Talk, talk, enough talk already.

[Tom_in_CA]

I did what you said. I did not find it.....

Really ? There's no lack of them on Youtube. Surprised you can't find examples of what I'm referring to. Here's a few. Shared in a non-badgering friendly way, as a direct result to your direct question.

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

Cry Of The Eagle: History And Legends Of The Cherokee Indians And Their Buried Treasure - Grab it through Amazon!

[lesjcbs]

Went dowsing today. Found this. Looks like a rusty link from a chain. The temperature was warmer today too. If it is warm
again tomorrow, I will dowse again and maybe find something.

 

[lesjcbs]

Here are just two of my favorite dowsing videos. There are tons more like these two that shows the truth that is way beyond the understanding and capability of science.

 

[Tom_in_CA]

Here are just two of my favorite dowsing videos. There are tons more like these two that shows the truth that is way beyond the understanding and capability of science. ...

Lesjcbs, what happened ?? Instead of addressing the video links I gave , you just link some others ? Why can't you address the ones I posted ?

As for your video links: I will save us both some time and acknowledge that there is ... no doubt ... TONS of anecdotal stories, videos, posts, etc.... of people who have found stuff this way. But in each and every case (as hinted at in the video links I gave), there is other potential reasons for the seeming success. And/or the anecdotal stories and videos are not double blind, no safeguards or protocols, etc....

 

[lesjcbs]

If I organized a treasure hunt I would not take a dowsing skeptic along, even if that person had the latest any greatest electronic .metal detector. Their negative take on dowsing is very powerful and corrosive to dowsing success. I'm going dowsing today. Hope I find something to show and tell.

 

[Tom_in_CA]

.... Their negative take on dowsing is very powerful and corrosive to dowsing success. ....

Yes. That is one of the popularly cited "pushback lines" I anticipated. The "negative vibes" of testers will "skew the results". And I can think of about 10 other push-back lines too.

I can't understand how "bad vibes" would have any effect on the outcome, if this is a scientific principle. In the same way that if you had 100 skeptics wave a quarter in front of a detector, it would beep for all of them. Whether they believed, or not.

So this "vibes" thing causes me to think that the supposed powers have something mystical/supernatural at play . Especially when some dowsers even allude to "asking the rods questions". I mean, gee, that sounds like Ouija boards type stuff ?

But the moment we go down THAT path, a lot of dowsers admittedly become uncomfortable. Knowing this puts them into a class of supernatural, occult, etc.... And we certainly can't have that, eh ? So they retreat back to "un-discovered science". But don't you see the vicious circle ? If we say "science", then "belief" or "vibes" should have nothing to do with it. Eh ?

Said in a non-badgering way, constructive/fair-pro-con discussion . Replying to the invite that was given to me.

 

[aarthrj3811]

R Darken one of Randi's guys. Randi ask what they would do if anyone ever passed the test. he said we would just claim it was all mental and that gets us from paying the million dollars.

 

[Tom_in_CA]

..... Randi ask what they would do if anyone ever passed the test. she said we would just claim it was all mental and that gets us from paying the million dollars.

Huh ? Care to elaborate on this ? Got a link ?

This is another common push-back line, when it comes to various persons/entities that have offered prize money. The persons being challenged (psychics, dowsers, or whoever) will claim that there's not really any prize money. Or that they won't waste their time, because if they passed the test, then the prize money would be unfairly denied to them, blah blah blah.

got a link to this quote where Randi openly claimed he'd skirt and circumvent paying ?

 

[lesjcbs]

As l promised in post 25 above, I did. I had a terrible day dowsing today. Found only these four things and since dowsing does not work, this should not have happened, but it did. Two wires, a curved pieced of metal and a part of what looks like a 7/16 inch rusty bolt with course threads. I will take sunday off and start dowsing again on Monday. Enjoy.

 

[aarthrj3811]

There you go Tom. I would like to see 100 dowsers do a Double Blind test. Maybe all you skeptic's could get together and be the control group...Art

 

[Tom_in_CA]

...There you go Tom...

You mean lesjcbs nut, bolts, & wires anecdotal find ? Well why stop there ? I can show you picture, posts, and videos, of fellows posing next to jars of coins, and whopper nuggets that they found. And .... there certainly can't be any other explanations for the "finds", right ?

... I would like to see 100 dowsers do a Double Blind test. Maybe all you skeptic's could get together and be the control group...

But remember, it won't work. The "negative vibes" will skew the results. Or some devious trick would be done (magnets in pockets of nearby skeptic testers, etc....). Or there's not *really* any prize money, d/t it would be unfairly circumvented and not really awarded, etc.... Right ?

 

[lesjcbs]

If dowsers, both past and present had never found any thing when dowsing, the science would be correct to claim dowsing does not work, but that is not what happened. Dowsers find things all the time using the dowsing technique, even children who know nothing about science.

 

[Tom_in_CA]

If dowsers, both past and present had never found any thing when dowsing...

Who is claiming that ? I have said over and over that ... yes .... anecdotal stories of finds do abound. There is no shortage of those "finds" . The key word though is: "Anecdotal"

Remember: in the past, people sincerely believed they could control the weather by certain means. And ... historically ... they used the means quite frequently. So how can we say the means didn't work, if they used it as much as they did ?

 

[aarthrj3811]

Well Tom. I can check a one mile by three miles in the time it takes me to walk one mile. If it is on a road that runs north-south or east- west can search it very fast from my can. How many months or years would it take you and you would not be sure if you checked it all or if there may be a pile of gold that as to deep for your tool...Art

 

[lesjcbs]

Anecdotal evidence is evidence collected in a casual or informal manner and relying heavily or entirely on personal testimony. When compared to other types of evidence, anecdotal evidence is generally regarded as limited in value due to a number of potential weaknesses, but MAY BE considered within the scope of scientific method as some anecdotal evidence can be both empirical and verifiable, e.g. in the use of case studies in medicine. Other anecdotal evidence, however, does not qualify as scientific evidence, because its nature prevents it from being investigated by the scientific method.

Post hoc fallacy : Suppose we notice that an event of kind A is followed IN TIME by an event of kind B, and then hastily leap to the conclusion that A caused B. If so, our reasoning contains the Post Hoc Fallacy. Correlations are often good evidence of causal connection, so the fallacy occurs only when the leap to the causal conclusion is done "hastily." The Latin term for the fallacy is Post Hoc, Ergo Propter Hoc ("After this, therefore because of this"). It is a kind of False Cause Fallacy. Throwing virgins into volcanoes to control the weather is post hoc.

 

[Tom_in_CA]

.... How many months or years would it take you .....

Yes. I've seen your claims here before. And no one in their right mind would argue with the time-savings it presents. Ie.: who would argue with a "better mousetrap" and "better method" to cover large areas ?

It's just a shame it can't be demonstrated in double -blind tests

Anecdotal evidence is evidence collected in a .....

Lesjcbs: Very good definitions. I agree wholeheartedly . I guess we just disagree on where dowsing fits into that picture & definitions. Ie.: whether the testimonies and finds shown by the dowsers, falls into those categories, or doesn't.

Said in a non-badgering friendly way.

 

[lesjcbs]

A young mother senses / feels something is wrong at home that is miles away. Upon arriving back home, she and her new husband find the house on fire and their baby and baby sitter are safe. This scenario, like dowsing and other things cannot be duplicated in double blinded tests. Perhaps our Creator meant it to be that way.

 

[Tom_in_CA]

A young mother senses / feels something is wrong at home that is miles away. Upon arriving back home, she and her new husband find the house on fire and their baby and baby sitter are safe. This scenario, like dowsing and other things cannot be duplicated in double blinded tests. Perhaps our Creator meant it to be that way.

Very interesting explanation of why dowsing can not be "tested". Thankyou (said in a non-badgering friendly way)

Ok then, to expand on your illustration : Notice, in that case, the mom didn't need rods. That is a clear-cut-case of gut intuition, right ? If that example is to be expanded and applied to dowsing (which is your clear intent), then ... are you saying that it's intuition/instinct . No different than an md'r can look at a landscape, and figure the "best place to start md'ing", right ? Or more than that, in sort of .... almost mystical way, right ?

If so, then sure: It's outside of the ability of science to measure. You even hint at "creator" (your words, not mine). WHICH IS FINE. I'm totally onboard with that. I too don't believe we are "meat all the way to the bone" or that "this is all there is". I totally get that.

But then you've got a big problem though, among your peers: A lot of them will distance themselves from such explanations. Because the moment you go "there", is the moment you start to admit that it's relying on the supernatural, mystical, etc... And that's the moment it starts to be lumped into a category of occult, spiritual, hocus pocus, etc.... So a lot of your peers MOVE FAR AWAY from that explanation. And will retreat back to "scientific" (albeit, as yet, un-discovered science).

So I see a curious rift, within your own ranks, as to the explanation. But I appreciate your explanation. Just be aware, it will put you at odds with other dowsers. Who say there's some sort of "attraction" going on, between the object and the rod.

 

[Tom_in_CA]

Also, I would add, as to your "house on fire" and "kids in danger" example: Don't forget that there's often -time memory bias , at-play, in such examples. It works like this:

We ALL have premonitions of danger, people we should call or check on, etc... All the time, Every day. And when nothing is amiss, we promptly forget our premonitions. But when one coincidentally comes true, only THEN do we remember our premonitions and think "Aha ! I knew it !". That's the trick of selective memory.

It's the same thing for when we think our horoscopes come true. We are simply forgetting the massive amounts of "general pithy things " that didn't come true.

Or how if you wake up to the song on your radio alarm clock, that you were JUST DREAMING ABOUT. You think "aha ! I'm psychic !". But the truth is: You dream hundreds of dreams per night, none of which come true, and forget all of them 10 seconds after you wake up. But if one were to coincidentally come true, THEN you wold remember it.

So too can a lot of the "child" examples, that you cite, be chalked up to. I'm not saying this as an atheist skeptic. As I say, I'm a believer in "more than the here and now". But just saying : Also be aware of the other explanations that can exist, that DON'T point to something divine, supernatural, etc...

 

[aarthrj3811]

Well Tom. We have wasted a few weeks on you. Just read the Sceitific proof on this board. We have nothing to prove. If you want to prove something it is now in your court...Art

Said in a non-badgering, friendly, intellectual pro/con way.