the most likely spot goodies will be. By goodies, I mean items you can find with a detector. Not necessarily gold, but I sure hope so :P Of course, this assumes someone didn't get there before and work the sn*t out of it. But I've been lucky enough to research out some virgin picnic sites, virgin mission era adobes and indian rancherias. After working a few of those .... I can scan an area, and guess the likely spread of human activity. This is not supernatural. That's exactly my point! It's mere hunches based on experience. No rods necessary.

 

[aarthrj3811]

That's why in a double-blind test of dowsing, the dowser will always fail, since there are no LIKELY spots to key off of, and hence the results will be like random choice guessing.

Where can I find out about where, when , and how these test you keep talking about were preformed and please include the results.

And let's not forget one other facet of LIKELY spots. If a dowser dowses for flour gold in a known gold-producing environment, then digs where the rods indicate --quite naturally they will find flour gold. It can't be helped. However, if the same dowser took part in a "real" test with flour gold hid under one of ten enclosures and the test took part in a huge blacktop parking lot; they will always score no better than random guessing. Why? Because the LIKELY spots are missing.

An old abandon parking lot is my favorite place to look for micro-gold. Easy to locate and no digging. Just a paint brush and a small dust pan. Another place is the rain gutters in front of your house….Art

 

[Tom_in_CA]

Jerry, I do agree with you that most dowsing attempts fail, and yes, are nothing but hunches and random chance. So you don't believe dowsings can be a natural ability, and you don't believe it can be a scientifically explained ability. Fine. But what about the 3rd possible explanation: spiritual ability? Folks might get results in that arena, and then, your assertions of "it never works" are, I guess, wrong.

I am reading about actual results, with some help from google. At least in the area of water dowsing. Results which, unless the accounts are totally made up, do leave the skeptic with something to squirm about :P Is it ok to post a link here folks?

The results which are in the links, are what I would call the spiritual reasons for how dowsing may work. That should not be a problem for the pro-dowsers on this forum, as several of them have not discounted that this may be how it works. If no one has an objection, I'd like to post them, for folk to read and comment. Ok with y'all?

 

[dowser]

Tom, I can scientifically explain the way I dowse. I don't believe the way I dowse is spiritual at all. But map Dowsing may be tied to that. And for the Dowsing test; I know of one test, that wouldn't have to be staged, and the results would make world news. Should I do it? Would everybody quit arguing? That wouldn't be no fun!!!!!!

 

[Real de Tayopa Tropical Tramp]

HIO CARL: just droped by. and how is my cross sabres buddy?

Don Jose de La Mancha

 

[Real de Tayopa Tropical Tramp]

Evening Tom: I am bk. your quote--->

"Do dowsers think they are dabbling into supernatural things? Of course not! They, like the horoscope folk, think there's a rational (known or unknown at present

Take for example the people who run their lives by horoscopes. How harmless right? Do they think that's dabbling into superstition? the spiritual or spooky side of things? Of course not! They probably think there is merit to how the stars line up, etc..... and that it is somehow scientific or natural. "
~~~~~~~~~~~~~

I repeat, yesterdays supernatural is todays natural / normal, as todays supernatural is tomorows natural./ normal.

As for horoscopes, shall we play with that a bit? Frankly, at this state I do not believe that the so called daily horescope that tells me that I will meet a hyper sexed, gorgeous, Rich, blonde that has alwas had a serious yen for me tomorow at 10:am. - but who knows?.

But, there is a serious scientifc basis to Horescopes. Simple Astromony will tell you this.

If you want to conduct a serious trial, I may be able to demonstrate a basis for this. it will reqiure complete honesty from both. Want to try?

Don Jose de LA Mancha

 

[Real de Tayopa Tropical Tramp]

HIO TOM my friend: your quote ---->

"Real De Tayopa certainly believes in things beyond us, even to the point of admitting dabbling into telepathy, for instance"
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Yer cottin pickin right Tom, and semi-sucessfully too.
==========================================================

"They probably think there is merit to how the stars line up, etc..... and that it is somehow scientific or natural."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Hmm somehow the exalted Astronomers think so? Other wise explain the curvature of light in space and planetary alignments, orbits, locating unknown objects in space by orbit irregularities.etc?
=========================================================

"The issue is when dowsers want to say it's explainable in scientific terms, or natural abilities."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

It is, but possibly in terms, fields, etc., undeveloped as yet. How would you explain to a middle ages scientist nano/biological technology in his terms?
=========================================================


" Supernatural though, would be to do things that are not humanly or scientifically possible."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Qualify that, "PRESENTLY not knowingly possible.
==========================================================

" anymore than me someday moving that mountain with my fingertip, with nothing but natural means."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Hmm Tom haven't you ever heard of Coral Castles in Florida? check it out

http://paranormal.about.com/library...iam=momma_100_SKD&terms=Coral+castles+Florida


Don Jose de La Mancha

 

[Yardog]

[size=11pt][size=10pt]This is ridiculous, if you don't believe in Dowsing, get out of here! Sounds like a fellow dowser can't read a post here without having to listen to all these negative non-believing negative people, all you want to do is cause ARGUMENTS. I new in this forum, and is only my second post, and I am SICK of it already. I don't understand how the moderator lets this get out of hand like this. It should be a friendly site with interested people or experienced dowsers share information. WE don't have to PROVE nothing to you non-believers. I know there are Adults in here somewhere . lol I enjoy this site for the great information everyone has to share. That's my story and I'm sticking to it!!!![/size][/size]

 

[Miner49er]

Well said.

 

[Tom_in_CA]

Wow! This thread was brought up from a long time ago

Snow dragon, you say: "Seems like some of you are saying that there will never be any new scientific discoveries ever. Everything that can be explained has been? Just because it's not in the realm of your understanding doesn't mean it doesn't exist"

Let's test that statement, ok? I'll make some absolutely ridiculous assertion, that has no "presently known" basis in fact. Then you ....... according to your own statement ...... may cast no doubts on the validity of my claim. Afterall "future science *MAY* prove it", right? It's simply not "presently known", right?

Ok, here goes: Each day, when you go to work, space aliens come down and abduct all your house plants. They take them up to their flying saucer and conduct experiments, of a sexual nature, on them. You simply don't know it, because they return them to your living room, before you get home from work each day. Any security cameras you have in place aren't capturing the images of these abductions, because the space aliens have used a jamming frequency to make it appear that nothing amiss happened in your house.

Obviously you would say the above statement is absurd. So too would you say that the ability of a peanut butter sandwhich to find treasure is also absurd. Why? How do you KNOW that future science might not prove each of the above to have merit? Someday I will invent a camera that foils the aliens jamming devices, and might just prove to you that your plants are being abducted each day while you're gone. And the sandwich that can find treasure (after I dig enough holes around enough ruins and use my detector to "pinpoint" them) will also some day have scientific proof. How can you doubt me? Do you know everything?

 

[aarthrj3811]

Gee Tom….How many people have to post here telling us Dowsing Works? How many Links do we have to post that show prove that Dowsing works? You will not except real facts so it is your problem...Art

 

[Tom_in_CA]

Hi art, good to see you're still around. I love your passion. It's the samo-samo: you can say it works, but then it devolves into a study/debate of random-chance vs actual results. Ie.: are you guys simply digging around enough obvious places, with enough treasure leads? Like "so & so buried a jar of coins somewhere on this property 80 yrs. ago" Then use a metal detector to "pinpoint" and write off dry-holes to a variety of other metal tin that was nearby, sunspots, spooks, etc... At what point does it become random chance?

Yes, there are compelling stories from the annals of dowsers tales. Some that appear to have no other answer than the success of dowsing. Never-mind that they're not repeatable, or test-able, but some are down-right convincing (if what I read can be believed). To that I might add, that so TOO are various stories of paranormal occurances as well. I mean, if you cruise enough new-agey occult type sites, no doubt you'll find stories of things that could have no natural explanation. Does that make them legit? Should be all start doing that stuff? Does that make those things "scientific"? Or are they occult practices that are out-side science?

Snowdragon, you say: "I believe all things are possible" & "science is like history, there is no cut off point" Good! So I expect that you do believe my peanut butter sandwich finds treasure, right? And your house plants are abducted daily by horny aliens, right? Don't close your mind now! You "never know"

 

[aarthrj3811]

Hi art, good to see you're still around. I love your passion. It's the samo-samo: you can say it works, but then it devolves into a study/debate of random-chance vs actual results. Ie.: are you guys simply digging around enough obvious places, with enough treasure leads? Like "so & so buried a jar of coins somewhere on this property 80 yrs. ago" Then use a metal detector to "pinpoint" and write off dry-holes to a variety of other metal tin that was nearby, sunspots, spooks, etc... At what point does it become random chance?

Yes, there are compelling stories from the annals of dowsers tales. Some that appear to have no other answer than the success of dowsing. Never-mind that they're not repeatable, or test-able, but some are down-right convincing (if what I read can be believed). To that I might add, that so TOO are various stories of paranormal occurances as well. I mean, if you cruise enough new-agey occult type sites, no doubt you'll find stories of things that could have no natural explanation. Does that make them legit? Should be all start doing that stuff? Does that make those things "scientific"? Or are they occult practices that are out-side science?

debate of random-chance vs actual results…..You guys want to debate…Dowsers have actual results. are you guys simply digging around enough obvious places, with enough treasure leads?That’s what treasure hunters do. Then use a metal detector to "pinpoint" and write off dry-holes to a variety of other metal tin that was nearby, sunspots, spooks, etc... At what point does it become random chance?. Dry holes are part of the skeptic view. Never-mind that they're not repeatable, or test-able. Happens every day. I call that repeatable. …Art

 

[ClonedSIM]

Hi art, good to see you're still around. I love your passion. It's the samo-samo: you can say it works, but then it devolves into a study/debate of random-chance vs actual results. Ie.: are you guys simply digging around enough obvious places, with enough treasure leads? Like "so & so buried a jar of coins somewhere on this property 80 yrs. ago" Then use a metal detector to "pinpoint" and write off dry-holes to a variety of other metal tin that was nearby, sunspots, spooks, etc... At what point does it become random chance?

Yes, there are compelling stories from the annals of dowsers tales. Some that appear to have no other answer than the success of dowsing. Never-mind that they're not repeatable, or test-able, but some are down-right convincing (if what I read can be believed). To that I might add, that so TOO are various stories of paranormal occurances as well. I mean, if you cruise enough new-agey occult type sites, no doubt you'll find stories of things that could have no natural explanation. Does that make them legit? Should be all start doing that stuff? Does that make those things "scientific"? Or are they occult practices that are out-side science?

debate of random-chance vs actual results…..You guys want to debate…Dowsers have actual results. are you guys simply digging around enough obvious places, with enough treasure leads?That’s what treasure hunters do. Then use a metal detector to "pinpoint" and write off dry-holes to a variety of other metal tin that was nearby, sunspots, spooks, etc... At what point does it become random chance?. Dry holes are part of the skeptic view. Never-mind that they're not repeatable, or test-able. Happens every day. I call that repeatable. …Art

Hey Tom!
There's really no point in talking numbers or odds with Art, he just doesn't understand them. How he can understand non-existant "waves" and "signals" that emanate from inert metals and go flying therough the air, but not grasp odds, is beyond me. Maybe your peanut-butter sandwich can tell us?