My Dowsing Test

So let's say you also read on that site that "all demonstrations we tried were perfect," whereas you witnessed something that was entirely contrary to this claim. Would you accept that statement over what you saw with your own eyes?

Well Carl...I should not answer this post but I will..I did not see Bob do a perfect demonstration. Did I tell you that the Skeptics pulled out of the parking lot ahead of me....The people that told me that Bob then did the demonstration I trust to be honest with me. He found all the objects that you had agreed to. ACCURACY & DISCRIMINATION: A well-known skeptic will then place a line of 10 paper plates either 100’ or 150’ away from the xxxx. Each plate will be spaced 4’ to 6’ from the next plate in the line up.
a) The ten minerals in the above test, chosen by xxxxxxx, developer of the xxxxxxx , will be of laboratory grade from those listed here.
Gallium 10g. 99.999% pure; Neodymium 25g. 99.9% pure;
Nickel 5g. 99.998% pure; Europium 1g. 99.9% pure;
Germanium 10g. 99.999% pure; Indium 5g. 99.999% pure;
Hafnium 2g. 99.8% pure; Tantalum 10g. 99.95% pure;
Rhenium 0.5g. 99.9% pure; Samarium 1g. 99.9% pure;
Tellurium 10g. 99.9985% pure; Osmium lg. 99.95% pure;
Rhodium 1g. 99.9% pure; Chromium 25g. 99.6% pure;
Gold, Nitrates, Emeralds

You see Carl...It is a matter of who you trust and who you do not....If you had been there you could have wittnesed this...Art
 

SWR...This was demonstration where Carl and Bob Yokum had agreed on a protocol. Bob went ahead with the demonsration as he had rented the park and invited people to the event...Art
 

aarthrj3811 said:
Well Carl...I should not answer this post but I will..I did not see Bob do a perfect demonstration.

Bob claimed he was "perfect" in "all demonstrations." Did you, or did you not, witness demonstrations in which he failed?

- Carl
 

Hey Carl....It seems that you and Randi have a lot of trouble getting people to sign contracts or returning them in time...that seems to be the your main excuse. Now if you would have been at the demonstration you would have saw the unit find a flake of gold beween two 25 lb bags of lead shot. You would have saw it locate a few different metals. You would have saw it track my wife as she walked around the park with a piece of gold in her hand. If you would have been there those demonstrations were enough to prove that your report on this unit is False and has no true facts in it. What is that 6 or 7 units you are wrong about....SWR.....Your little teaser at the end of posts is based on Carls reports. Most of Carls reports are a bunch of false facts and are just what he imagines people want to hear.....Art
 

SWR said:
aarthrj3811 said:
Hey Carl....It seems that you and Randi have a lot of trouble getting people to sign contracts or returning them in time...that seems to be the your main excuse. Now if you would have been at the demonstration you would have saw the unit find a flake of gold beween two 25 lb bags of lead shot. You would have saw it locate a few different metals. You would have saw it track my wife as she walked around the park with a piece of gold in her hand. If you would have been there those demonstrations were enough to prove that your report on this unit is False and has no true facts in it. What is that 6 or 7 units you are wrong about....SWR.....Your little teaser at the end of posts is based on Carls reports. Most of Carls reports are a bunch of false facts and are just what he imagines people want to hear.....Art

Hey Art...so all of the targets were in plain sight. Very impressive demonstration.

You can't be serious. The targets were in plain sight? ???

Jean
 

aarthrj3811 said:
Now if you would have been at the demonstration you would have saw the unit find a flake of gold beween two 25 lb bags of lead shot. You would have saw it locate a few different metals. You would have saw it track my wife as she walked around the park with a piece of gold in her hand.

Please, Art, don't try to insult me by claiming that Bob's devices Really Worked because he could "locate" targets that were in plain view. Those kinds of demonstrations are well south of worthless, and should not be taken seriously by anyone. They are good for sales pitches, and fooling gullible people, but not much else.

Art, please respond as to whether you understand what I am saying.

When I asked if you witnessed any demonstrations in which Bob failed, I wanted to see if you would admit to seeing the elephant that is plainly standing in front of you. Bob claimed he was "perfect" in "all demonstrations." Clearly, you witnessed demonstrations in which he failed, making his claim of perfection totally false. If you weren't completely in denial about what happened in Nevada, you would understand why I require a signed contract.

Art, please respond as to whether you understand what I am saying.

Most of Carls reports are a bunch of false facts and are just what he imagines people want to hear.

Art, I'll ask you to do the same thing I asked of Dell... please state exactly what "false facts" you have found in my reports. Be specific. If you cain't do it, just say, "I cain't do it."

- Carl
 

Please, Art, don't try to insult me by claiming that Bob's devices Really Worked because he could "locate" targets that were in plain view. Those kinds of demonstrations are well south of worthless, and should not be taken seriously by anyone. They are good for sales pitches, and fooling gullible people, but not much else.
SWR posted that fact 3 times so it must be true

When I asked if you witnessed any demonstrations in which Bob failed, I wanted to see if you would admit to seeing the elephant that is plainly standing in front of you. Bob claimed he was "perfect" in "all demonstrations." Clearly, you witnessed demonstrations in which he failed, making his claim of perfection totally false. If you weren't completely in denial about what happened in Nevada, you would understand why I require a signed contract.
I did not tell you Bob was perfect in his test. I can see no reason to have a signed contract to attend a demonstration that is for fun. All I hear is a bunch of excuses as to why you did not attend.
Art, I'll ask you to do the same thing I asked of Dell... please state exactly what "false facts" you have found in my reports.
http://geotech.thunting.com/cgi-bin/pages/common/index.pl?page=main&file=main.dat
Under First Look you say that it comes with a set of Dowsing Rods...They are just plain Brass Rods.

The second thing is that you claim the range to be under 100 feet as test ...Since you claim that these signals can not be measured how was this done.

You claim that in a basic test it could not detect 1 0z of gold. If you don't turn the unit on or you do not use the rods to check the signal you are right. If you turn the unit on, and set it up to locate gold and check the signal with the brass rods it will find gold.

Conclusion
The whole concept of using a simple low-frequency signal generator to resonate distant buried objects is total folly. Therfore, the XXXXXX is an ordinary dowsing device, and even dowsing has been demonstrated repeatedly to be a self-delusion.
While the signal generator is of superb construction, it performs absolutely no useful function in the supposed locating of buried objects. The dowsing rods behave exactly the same, with or without the signal generator. All claims made of the XXXXXXXx pertaining to the ability to locate distant buried objects, are false.

As can be clearly noted, The whole report is based on your thories of Dowsing. Not on any real testing results....Art
 

Therfore, the XXXXXX is an ordinary dowsing device, and even dowsing has been demonstrated repeatedly to be a self-delusion.

Please tell us where and how these demonstrations were repeatedly done that proved Dowsing was self-delusion

The dowsing rods behave exactly the same, with or without the signal generator.

You admit that you can not Dowse....So how can you know that the RODS behave the same

All claims made of the XXXXXXXx pertaining to the ability to locate distant buried objects, are false.

If you don't know how to use the RODS or set the unit up correctly how can you made this statement....

I am very familiar with dowsing, dowsing claims, and dowsing alibis.
I am very familiar with dowsing devices, including LLADs.
I am very familiar with traditional geophysical devices, and how those devices might be used in an attempt to cheat.
I know that the most likely causes of dowsing successes are overt observation, intuition, and luck, and I know how to eliminate or account for them in a test.
I know how to design tests that utilyze good scientific methods, namely randomization and double-blind protocol.
I know how to calculate probabilities, and how they play into expected results.
I know how to conduct tests to prevent intentional or unintentional information leakage
.

From these statements can anyone tell just who has SELF-DELUSIONS???....Art
 

aarthrj3811 said:
I am very familiar with dowsing, dowsing claims, and dowsing alibis.
I am very familiar with dowsing devices, including LLADs.
I am very familiar with traditional geophysical devices, and how those devices might be used in an attempt to cheat.
I know that the most likely causes of dowsing successes are overt observation, intuition, and luck, and I know how to eliminate or account for them in a test.
I know how to design tests that utilyze good scientific methods, namely randomization and double-blind protocol.
I know how to calculate probabilities, and how they play into expected results.
I know how to conduct tests to prevent intentional or unintentional information leakage
.

From these statements can anyone tell just who has SELF-DELUSIONS???....Art
Hey Art. None of the statements Carl made even border on the outlandish claims of dowsers. Do you even know what self-delusion means?
 

=SWR link. Now if you would have been at the demonstration you would have saw the unit find a flake of gold between two 25 lb bags of lead shot.
\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\
Hey Art...so all of the targets were in plain sight.
***********
Not even you are that naive swr mi buddy, Perhaps xu could have seen it, in which case he could become a millionaire overnight by taking randi's test.

Tropical Tramp
 

aarthrj3811 said:
I did not tell you Bob was perfect in his test.

Yes, I know. You said you witnessed failures. Bob said he was perfect every single time. One of you is not telling the truth.

Please respond as to whether you understand what I am saying.

I can see no reason to have a signed contract to attend a demonstration that is for fun.

Were it just "for fun," I would agree. But it was not "for fun," it was a $25,000 challenge that Bob accepted.

Please respond as to whether you understand what I am saying.

Under First Look you say that it comes with a set of Dowsing Rods...They are just plain Brass Rods.

OK... are you saying that is a false statement?

The second thing is that you claim the range to be under 100 feet as test ...Since you claim that these signals can not be measured how was this done.

I haven't claimed that a signal cannot propagate through the ground, since I know that it can, and I know that it can be detected with proper equipment. I've done this out to about 60 feet or so, with more powerful signal generators, and have even posted that experiment on these forums. So the 100-foot number is being very, very, very generous. It's probably more like a foot or two for this particular product. What does NOT happen is a so-called "signal line," and I will pay dearly for someone to prove me wrong on this.

You claim that in a basic test it could not detect 1 0z of gold. If you don't turn the unit on or you do not use the rods to check the signal you are right. If you turn the unit on, and set it up to locate gold and check the signal with the brass rods it will find gold.

I set the unit up and used it as instructed. It does not detect gold. I will pay dearly for someone to prove me wrong on this.

As can be clearly noted, The whole report is based on your thories of Dowsing. Not on any real testing results.

Yes, I do actually test the devices. My report is based on results and reality. I will pay dearly for someone to prove me wrong on this.

Please tell us where and how these demonstrations were repeatedly done that proved Dowsing was self-delusion

We've been discussing this very topic for quite some time right here on these forums. Would you like to deny that these discussions have taken place?

You admit that you can not Dowse....So how can you know that the RODS behave the same

Of course I can dowse! It's quite easy, just not very useful. The rods behave exactly the same whether or not the generator is turned on. This might not be true if someone has the mindset that there should be a difference, and therefore they produce that difference subconsciously. But in randomized blind testing (yes, I have done this) dowsers cannot tell whether the device is powered on, or not. I will pay dearly for someone to prove me wrong on this.

If you don't know how to use the RODS or set the unit up correctly how can you made this statement....

But I do. I will pay dearly for someone to prove me wrong on this.

Thanks for at least giving it a try, Art. That's certainly more than Dell did. But all your complaints are based on your opinion that I'm wrong. You failed to present any facts.

As I said several times, I am open to being proved wrong on any part of the report, and Bob certainly has the opportunity to do just that by following through with the challenge. But he refuses to do so.

- Carl
 

[=, Realde. Art defined what he said, and there was no typo involved.
**************
Agreed now,. You attempted to cast some sort of dispersion on me for a statement I made when in fact my question was valid and had been expounded on long before you even attempted to make light of it.
*************

DUH, obviously you were being just courteous by mentioning it? That would be completely out of line based upon all of your past posts to him Your MO hasn't changed.

Quite looking for spelling and similar tech. to pounce upon. You are better than that.

Tropical Tramp
 

RealdeTayopa said:
[=, Realde. Art defined what he said, and there was no typo involved.
**************
Agreed now,. You attempted to cast some sort of dispersion on me for a statement I made when in fact my question was valid and had been expounded on long before you even attempted to make light of it.
*************

DUH, obviously you were being just courteous by mentioning it? That would be completely out of line based upon all of your past posts to him Your MO hasn't changed.

Quite looking for spelling and similar tech. to pounce upon. You are better than that.

Tropical Tramp
And again you make too many assumptions. I asked him how he finds gold 75 feet down in a 25-foot river. It didn't make sense to me and it may have been a typo, but nowhere did I attack his math or composition skills. I just asked a clarifying question and got a clarifying answer.
 

author=Carl-NC link=topic=28701.msg464386#msg464386 date=1168367577]
[quote authorpeople whose names you can't even spell. Doppler? Getz? At least get the easy stuff right.- Carl
**********
Never heard of Doppler and his many experiments carl? hmm

Tropical Tramp
 

Carl-NC said:
I wasn't out looking for a straw. Someone else was, and found out the straw he was grasping for was rooted in his own lack of knowledge.

I find it amusing that you guys continuously promote information from people whose names you can't even spell. Doppler? Getz? At least get the easy stuff right.

- Carl
Here's the whole quote, Realde. As you can see, Carl was referring to the fact that some posters were misspelling the names of the scientists who executed the experiments they were posting.
 

[=SWR Hey Art...is that the same test you were talking about where all the targets were in plain sight?

**************
Yep, just as a gold nugget is found in almost any western mineralized field. after all the field is in plain sight, no"?

Tropical Tramp
 

Please respond as to whether you understand what I am saying.

Your source and mine have different opinions of the event

Please respond as to whether you understand what I am saying.

Your source and mine have different opinions of the event

OK... are you saying that is a false statement?

I am saying that everything that looks like a L-Rod is not a Dowsing Rod...To become a Dowsing Rod it has to be used for that perpose.

I haven't claimed that a signal cannot propagate through the ground, since I know that it can, and I know that it can be detected with proper equipment.

What kind of proper equipment did you use? What kind of equipment did you use to check for a signal line?
I set the unit up and used it as instructed. It does not detect gold

Did you walk the 50 foot circle around the antenna wire with a set of L-Rods?

Yes, I do actually test the devices. My report is based on results and reality.

I would have liked that answer a lot better if you would have said facts instead of reality.

We've been discussing this very topic for quite some time right here on these forums. Would you like to deny that these discussions have taken place?

Yes we have...It has been one sided with NO FACTS from you.

Of course I can dowse! It's quite easy, just not very useful. The rods behave exactly the same whether or not the generator is turned on. This might not be true if someone has the mindset that there should be a difference, and therefore they produce that difference subconsciously. But in randomized blind testing (yes, I have done this) dowsers cannot tell whether the device is powered on, or not.

That is very strange. When using L-Rods with these units they do not respond as they do when Dowsing? Two types of signals going different directions. Very strange indeed.
You mention that the unit had a very weak signal...I find that it has the strongest signal of any unit I have used. I find that unlike the others it stops at the object. I now live 4.36 miles from his Lab. When I am testing for gold and silver and he is also testing his signal interfears with my work....Very strange indeed.
 

aarthrj3811 said:
Your source and mine have different opinions of the event

My source is Bob Yocum, who said he was perfect every single time. One of you is not telling the truth.

- Carl
 

Top Member Reactions

Users who are viewing this thread

Latest Discussions

Back
Top Bottom