Secrecy

[WEF_Insect_Burger]

Anyone who can take a couple of bent rods, walk around and have them cross on anything, is also capable of doing the same thing on a map. Otherwise you have to believe there is some kind of "magnetism" or other physical reaction between the rods and underground anomaly taking place. Clearly there isn't.

It's literally all happening in the central nervous system. Einstein was a smart mf.

“I know very well that many scientists consider dowsing as they do astrology, as a type of ancient superstition. According to my conviction this is, however, unjustified. The dowsing rod is a simple instrument which shows the uncanny reaction of the human nervous system to certain factors which are unknown to us at this time.” -Einstein

Those other factors he was talking about, which were unknown to us at that time:

QUANTUM PHYSICS

​

Dowsing is a simple way to experiment with Torsion fields, another way would be to spend 10 minutes watching the old CIA videos on YouTube about Spoon bending, large audiences and even kids bent spoons with their minds in the 1980s on video as CIA experiments in the open.. And now any person can try this with family members as fun activity..

When you are manipulating pieces of metal with your mind, like the videos, will you know you are 100% ready for the next level.

Telekinesis/Dowsing/Remote Viewing is very easy, kids can do it very easily, any person with a pure open mind will master it quickly, if you cant get results in 5-10 minutes, park the experiments, and wait for a day or time when you get that feeling you are ready, the CIA protocols explained on YouTube is 100% spot on.

Accessing accurate information from the "universal mind" or "universe" is the first thoughts humans get when focusing on something in dowsing/RV... By default your imagination will kick in and try to mislead you.. I suspect this is what skews treasure hunter's dowsing abilities eventually, there after they lose their minds.. they will imagine all kinds of crap, constantly fighting on forums with skeptics, trying to prove their abilities.

I see now the forum has wonderful ignore functionality, it made the mind vomit of the skeptical posters or broken dowsers just disappear

 

[Carl-NC]

It's literally all happening in the central nervous system. Einstein was a smart mf.

“I know very well that many scientists consider dowsing as they do astrology, as a type of ancient superstition. According to my conviction this is, however, unjustified. The dowsing rod is a simple instrument which shows the uncanny reaction of the human nervous system to certain factors which are unknown to us at this time.” -Einstein

You do realize that is a fake Einstein quote, right?

 

[dowser]

Now you're a dowser?
Do you have a certificate or something?

It looks to me you need to complain to the administration for allowing the Dowsing topic and its content.
Or grow up!
What kind of people tell other people they are fake? I don't call skeptics fake..

 

[DizzyDigger]

What kind of people tell other people they are fake? I don't call skeptics fake..

I don't think you're fake..not one bit. Do "I" believe in dowsing? No, but that
is completely irrelevant to the issue because you do believe in it, and find
value in pursuing it as a hobby.

Science learns more and more every day, especially in the area of particle physics,
so who knows what will come in the future?

So, IMO, enjoy your hobby. There's no need for you to have to defend it, as there
will always be naysayers who want to prove you wrong, and that's OK as it's human
nature to challenge that which can not be explained or understood.

 

[dowser]

I don't think you're fake..not one bit. Do "I" believe in dowsing? No, but that
is completely irrelevant to the issue because you do believe in it, and find
value in pursuing it as a hobby.

Science learns more and more every day, especially in the area of particle physics,
so who knows what will come in the future?

So, IMO, enjoy your hobby. There's no need for you to have to defend it, as there
will always be naysayers who want to prove you wrong, and that's OK as it's human
nature to challenge that which can not be explained or understood.

View attachment 2254099

One says Dowsing isn't real, nobody has found anything, they can't do it.
What are they threatened of, if we haven't found anything?
If my name was bike rider, and I rode a bike, someone on here will say fake, you can't do it..

 

[Red-Coat]

**The primary evidence for Einstein’s dowsing quote is a letter he wrote on February 15, 1946 (sometimes referenced near February 4), to Herman E. Peisach of South Norwalk, Connecticut.**

### Full Relevant Excerpt from the Letter
> “I read with great interest the reports from your father and I think that they deserve attention. ...
> I know very well that many scientists consider dowsing as they do astrology, as a type of ancient superstition. According to my conviction this is, however, unjustified. The dowsing rod is a simple instrument which shows the reaction of the human nervous system to certain factors which are unknown to us at this time.”

Peisach had contacted Einstein about his (deceased) father’s papers on dowsing, particularly its use for medical diagnosis and possible health effects from underground features like water veins. Einstein’s reply includes the full quote above and suggests submitting the reports to a medical journal, offering to attach his letter for attention.

### Source of the Evidence
- **Photocopies of the correspondence**: These were shared by Peisach himself with dowsing organizations (e.g., referenced in connection with the American Society of Dowsers). The letters (one preliminary around early February and the fuller one on the 15th) appear in dowsing literature and archives, with translations noted as provided via academic channels.
- It is not part of the main published volumes of *The Collected Papers of Albert Einstein* (which focus on more significant scientific, political, or personal correspondence), but it is treated as authentic minor correspondence in specialist discussions. The Einstein Papers Project at Caltech/Hebrew University holds vast archives, and this fits the pattern of Einstein responding to public inquiries on fringe topics.

The quote has been widely reproduced in dowsing books, articles, and websites since at least the mid-20th century, consistently tied to this specific letter and recipient. No major scholarly challenges label it as a hoax or fabrication, though some skeptics note it shows cautious openness rather than strong endorsement of dowsing’s practical reliability.

In summary, the proof rests on documented correspondence (via photocopies from the recipient), with consistent attribution and no credible evidence of misattribution. This aligns with Einstein’s occasional willingness to consider unexplained phenomena without claiming they were supernatural or fully proven.

Although the quote is widely reproduced in dowsing-related literature, no authentic photocopy of a handwritten or typed letter from Albert Einstein to Dr. Peisach regarding dowsing exists. The document circulating on social media is considered a modern internet hoax or forgery (although the alleged quote itself has earlier origins).

Archivists at the Albert Einstein Archives have examined images of the alleged letter and concluded it is a digital fabrication. The text of this fake letter typically reads: "I know very well that many scientists consider dowsing as they do astrology, as a type of ancient superstition. According to my conviction this is, however, unjustified. The dowsing rod is a simple instrument which shows the reaction of the human nervous system to certain factors which are unknown to us at this time."

The exact same quote is also variously attributed to: a 1943 letter Einstein allegedly wrote to astrology-believer Eugene Simon; a 1946 letter Einstein allegedly wrote to T. B. Pawlicki (fringe science author of books such as “How to Build a Flaying Saucer”); and a 1946 letter Einstein allegedly wrote to the author and dowser William B. Davys. None of those sources are verifiable with respect to the quote about dowsing.

 

[dowser]

I've used a Metal detector, searching for Gold, I didn't find Gold.
I call Metal detecting Fake!, my opinion, regardless of all the posting and discussion, if I can't do it, neither can you! That's how a skeptic sounds to me, about Dowsing.. No sense..
I Dowsed for Gold and found Gold, so Dowsing must be real!
I don't pop in to Metal detecting discussion threads regularly, to cry and complain about people posting about it, people would think there is something wrong with me.
Nothing wrong with me!
I don't push Dowsing on people.. and I've never seen any Dowser pushing Dowsing on anyone.
What is the threat?
They have a Dowsing forum, with Dowsing topics, for Dowsers to post their experiences..
You skeptics don't need to post continually, saying you don't believe in Dowsing!!
We believe you..

 

[dowser]

With a Metal detector, your swinging a frequency generator, with a coil/antenna, using frequency to locate unseen targets.. In a way Dowsing for a target.
A Dowser uses a frequency generator, or not, holding antenna/rods, to Dowse, locate and follow frequency of unseen targets.
Too much of a rabbit hole to look down for some..

 

[releventchair]

It looks to me you need to complain to the administration for allowing the Dowsing topic and its content.
Or grow up!
What kind of people tell other people they are fake? I don't call skeptics fake..

Grow up ehh. I suppose that's better than out. But I'm pretty well done growing.

You know any fake skeptics? How do you know?
Someone claiming to be a dowser I've never seen dowse I have no problem asking how it is they've been confirmed. More so when they've nothing to offer for evidence..
Have you ever qiestioned anyones credentials?
Does your Dr. wear a sorcerers robe?
Be sure to study the length of white coats in medical facilities. They vary for areason.
Same as sheepskins on the office walls.
It doesn't matter what's claimed when credentials are called for. Credentials do.

 

[dowser]

Grow up ehh. I suppose that's better than out. But I'm pretty well done growing.

You know any fake skeptics? How do you know?
Someone claiming to be a dowser I've never seen dowse I have no problem asking how it is they've been confirmed. More so when they've nothing to offer for evidence..
Have you ever qiestioned anyones credentials?
Does your Dr. wear a sorcerers robe?
Be sure to study the length of white coats in medical facilities. They vary for areason.
Same as sheepskins on the office walls.
It doesn't matter what's claimed when credentials are called for. Credentials do.

I think it's rude for people to post against Dowsing, on an allowed Dowsing forum..

 

[releventchair]

I think it's rude for people to post against Dowsing, on an allowed Dowsing forum..

Post away.
I think it rude dowser claims aren't defended by fact when inquired of on a dowsing forum.
It insults the integrity of those who actually produce results dowsing.

Someone finding unproven declarations in a search that led here discredits dowsing in general.
Then you wonder why guests don't do handsprings at the unproven presentation to follow.

Cheeky suits.

[Definition

rude
[ruːd]

adjective
rude (adjective)
ruder (comparative adjective)
rudest (superlative adjective)
offensively impolite or bad-mannered:
"she had been rude to her boss""he is a rude and arrogant bully""how rude of me, I should have offered you some tea""it's rude to talk about people right in front of them"
Similar:
ill-mannered
bad-mannered
impolite
discourteous
impertinent
insolent
impudent
cheeky
audacious
presumptuous
uncivil
disrespectful
unmannerly
ill-bred
churlish
crass
curt
brusque
blunt
ungracious
graceless
brash
unpleasant
disagreeable
offhand
short
sharp
offensive
insulting
derogatory
disparaging
abusive
tactless
undiplomatic
uncomplimentary
uncharitable
unchivalrous
ungallant
ungentlemanly
unladylike
malapert
contumelious
underbred
mannerless
Opposite:
polite
civil
chivalrous
BRITISH ENGLISH
referring to a taboo subject such as sex in a way considered embarrassing or offensive:
"she giggled at every rude joke""he made a rude gesture"
Similar:
vulgar
coarse
smutty
dirty
filthy
crude
lewd
obscene
offensive
indelicate
improper
indecorous
salacious
off colour
tasteless
risqué
naughty
ribald
bawdy
racy
broad
spicy
colourful
suggestive
blue
raunchy
nudge-nudge
fruity
near the knuckle
saucy
gamy
adult

in bad taste
Opposite:
clean
having a startling abruptness:
"the war came as a very rude awakening""the company's announcement came as rather a rude shock"
Similar:
abrupt
sudden
sharp
startling
unpleasant
disagreeable
nasty
harsh
BRITISH ENGLISH
vigorous or hearty:
"Isabel had always been in rude health"
dated
roughly made or done; lacking sophistication:
"a rude coffin"
Similar:
primitive
crude
rudimentary
rough
rough-hewn
rough and ready
simple
basic
makeshift
Opposite:
sophisticated
classy
archaic
ignorant and uneducated:
"the new religion was first promulgated by rude men"
Similar:
ignorant
unenlightened
uneducated
unschooled
untutored
illiterate
unlettered
unlearned
unscholarly
unread
uninformed
backward
simple
primitive
uncivilized
unsophisticated
unrefined
uncouth
unpolished
uncultured
philistine
barbarian
barbaric
barbarous
savage
crude
coarse
rough
vulgar
gross
yobbish
nescient
Opposite:
enlightened]

 

[dowser]

Post away.
I think it rude dowser claims aren't defended by fact when inquired of on a dowsing forum.
It insults the integrity of those who actually produce results dowsing.

Someone finding unproven declarations in a search that led here discredits dowsing in general.
Then you wonder why guests don't do handsprings at the unproven presentation to follow.

Cheeky suits.

[Definition

rude
[ruːd]

adjective
rude (adjective)
ruder (comparative adjective)
rudest (superlative adjective)
offensively impolite or bad-mannered:
"she had been rude to her boss""he is a rude and arrogant bully""how rude of me, I should have offered you some tea""it's rude to talk about people right in front of them"
Similar:
ill-mannered
bad-mannered
impolite
discourteous
impertinent
insolent
impudent
cheeky
audacious
presumptuous
uncivil
disrespectful
unmannerly
ill-bred
churlish
crass
curt
brusque
blunt
ungracious
graceless
brash
unpleasant
disagreeable
offhand
short
sharp
offensive
insulting
derogatory
disparaging
abusive
tactless
undiplomatic
uncomplimentary
uncharitable
unchivalrous
ungallant
ungentlemanly
unladylike
malapert
contumelious
underbred
mannerless
Opposite:
polite
civil
chivalrous
BRITISH ENGLISH
referring to a taboo subject such as sex in a way considered embarrassing or offensive:
"she giggled at every rude joke""he made a rude gesture"
Similar:
vulgar
coarse
smutty
dirty
filthy
crude
lewd
obscene
offensive
indelicate
improper
indecorous
salacious
off colour
tasteless
risqué
naughty
ribald
bawdy
racy
broad
spicy
colourful
suggestive
blue
raunchy
nudge-nudge
fruity
near the knuckle
saucy
gamy
adult

in bad taste
Opposite:
clean
having a startling abruptness:
"the war came as a very rude awakening""the company's announcement came as rather a rude shock"
Similar:
abrupt
sudden
sharp
startling
unpleasant
disagreeable
nasty
harsh
BRITISH ENGLISH
vigorous or hearty:
"Isabel had always been in rude health"
dated
roughly made or done; lacking sophistication:
"a rude coffin"
Similar:
primitive
crude
rudimentary
rough
rough-hewn
rough and ready
simple
basic
makeshift
Opposite:
sophisticated
classy
archaic
ignorant and uneducated:
"the new religion was first promulgated by rude men"
Similar:
ignorant
unenlightened
uneducated
unschooled
untutored
illiterate
unlettered
unlearned
unscholarly
unread
uninformed
backward
simple
primitive
uncivilized
unsophisticated
unrefined
uncouth
unpolished
uncultured
philistine
barbarian
barbaric
barbarous
savage
crude
coarse
rough
vulgar
gross
yobbish
nescient
Opposite:
enlightened]

Obvious you didn't try Dowsing, nor read all my scientific observations and results.
I proved it all, Dowsing, and posted everything, you just don't want to believe.
Don't trash another Dowsing thread, filling it with garbage.
Just like many of my Threads, comments disable because of rude people.

 

[Treasure_Hunter]

Gentlemen please post by our rules..

"Keep the discussion civil, respectful and on topic."

 

[releventchair]

Obvious you didn't try Dowsing, nor read all my scientific observations and results.
I proved it all, Dowsing, and posted everything, you just don't want to believe.
Don't trash another Dowsing thread, filling it with garbage.
Just like many of my Threads, comments disable because of rude people.

May I suggest you peruse the o.p.. And be secretive yourself.

Had you read my posts you'd have noted multiple of my personal dowsing references.
Odd you'd miss that but there must be some mysterious reason for such...Could it be too long a gaze into a pool of water on your end?...

Your posts disable because of rude people. Not on your account?
Is that like Taylor Swifts relationships being the faults of others?

 

[Carl-NC]

### What is verifiably known
- The quote (or a very close version of it) is tied to a **February 1946 letter** (with a preliminary reply around February 4) from Einstein to **Herman E. Peisach** of South Norwalk, Connecticut. Peisach contacted Einstein about his deceased father's papers on dowsing/radiesthesia, including possible health effects from underground water veins.
- The letter text matches the commonly circulated version: Einstein notes that many scientists dismiss dowsing like astrology as superstition but says this is unjustified, describing the dowsing rod as showing the human nervous system's reaction to unknown factors.
- **Photocopies/translations** of the correspondence have circulated in dowsing communities since at least the late 20th century (references appear in books, articles, and sites linked to dowsing organizations). One detailed 2010 discussion on a mailing list reproduces context from the letters and notes translations (e.g., via academic channels).
- The Einstein Archives database (alberteinstein.info) has been reported by dowsing researchers to list references to "dowsing" in correspondence with Peisach, though full public images or transcriptions of minor letters like this are not always digitized or highlighted.

I've been researching this for years and have well over 100 books on dowsing dating back to the early 1900s. What I found was that the quote first appeared in Joseph Baum's Beginner's Handbook of Dowsing (1974) with no source reference. It then propagated throughout dowsing books because, as I've also found, people who write dowsing books are pretty lazy about their source material. They tend to repeat what other dowsing books say without question -- see also the Archers of Tin Aboteka. I've seen the reference to the Peisach letters but no one seems to be able to produce them. If you can find a reference to the quote earlier than 1974, or a copy of the letter then I would be interested.

 

[guest]

Gentlemen please post by our rules..

"Keep the discussion civil, respectful and on topic."

I totally agree. Even if people have different opinions, they should treat each other with respect. Thank You, @Treasure_Hunter .
And before this topic is closed, I'd like to add my two cents.

Although I don't believe in dowsing, I'm quite good at it.
My uncle (RIP) taught me several decades ago.
A dowsing rod is a very useful tool for locating water, unless you're looking for a metal pipe, in which case a metal detection system is a better option. (This doesn't necessarily have to be a metal detector.)

Even electronic interference sources in living and sleeping areas can be successfully located with a dowsing rod.

But back to the treasures.
If something valuable is found, I would certainly want it to be known. I'm not talking about some modern-day junk here.
Dowsing can be a legal method, since a bit of luck is also necessary for success. (Especially when everything else is forbidden.)😉
With both hobbies, dowsing and metal detecting, success requires not only knowledge of the equipment and the selection of the search area, but also a considerable amount of luck.🍀🤞

IJMHO
Best of Luck🍀🤞😎👍

Oh, and an old Freemason saying goes, keep secrets from unbelievers.

 

[Red-Coat]

I've been researching this for years and have well over 100 books on dowsing dating back to the early 1900s. What I found was that the quote first appeared in Joseph Baum's Beginner's Handbook of Dowsing (1974) with no source reference. It then propagated throughout dowsing books because, as I've also found, people who write dowsing books are pretty lazy about their source material. They tend to repeat what other dowsing books say without question -- see also the Archers of Tin Aboteka. I've seen the reference to the Peisach letters but no one seems to be able to produce them. If you can find a reference to the quote earlier than 1974, or a copy of the letter then I would be interested.

Some sources say that the quote first appeared in 1949 as the preface written by Albert Einstein for a book titled “The Divining Rod: An Interpretation of Water Divining” by the British dowser R.R. Bill.

I have not been able to find any such book, nor a reference to an author with that name. It just seems to be another made up justification… unless someone knows different.

There is a Wikipedia ‘Talk” page for every entry where contributors and editors discuss the validity of, or desirable amendments to the entry, often proposing rejection of unverified information or the need to include references to where it has come from. The archive for the “Dowsing” page discusses the alleged Einstein quote in detail after the editor ‘Maustrauser’ proposed in 2006 that it should be removed “Because it is not adequately referenced. This quote is all over the internet on pro-dowsing sites but none of them state where Einstein said this. Can the proponent for this claim state a book or an article or something that can be checked, rather than simply another pro-divining website? If this can be referenced properly then I am quite happy for it to be returned to the article.”

Someone identified only by an American IP address chipped in to say “Excuse me, I have never contributed to wikipedia before. (I am the one who added the quote). Does wikipedia have a page about how to cite quotes properly? I looked for it but did not see one. I have seen other quotes on wikipedia referenced in that way so I thought it would be ok. I have a book that also quotes him as saying that but I'm sure you would consider it "pro-dowsing". Would a reference to a book about dowsing be adequate?”

Another contributor added: “I looked on Google Print, and the earliest reference I could find tracked back to "Beginner's handbook to Dowsing, by Joseph Baum, Crown Publishing Inc, New York, 1974, page 6”

Then, another contributor identified only by an American IP address supplied what he said was a translation of a February 1946 Einstein letter to Peisach including the quote (not an actual photocopy or other image, just the text translation) saying: “Now you can reference the entire letter. TY I do not make claims only state facts and back them up. I am not the original editor of cited reference.” It was claimed that the letter had been made available by Peisach’s son, after he had seen an episode of the TV newsmagazine programme 'Look at Us' and been prompted to get his father’s letter translated by Tell Ehardt and the German Department of Villanova University. [This cannot possibly have been earlier than 1981 when the programme first aired on TV.]

It’s therefore extremely odd for there to be any claims for the quote using exactly the same English translation wording (not just similar, but literally word for word) purporting to be from earlier than the 1981 translation said to have provided by the German university after Peisach’s son is said to have brought the letter to their attention and then allowed publication of it.

The Wiki editors seem to have been unconvinced, since the quote now appears not to have been restored to the ‘Dowsing’ entry.

 

[Carl-NC]

Why skeptics live for Dowsing subject, and can't wait to comment, is it to impress people?

In the thread "One Dowsed observation" you have made 461 posts regarding your theories and abilities. Is this to impress people? Or is it because you genuinely believe in your observations and that sharing them can help other dowsers? I suspect it's the latter. I, too, have my own observations that I've accumulated in over 25 years of dowsing study but it so happens that my observations run counter to yours. My observations very much align with science instead of trying to create "alternative facts" to support bad test protocols. And, I feel it's important to keep a proper balance between wishful thinking and reality so that people (dowsers and non-dowsers) can see both sides of the issue. Besides that, these are forums where people can openly discuss and debate the topics at hand; they are not strictly limited to proponents.

 

[dowser]

In the thread "One Dowsed observation" you have made 461 posts regarding your theories and abilities. Is this to impress people? Or is it because you genuinely believe in your observations and that sharing them can help other dowsers? I suspect it's the latter. I, too, have my own observations that I've accumulated in over 25 years of dowsing study but it so happens that my observations run counter to yours. My observations very much align with science instead of trying to create "alternative facts" to support bad test protocols. And, I feel it's important to keep a proper balance between wishful thinking and reality so that people (dowsers and non-dowsers) can see both sides of the issue. Besides that, these are forums where people can openly discuss and debate the topics at hand; they are not strictly limited to proponents.

Thanks for counting, yes your very observant, I did post ongoing real time Dowsing tests and results.
Everything posted is original to my L-rods Dowsing experience of 3 yrs.
I figured out every detail about Dowsing.
In case you missed it, I even posted why there is so many failed Dowsers.
I am a actual real Dowser.
Were is all the debunking of my material?
No debunk, no explanation of what is happening from you.
In my opinion you got fogged out, by frequency interference. Only it happened to you before me.
Possible you were located near a military base..
You talk about your observations and how they align with science.
Do you actually understand what a LRL did?
Or was supposed to do.
It's a frequency device, and frequency and interference are real science.

 

[dowser]

As for why I posted all that.
It was facts as I Dowsed them.
The forum needed more true Dowsing content.
Dowsers like hearing about dowsing.
I was hoping for intelligent discussion about my individual posts.
I was hoping someone else would confirm my results.
It is my Dowsing book, because I wouldn't publish one.
To be a thorn in skeptics side, because they are definitely wrong.