Is it subjective to put water in a PPM sensor, place the RX coil on an oscilloscope, and see a 2.13kHz precession frequency when pulsing a magnetic field? Is it then subjective to replace the water with alcohol, and then lighter fluid, and still see the exact same 2.13kHz precession frequency? And then calculate the Larmor frequency for hydrogen and find it to be the same 2.13kHz? Is all of this based purely on belief?
And that's the answer to the prior questions. They all precess at 2.13kHz in a 50uT ambient field because it is
only the hydrogen atoms that are precessing. In water, the oxygen atom is almost always O-16 which has no dipole moment, therefore no precession frequency. Same with carbon-14 in alcohol and lighter fluid.
What separates science from pseudoscience is the ability for anyone, anywhere, to replicate the experiment and get the same results. You don't have to
believe what frequency water precesses at, you can actually measure it and see for yourself. That's the funny thing about dowsers... they all have theories that go all over the place, often contradicting one another, and none of the theories can survive even the slightest scientific investigation. Your averaging claim for calculating NMR frequencies is obviously wrong, and dowsing has nothing to do with NMR anyways. But you're in good company around here as it's no more or no less wrong than all the claims
@dowser makes about his frequency nonsense.
The two consistent traits I've noticed with dowsers are the proclivity for making up semi-science-sounding explanations for how their dowsing works (or doesn't work) -- usually mangling real science in the process -- and the utter inability to objectively investigate their own claims. The truth is, most dowsers just don't want to do the latter, preferring instead to simply believe the alternative facts they've created to explain a skill they don't really have.