Water dowsing question...

[Oroblanco]

Greetings,

I am no expert on dowsing, but have dabbled in it for water lines and electric lines with success. To the experts on dowsing I have a couple of questions....

1 While dowsing for water, using brass rods, how do you differentiate between a tiny trickle of water and a good stream?

2 I have tried two of the methods to estimate depth to water, that of counting the time for the rods to align while standing over the spot, and of the refraction-angle method, both seem to come up with the same results. Is there a better way to estimate the depth to water?

My reasons for asking are that I am trying to find a water source for a pasture, and have found tiny trickles of water - is there some trick to finding more than a trickle. The depth problem is directly related, because I dug to nine feet on one "hit" that proved to be just another tiny trickle of water and don't care to dig that deep again unless there is some indicator/clue that it is more than just a damp spot in the rocks! We have a good amount of mesquite around (honey and screwbean) which is a water indicator plant, but the water source can be up to 140 feet down and a trickle is enough for a mesquite bush. Any hints or suggestions to try would be appreciated, thank you in advance....
Oroblanco

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

Upgraded Night Vision Monocular Digital Infrared Monocular Telescope for 100% Darkness with 8X Zoom - Grab it through Amazon!

[Real de Tayopa Tropical Tramp]

HI ORO. Read about Henry Gross and his map dowsing of 3 successful wells in Bermuda from Maine. This was after the Royal Hydrologists had decided that it was impossible to find any potable water after an extended study on Bermuda, except for subsurface pools of brackish water. This is how the present Bermuda Water co. originated. Still the only source for fresh water there.

Tropical Tramp

 

[Real de Tayopa Tropical Tramp]

HI ROOM
isn't it about time to discuss Dowsing rationally and try to suggest ways to improve it instead of just mocking, ridiculing it and some of it's posters.etc ?

Even Carl, one of the most devoted attackers, has admitted to dowsing, so since there is no longer a question of it's existence, why don't we start on ways to improve it.

As to how it works , that is outside of any of our indvidual expertise, so put that aside, and discuss dowsing rationally

Tropical Tramp

 

[Jean310]

When to dowse for water.

I recall many times I came home with a flue like head from dowsing all day for a farmer, not realising that there are rules to when to dowse and I knew them not.
Naturally on these days I didnt find water or get paid.

Max

After someone else mentioned his name the other day (Sam Lobo Wolfe), I did a little research, and found he was very much into dowsing. He taught dowsing, published dowsing literature and also did a lot of map dowsing. Later in his life, he got involved in dowsing health related issues. Point is, he did a huge amount of dowsing, both with pendulums and L-shaped rods. I also learned that eventually he was stricken with some type of neurological illness (perhaps a stroke), leaving him unable to walk and in a near vegetative state for his last few years on this Earth. Certainly, there wouldn't be enough of these cases to establish a meaningful trend; but I understand that some have conjectured his passion for dowsing may have been related to his demise.

When you mentioned your flue like symptoms in your head, after dowsing, I couldn't help thinking of the obvious similarities.

Jean

 

[Oroblanco]

Greetings,

SWR wrote: Although I do not really think groundwater (aquifer) flows in a stream configuration (vein/trickle/stream), it should be interesting to see some of the answers flow in.

I have been reading up on this, most groundwater aquifers do "flow" but at a very slow rate, (percolate really) in my own area the Sulphur Springs valley (around our hills) is a trapped (basin) aquifer, does NOT flow out of the valley - and there are a number of trapped aquifers in the western states. Where I am trying to find water is on either of two long-dead-volcanic hills, which have quite a number of mesquites growing - mesquites are a water-indicator plant but the water can be quite deep (up to 140 feet) so there has to be water on these two hills somewhere. I don't think water-dowsing is some kind of supernatural phenomenon, I think it is electrical in nature. The US Army had experments in remote-sensing/viewing with a surprising level of success, but I sure don't think I have those kinds of abilities, and my experimenting with dowsing for water had good results. The area here is very dry, the only "trees" are those mesquites, in most places you can dig down to at least eight or nine feet without finding even a damp spot - so finding a source of water for the livestock would be a great boon for us. The local well-drillers are ridiculously expensive (all we have talked to refuse to even come here, it is fairly remote and rough to get to) so i HOPE to find a spot I could dig down to with hand tools. Hence my questions on how to define the depth and a large flow versus a tiny trickle. So far I can't tell the difference until I dig down!

Thanks for the replies and suggestions, I will try them as soon as we get some let-up in the winds. (Been having a lot of wind the last few days.) The two hills run e-w with more dry canyons on the northern side than the south, plus the northern side seems to have more mesquites so will try that area next.

Oroblanco

 

[Oroblanco]

Thanks for the offer buddy - if I can get one of these gizmo electronic cameras to work I will try to get photos to send you.
Oroblanco

 

[Real de Tayopa Tropical Tramp]

Good morning room
Sheehs I leave for a few days to conclude a mining contract that may well give me a few million over the next few years and when I return I see that the mice have come out of their holes and are running amok, squealing and fighting over "look at me, see how brilliant I am".

However, I still see that not one of them has even attempted to address the data in the now infamous posts #6 & #88. So the obvious conclusion must be that they simply cannot, so they just run away from it by ignoring it or simply using the "ignore " button, which is exactly the same thing..

I will, go over the past few days posts and address those that are not too silly or plain dumb. <- (polite)

As for my statement in post #1120 in the 1,000,000 series , no-one seems to have understood what I was saying apparently from the recent posts.

Carl very clearly wrote "Of course I can dowse! It's quite easy, just not very useful. - carl". In any court of Law that I have ever attended or practiced that is a complete, legally binding, statement with no modifiers or ambiguities.

He flatly states that dowsing exists, so all that the incredibly flawed statistic tests, or any of the others can show is only what that "particular dowsers ABILITIES are", nothing more.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Operational definitions are inherently difficult — arguably, even impossible — to apply to mental entities, because these latter are generally understood to be accessible only to the individual who experiences them and are therefore not independently verifiable."
=================
Of course I can dowse! It's quite easy, just not very useful. - Carl
\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\


Tropical Tramp

 

[Oroblanco]

Greetings,

Tropical Tramp wrote: ...I still see that not one of them has even attempted to address the data in the now infamous posts #6 & #88. <snip>

May I ask which threads these posts are in? Thank you in advance,
Oroblanco

 

[Real de Tayopa Tropical Tramp]

[=Jean310 link.After someone else mentioned his name the other day (Sam Lobo Wolfe), I did a little research, and found he was very much into dowsing.
***********
Research? I flatly told you that he wrote books on dowing hmm hmmmm no comment needed.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
He taught dowsing, published dowsing literature and also did a lot of map dowsing. Later in his life, he got involved in dowsing health related issues. Point is, he did a huge amount of dowsing, both with pendulums and L-shaped rods. I also learned that eventually he was stricken with some type of neurological illness (perhaps a stroke), leaving him unable to walk and in a near vegetative state for his last few years on this Earth. Certainly, there wouldn't be enough of these cases to establish a meaningful trend; but I understand that some have conjectured his passion for dowsing may have been related to his demise.
****************
Actually no jean, itwas his addiction to statistics and porn that did him in. xu in on his way also.
same meaningful trend no?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Operational definitions are inherently difficult — arguably, even impossible — to apply to mental entities, because these latter are generally understood to be accessible only to the individual who experiences them and are therefore not independently verifiable."
=================
Of course I can dowse! It's quite easy, just not very useful. - Carl
\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\


Tropical Tramp