aarthrj3811 said:
Dowsing vs LRL’s
We have been told by our expert non-treasure hunters many fairy tales in the last few months…They have admitted now that we can find treasure with our LRL’s but only because it is just Dowsing..The electronics have nothing to do with what we locate and recover. So as usual I have a few questions.
As a fair Dowser and also a LRL user I will tell you a few facts..I can locate a few flakes of Gold with a set of Dowsing Rods for a distance of @ 70 paces. A Gold Nugget which weights a little less than a ¼ oz for a little less than a ¼ mile. With all 4 of the MFD’s and LRL’s that I own I can find those same targets at a distance of 2 and 3 miles.
Could these experts please explain how this can occur if the electronics have nothing to do with the process ?..Art
First, I haven't noticed any "they," among the skeptics, commenting otherwise than in the negative about dowsing. I appear to be the only skeptic of LRLs, who doesn't do that.
Second, I've never "admitted" that dowsing works. I have merely said that I have do reason to doubt it. And that I have no interest in contesting it. There is a difference.
Since it is my opinion, from all my experiences with things similar to dowsing, that dowsing is purely a psychic phenomenon. And since the existence and abilities of the psyche are outside the realm of formal Science, I don't make any claims, or attempts to prove my opinion, using existing scientific methods or terminology.
My opinion of why, if it is true, that you have greater success with LRLs than with plain dowsing, is because you
believe you will. Since this phenomenon, of
belief affecting success, aligns with most reports of psychic abilities, I think it tends to be convincing corroboration of my opinion. Your milage may vary.
But, any way you look at it, Science is not "fairy tales." It is a subject of standardization of agreed upon terminology and methods. It
is what it
is, by its own definition. You can't change the existing definition without agreement from everyone else. Because "agreement" is contained in the definition of Science.
And, in the end, you can't even prove that the LRL thingies actually work. Not even with only a 70% accuracy rate.
And, as of this point in time,
that's the Science of it.
