My today's dowsing finds.

[Tom_in_CA]

My father in law uses dowsing rods to find wells. it works....

Bummer that this is treasure net. Not water net.

.... I had a friend hide a Morgan Silver Dollar in my yard and I looked for it with dowsing rods. I found it....

Yes. And so too do the claims continually come in, of persons saying they can find stuff. Either staged, or wild. However, when it comes time to test those persons in double blind fool-proof (to ensure no biases, hints, and/or more plausible explanations), then BAMMO, it never boils down to anything more than random chance. And trust me: The persons they tested were the supposed tops-of-the-field.

But the response lines that will follow: Those were un-fair rigged tests. Right ? Strangely, the testers go to EXTREME MEASURES to stop either side from making this claim as a convenient excuse for failure. By making mutually agreed upon parameters before hand. But to no avail, the loosing side of the wagers (the dowsers) will claim sun-spots, or magnets in the testers pockets, or rigged tests, or refuse to be tested all together, etc....

If you are right, and you are the exception to this historical rule, then by all means you need to participate in a test with these skeptics, and blow them out of the water. If you can point me to any incident where this has been done, I would be more than happy to look at it. But alas, all the studies do NOT support the workability of it. Other than "personal testimonials" of the dowsers themselves.

And unfortunately, "personal testimony" is not the gauge of truth. Otherwise, we have some people's "personal testimony" that they are Napolean. Or they saw Elvis, etc.....

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

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

[aarthrj3811]

Yes. And so too do the claims continually come in, of persons saying they can find stuff. Either staged, or wild. However, when it comes time to test those persons in double blind fool-proof (to ensure no biases, hints, and/or more plausible explanations), then BAMMO, it never boils down to anything more than random chance. And trust me: The persons they tested were the supposed tops-of-the-field. But I know the response lines that will follow: Those were un-fair rigged tests. Right ? Strangely, the testers go to EXTREME MEASURES to stop either side from making this claim as a convenient excuse for failure. By making mutually agreed upon parameters before hand. But to no avail, the loosing side of the wagers (the dowsers) will claim sun-spots, or magnets in the testers pockets, or rigged tests, or refuse to be tested all together, etc....

Gee. Where have I heard that before. Try reading the Betz Report a 10 year study of water dowsing or some of the real reports

 

[Jeff H]

Stories are fun to read, pictures of finds are nice to look at....but has dowsing ever been proven to work in any credible scientific study?

 

[fmrUSMC_0844]

Bummer that this is treasure net. Not water net.




Yes. And so too do the claims continually come in, of persons saying they can find stuff. Either staged, or wild. However, when it comes time to test those persons in double blind fool-proof (to ensure no biases, hints, and/or more plausible explanations), then BAMMO, it never boils down to anything more than random chance. And trust me: The persons they tested were the supposed tops-of-the-field.

But the response lines that will follow: Those were un-fair rigged tests. Right ? Strangely, the testers go to EXTREME MEASURES to stop either side from making this claim as a convenient excuse for failure. By making mutually agreed upon parameters before hand. But to no avail, the loosing side of the wagers (the dowsers) will claim sun-spots, or magnets in the testers pockets, or rigged tests, or refuse to be tested all together, etc....

If you are right, and you are the exception to this historical rule, then by all means you need to participate in a test with these skeptics, and blow them out of the water. If you can point me to any incident where this has been done, I would be more than happy to look at it. But alas, all the studies do NOT support the workability of it. Other than "personal testimonials" of the dowsers themselves.

And unfortunately, "personal testimony" is not the gauge of truth. Otherwise, we have some people's "personal testimony" that they are Napolean. Or they saw Elvis, etc.....

Thanks for reminding me that this is not water net. I must have been confused on what website I was on. But i believe it applies to water and treasure.

Its funny because I was a skeptic at one time. Now Im not. There are a lot of things in this world that science cant explain. Try opening your mind to other peoples way of finding treasure. Just because you dont think it works doesnt mean it doesnt work.

You are right personal testimony is not the gauge of truth. Neither is a website that people can post what they find. I wouldnt consider that a gauge of truth either.

Why does it bother you so bad that someone believes dowsing works?

 

[tinpan]

Hi In 1960 one Americian generated 1.4 pounds of trash a day and today the generated trash has risen to 4.6 pounds per day . Of total only 55% ends up inland fill. Dig a random hole and you found something . Only requirement a Shovel Tp

 

[Tom_in_CA]

aarthrj3811, the "ideomotor effect is for PEOPLE. Not inanimate objects like rods. So if you're agreeing dowsing is the result of the ideomotor effect, the presto, the rods aren't doing anything. It's just the people relying on gut intuition of "the most likely places". No different than any other skilled person. Like a fishermen who looks at a trout stream and .... just by subconscious knowledge/selection/training, knows the best place to cast his line.

How then is the "rod" a "tool" then ? You and I in our TH'ing , and the trout fisherman, can simply go out there and accomplish the same thing by gut intuition. There's no "attraction" and "nothing physical or scientific" about rods then. Right ? Then we're in agreement ! Woohoo ! And you just distanced yourself from the vast majority of other dowsers who ROUTINELY say there's some sort of signal, antenna, attraction, scientific explanation (as yet un-known), etc....

.....How can you call dowsing an un-discovered science?....

I don't call it un-discovered science. I was quoting the dowsers themselves that routinely say this. Most of them names very familiar to you as fellow proponents of dowsing. So .... am I to assume then that you are not of this persuasion then, right ? Great. Then we're in agreement that this is a silly line (that can be used to bolster any claim, no matter how absurd). The trouble is though, you've just distanced yourself from most of your peers.

....Have there been dowsers for over 800 years? ... .

Sure. Does the period of time / age of beliefs, make them more credible ? Ie.: the longer some notion has been around, therefore the more-true it is ? Ironically, a well-parroted line comes to mind when I thought of your "800 year" quote above. Tell me who said this: "Science once thought (for 800 yrs. perhaps) that the earth was flat". Naturally, that notion was proved wrong. So you see then Art, the age of a belief is not the measure of how true it is. People can be gravely mistaken with superstitious false notions for millennium.

 

[aarthrj3811]

Stories are fun to read, pictures of finds are nice to look at....but has dowsing ever been proven to work in any credible scientific study?

http://www.water-diviner.com/articles3.htm

 

[Tom_in_CA]

....Why does it bother you so bad that someone believes dowsing works?

The better word is "fascinated" not "bothered". And to answer your question, here's the answer:

Because in 1994, I got ready for a 3 week cache hunting trip to the Sierra Madres in Mexico. Where my guide/host had handfuls of stories from his home countries of treasures we'd be looking for. I would provide him all the meta detecting expertise, and he would be my guide, translator, etc... From him and his extended family, (having come from little villages that date to the time of the conquistadors , etc...) there were several stories we were going to pursue.

In the weeks preceding our trip, while getting all our gear together (with a mutual financial budget), he came to me with a treasure magazine, and ... in his best english, showed me an advertisment of a rod that he suggested we needed to buy. He was quite impressed with the claims of "10 ft. deep" and "1 mile away", etc.... And the catchy pictures showing guys posed next to jars of coins (can't argue with that, eh?) . And I was HARD-PRESSED to answer why we shouldn't take $500 (or whatever it was) of our common pool of money and buy the durned things.

And I had to honestly admit, at that time, that I couldn't put my finger on a reason. Other than just rolled eyes and calling it hocus pocus or occult. But he'd point me them to various ones that had electronic controls on them, to satisfy me that they were legitimate electronic devices. I HAD NO ANSWER FOR HIM, other than a gut feeling that they were snake oil.

So I delved into a long study on the topic. And now, over 20 yrs. later, I am still fascinated about how people can believe in them, and what they say/reply in the face of point blank refuations and counter explanations. Sure, believe what you want though. I'm totally open to be persuaded to believe. Just have to see the proof.

 

[AlienLifeForm]

 

[aarthrj3811]

There is 24,000 posts on the Dowsing forum. All the information and proof are there. You can read all you want

 

[Tom_in_CA]

http://www.water-diviner.com/articles3.htm

Your link appears to be a dead link. Want to try again ? But it was probably one purporting to show positive test results for water dowsers ? Would love to read it. In the meantime, consider the following links which show nothing more than random chance results:

Start watching at 12:40:




And a quote from wikipedia on dowsing:

"A 1948 study tested 58 dowsers' ability to detect water. None of them was more reliable than chance.[33] A 1979 review examined many controlled studies of dowsing for water, and found that none of them showed better than chance results.[2] A 2006 study of grave dowsing in Iowa reviewed 14 published studies and determined that none of them correctly predicted the location of human burials, and simple scientific experiments demonstrated that the fundamental principles commonly used to explain grave dowsing were incorrect.[34]"

 

[Tom_in_CA]

There is 24,000 posts on the Dowsing forum. All the information and proof are there. You can read all you want

But you know the rules Art: That forum is only for believers. WHICH IS FINE. Nothing wrong with a forum where opposing views are not invited (in the interest of peace).

So anyone that goes there will not be reading about more plausible explanations, tough questions with counter data, etc.... For any skeptic to do so ... before long, he'd be asked to take it to another forum heading.

 

[fmrUSMC_0844]

The better word is "fascinated" not "bothered". And to answer your question, here's the answer:

Because in 1994, I got ready for a 3 week cache hunting trip to the Sierra Madres in Mexico. Where my guide/host had handfuls of stories from his home countries of treasures we'd be looking for. I would provide him all the meta detecting expertise, and he would be my guide, translator, etc... From him and his extended family, (having come from little villages that date to the time of the conquistadors , etc...) there were several stories we were going to pursue.

In the weeks preceding our trip, while getting all our gear together (with a mutual financial budget), he came to me with a treasure magazine, and ... in his best english, showed me an advertisment of a rod that he suggested we needed to buy. He was quite impressed with the claims of "10 ft. deep" and "1 mile away", etc.... And the catchy pictures showing guys posed next to jars of coins (can't argue with that, eh?) . And I was HARD-PRESSED to answer why we shouldn't take $500 (or whatever it was) of our common pool of money and buy the durned things.

And I had to honestly admit, at that time, that I couldn't put my finger on a reason. Other than just rolled eyes and calling it hocus pocus or occult. But he'd point me them to various ones that had electronic controls on them, to satisfy me that they were legitimate electronic devices. I HAD NO ANSWER FOR HIM, other than a gut feeling that they were snake oil.

So I delved into a long study on the topic. And now, over 20 yrs. later, I am still fascinated about how people can believe in them, and what they say/reply in the face of point blank refuations and counter explanations. Sure, believe what you want though. I'm totally open to be persuaded to believe. Just have to see the proof.

Fair enough. I believe in it. From how I read your posts it read to me that you are calling them liars. Maybe I am just reading them wrong.

 

[aarthrj3811]

Try this one...Groundwater.Com Water Dowsing

 

[FFFPatriot]

My dowsing rod has worked for many years. It has always led me to treasures of fat and ugly gals.

 

[Tom_in_CA]

Try this one...Groundwater.Com Water Dowsing

Art, I am so sorry. You're making this much too easy. Your "professor Betz" as it pertains to your link, is talked about here:

Testing Dowsing: The Failure of the Munich Experiments - CSI

tsk tsk

 

[CRUSADER]

Hi boogeyman. Well let's just cut to the chase: There's not only those stories (which, yes I've heard of), but also scores of other "testimonials" of guys that claim to have found stuff. I have no doubt. And people that claim to have talked to the dead via seances. And testimonies in history of how natives could control the weather by throwing virgins into volcanoes. But none of these "testimonies" takes into account the double-blind test of "more plausible explanations".



Not sure how you can say that. It is the logical extension test of the dowsers explanation of "signals" and "attraction". It actually GRANTS YOU that such a "signal" or "attraction" exists. But points out that to whatever extent this could be, it is unfortunately acted upon by a great force/attraction: Gravity. Those rods will always respond to gravity. Not to the coin or jar of coins a foot-ball field (or even 1 ft.) away.

Been reading with some interest.
To me this seems very easy to prove dowsing works. If the rods always remain tilted up above the horizontal axis, & still give 'a response' then wouldn't you have to say it worked? (assuming it beats the chance test as well.)

 

[Jeff H]

There is 24,000 posts on the Dowsing forum. All the information and proof are there. You can read all you want

You can go to the Big Foot forums too and read the thousands of posts from the "true believers". No real proof of course.

 

[detectorben]

I thought this thread was an April fool's joke until I saw it was not started today. Lol it was a fun read I will give it that.

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk

 

[aarthrj3811]

Sorry Tom. I would rather believe an article from a Scientific study than an article written by a Skeptic.
I would assume that everyone in the world knew that water dowsing works but I guess some people just do not know...Art