Dowsing sceptics!

[aarthrj3811]

Your question is like asking, "was an experiment performed?" This question is really meaningless unless you also ask "what were the results of the experiments?" So, saying "Tell me yes or no -- do you believe experiments were performed" is a semantically null question. The answer is not a yes/no situation, as it ignores the real point of the question, examining the results of said experiments. To put it more simply, it obfuscates the issue.

And just where can the true results of the experiments be found....Don't tell it is the NEW YORK Times...Art

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

Minelab PRO-FIND 35 Waterproof Pinpointer Metal Detector for Experts with Tone ID & Adjustable Sensitivity - Grab it through Amazon!

[ClonedSIM]

Your question is like asking, "was an experiment performed?" This question is really meaningless unless you also ask "what were the results of the experiments?" So, saying "Tell me yes or no -- do you believe experiments were performed" is a semantically null question. The answer is not a yes/no situation, as it ignores the real point of the question, examining the results of said experiments. To put it more simply, it obfuscates the issue.

And just where can the true results of the experiments be found....Don't tell it is the NEW YORK Times...Art

Ummm....Art? You do realize that Trips post was only hypothetical, right? He wasn't talking about an actual experiment. He was simply pointing out the error in asking for only a yes/no response regarding certain questions.

 

[aarthrj3811]

I live in the real world...Art

 

[ClonedSIM]

I live in the real world...Art

There's still much debate about that, Art....

 

[aarthrj3811]

I think by "proof," we mean better-than-chance. For example, finding a coin under ten coffee mugs by chance or guessing would lead to approximately a 10% success rate. I believe a dowser, comfortable with their skills, should be able to rate much higher, perhaps 60-70% success.

In the real world finding 2 coins would beat your 10% sucess rate. Why then would a Dowser have to get 60-70% to beat the odds of chance or guessing? I think you say that because no one has a clue as to what the odds of chance guessing is for Dowsing. Testing 1000 non-dowsers should give you some facts to base your odds on. Why don't you talk to Randi...Since he wants to give $1000000 away, testing the 1000 non-dowsers would be a good way to spend it and get some facts that mean something.

Then you would have real "proof" of chance or guessing instead of someones idea of what it may be....Art

 

[ClonedSIM]

Well said, SWR!

 

[aarthrj3811]

de-de-de-do-de-de-de-do

My exact thoughts...Art

 

[ClonedSIM]

de-de-de-do-de-de-de-do

My exact thoughts...Art

Hmmmm. Nope, that was SWR's thought.

 

[Gluk]

But art never posted "de-de-de-do-de-de-de-do" did he?
I don't thing he stole any catch phrase. He only thought your catch phrase.

I'll show you stealing a catch phrase... :::insert Twilight Zone theme here:::

de-de-de-do-de-de-de-do

 

[musstag]

One of you two need to quit posting... I can't take it anymore!

 

[Captain Trips]

I live in the real world...Art

Um...so do I. That's why I pointed out the fallacy of the "answer yes or no" question when the question itself is semantically null.

Oh, and the real world doesn't accept things blindly, but asks for proof. And the real world doesn't respond positively to people who ask, "show me you can do what you claim" with "I don't need to show you anything. Go away. <twilight zone theme>..."