Question for dowsers

[ClonedSIM]

Okay, so you don't understand the thread. Why didn't you just say that in the first place? I mean, you're in here voicing your opinion, but you don't even know what is being discussed? I personally don't feel like explaining it again. Carl did great the first time. Pretend it makes no sense to you and if you wish real hard maybe, just maybe, it'll come true someday!

Hey AF…Have you ever considered the fact that it may be you that doesn’t understand what is being disscussed?...Art

No, because I do understand this thread. It's very simple to follow, actually. Why do you try to make things so complex when they don't need to be?

 

[aarthrj3811]

Pretend it makes no sense to you and if you wish real hard maybe, just maybe, it'll come true someday!

No, because I do understand this thread. It's very simple to follow, actually. Why do you try to make things so complex when they don't need to be?

AF….I guess it does make sense to someone that doesn’t know better. I agree that it makes sense to someone like you. To the people that know anything about dowsing the only thing it says is “What a bunch of garbage”…Art

 

[Carl-NC]

Gee Af…I am not misunderstanding anything. What does throwing a tennis ball to locate trash have to do with Dowsing….Art

Quite a lot actually, if you understand objective comparative testing.

 

[ClonedSIM]

Pretend it makes no sense to you and if you wish real hard maybe, just maybe, it'll come true someday!

No, because I do understand this thread. It's very simple to follow, actually. Why do you try to make things so complex when they don't need to be?

AF….I guess it does make sense to someone that doesn’t know better. I agree that it makes sense to someone like you. To the people that know anything about dowsing the only thing it says is “What a bunch of garbage”…Art

Well, the people that know a lot about dowsing do say, "What a bunch of garbage." Unfortunately, folks that claim to know dowsing, blindly say "Dowsing works!"

 

[ClonedSIM]

Also, AF....your calculation of odds is incorrect....perhaps you should consult your mathematician and engineering buddies for a little help on that....

Where?

 

[ClonedSIM]

Also, AF....your calculation of odds is incorrect....perhaps you should consult your mathematician and engineering buddies for a little help on that....

Where?

Your "easy" button was too handy.
Since there is only one object....it can be in any location...in any position (sideways, for example)....therefore making your idea of gridding off the area quite useless.
"Without overlapping"...come on AF....there was only one object....how could it "overlap" anything?

You also said "within 5 inches" and didn't specify the width of the object. Think about it.

Something comes to mind here, and I think you should try it.

Delete all your posts again and disappear for 6 months.

 

[aarthrj3811]

You also said "within 5 inches" and didn't specify the width of the object. Think about it.

Something comes to mind here, and I think you should try it.

Delete all your posts again and disappear for 6 months.

Another great answer AF…Do you have any idea what we are talking about?Art

 

[ClonedSIM]

You also said "within 5 inches" and didn't specify the width of the object. Think about it.

Something comes to mind here, and I think you should try it.

Delete all your posts again and disappear for 6 months.

Another great answer AF…Do you have any idea what we are talking about?Art

Let's see..... You haven't been involved in this conversation up to this point, so I should be asking you this question. Read the posts, Art. Don't try to engage me in a battle of wits.

 

[aarthrj3811]

Let's see..... You haven't been involved in this conversation up to this point, so I should be asking you this question. Read the posts, Art. Don't try to engage me in a battle of wits.

Is there a question there AF…Art

 

[ClonedSIM]

Let's see..... You haven't been involved in this conversation up to this point, so I should be asking you this question. Read the posts, Art. Don't try to engage me in a battle of wits.

Is there a question there AF…Art

Did you see a question mark?

 

[aarthrj3811]

Quite a lot actually, if you understand objective comparative testing.

Fast Facts: Comparative Testing
>> Comparative testing is effective in determining which of several similar products or services are best for their intended function.
>> Based on unique goals and objectives, the test regimen could vary from technical and objective, practical and subjective, or it could be a head-to-head comparison to determine ease of use, durability, or safety.


Comparative Testing
Made popular by consumer magazines and aid organizations seeking to compare prospective products for deployment in developing countries, comparative testing is effective in determining which of several similar products or services are best for their intended function.

 

[ClonedSIM]

Quite a lot actually, if you understand objective comparative testing.

Fast Facts: Comparative Testing
>> Comparative testing is effective in determining which of several similar products or services are best for their intended function.
>> Based on unique goals and objectives, the test regimen could vary from technical and objective, practical and subjective, or it could be a head-to-head comparison to determine ease of use, durability, or safety.


Comparative Testing
Made popular by consumer magazines and aid organizations seeking to compare prospective products for deployment in developing countries, comparative testing is effective in determining which of several similar products or services are best for their intended function.

Just because you know how to cut and paste definitions does not mean you understand the subject, Art.

 

[aarthrj3811]

Quite a lot actually, if you understand objective comparative testing.


Fast Facts: Comparative Testing
>> Comparative testing is effective in determining which of several similar products or services are best for their intended function.
>> Based on unique goals and objectives, the test regimen could vary from technical and objective, practical and subjective, or it could be a head-to-head comparison to determine ease of use, durability, or safety.

Comparative Testing
Made popular by consumer magazines and aid organizations seeking to compare prospective products for deployment in developing countries, comparative testing is effective in determining which of several similar products or services are best for their intended function.
Just because you know how to cut and paste definitions does not mean you understand the subject, Art

Hey AF…The subject is DOWSING….When I see subjects that can in no way be applied to Dowsing I will post about them. If you don’t understand that the days of false information is over that is your problem. Have a good evening and I will see you tomorrow…Art

 

[ClonedSIM]

Quite a lot actually, if you understand objective comparative testing.


Fast Facts: Comparative Testing
>> Comparative testing is effective in determining which of several similar products or services are best for their intended function.
>> Based on unique goals and objectives, the test regimen could vary from technical and objective, practical and subjective, or it could be a head-to-head comparison to determine ease of use, durability, or safety.

Comparative Testing
Made popular by consumer magazines and aid organizations seeking to compare prospective products for deployment in developing countries, comparative testing is effective in determining which of several similar products or services are best for their intended function.
Just because you know how to cut and paste definitions does not mean you understand the subject, Art

Hey AF…The subject is DOWSING….When I see subjects that can in no way be applied to Dowsing I will post about them. If you don’t understand that the days of false information is over that is your problem. Have a good evening and I will see you tomorrow…Art

Someone posted false information? Where? Both you and Tom are speaking about comparative testing, which is a real thing. What's false about it?

Or is it that you just don't like it?

 

[aarthrj3811]

Someone posted false information? Where? Both you and Tom are speaking about comparative testing, which is a real thing. What's false about it?

Or is it that you just don't like it?

Read what comparative testing is. I think it was Carl who brought the subject up so don't twist it around. Now tell me in 50 words or less what thowing a tennis ball or comparative testing has to do with Dowsing?Art

 

[Carl-NC]

Carl is suggesting tennis ball tossing as a physical representation of "Random Chance".
I am merely asking him to prove it is an accurate comparison in a controlled situation...and to provide verifiable odds for "Random Chance".
It's not an unreasonable request.

My particular test was not a controlled test, nor did I claim it to be. It was reasonably random, but not strictly; it was comparative, though not entirely fairly so; and it was objective in a comparative sense, but not absolutely.

In short, it was not a thorough, rigorous test, but rather a quick gut check of whether a set of dowsing results were reasonably impressive, or rather mundane. Even though this experiment didn't rise to the level of a full-blown scientific protocol, it still provides valuable insight as to what is really going on, yet even this very basic level of testing is completely absent with most dowsers.

- Carl

 

[ClonedSIM]

There you go, Art. Read above.

 

[ClonedSIM]

Also, AF....your calculation of odds is incorrect....perhaps you should consult your mathematician and engineering buddies for a little help on that....

Where?

Your "easy" button was too handy.
Since there is only one object....it can be in any location...in any position (sideways, for example)....therefore making your idea of gridding off the area quite useless.
"Without overlapping"...come on AF....there was only one object....how could it "overlap" anything?

You also said "within 5 inches" and didn't specify the width of the object. Think about it.

Something comes to mind here, and I think you should try it.

Delete all your posts again and disappear for 6 months.

You asked for an answer and I gave it to you. You didn't offer specifics so I gave you a general answer. Using the information you provided I gave you an idea of what to expect as far as odds were concerned. If you want a specific answer than ask a specific question.

Here, try this one on for size.

How many coins are in the coffee mug in my desk? The mug is 6 inches tall and the coins are mostly quarters.
.
.
.
.
Care to guess?

Well, since I provided you with only the barest information, any answer you give I can mock as being incorrect.

An intelligent person would have seen that, when posting a question like yours, specifics are the key to getting the answer you seek.

 

[Carl-NC]

You haven't even defined what is "reasonably impressive"....yet you expect the readers to just take your word for it that your "tennis ball gut check" was an accurate depiction of dowsing results.

"Reasonably impressive" was defined by the dowser I was talking to. That is, he got dowsing results he thought were reasonably impressive. I simply tossed out a bunch of tennis balls, and got essentially the same results as his dowsing. No one has to take my word for what any of this means... folks are free to give it a try for themselves, and draw their own conclusions.

I merely want to see if that same tennis ball will find a single hidden object, and if it compares with the results of "Random Chance". That is what you're implying....isn't it? That is how we would determine what "reasonably impressive" is...isn't it?

My experiment did not involve an intentionally hidden object, so I'm not sure what you are trying to ask.

How can we know if Dowsing results are comparable to those of Random Chance...if we don't know what the results of Random Chance would be?

As I said, this was a comparative test, so there was no need to calculate odds. You just compare one result, with another.

- Carl

 

[ClonedSIM]

The coffee cup scenario was simply in place to demonstrate that a seemingly incorrect answer could be given unless enough information provided.

The math I used in your particular scenario was correct. You haven't once shown where it was wrong, only saying it is does not make it so.

If my math was incorrect, show me the correct math. If you can't, then how would you know?

I won't hold my breath. Never once have you brought any information to this forum that could be considered valuable, all you do is ask questions and insult others.

Well, you may have provided some sort of information, but it was probably in all those posts you deleted, so it does us no good at this point.

Why'd you do that, by the way? Why did you delete all your posts and just disappear for all those months?