View Active Topics          Latest 100 Topics          View Your Posts          Switch to Mobile

Real Scientific Analysis of Dowsing

Introduce yourself here!

Real Scientific Analysis of Dowsing

Postby taffy bowen » 04 Jun 2010, 12:05

I've been at this for a few years, but got nowhere. Science demands a reasonable hypothesis, and tests that are simple and definitive. If the tests are definitive and predictable, pretty good bet you're on to something. This is, unless no amount of data will change your mind.

More and more people are beginning to tell their experiences (usually finding pipes or tubes). I put out a summary paper with the URLs to the 14 videos I made and several papers. Despite all evidence to the contrary, the James Randi Ed. Fdn. still told me it was "ideomotor effect."

The hard data, showing what dowsing rods will and will not do is out there, and growing. Eventually, organized skeptics will be forced to address the findings. Here's the URL to my summary paper: http://journal.borderlands.com/2010/dow ... ubsurface/. Add your findings. Eventually, like all paradigm shifts, they will be forced to acknowledge the reality - nothing new, just another repeat of a historical process.

Am happy I found you all.

Best,



Taffy
taffy bowen
 
Posts: 1
Joined: 04 Jun 2010, 11:37






Re: Real Scientific Analysis of Dowsing

Postby ciscop » 04 Jun 2010, 13:42

you are not at JREF

but i can tell you
it is the ideomotor response

do it with a blindfold without touching anything
and let the people change the position of the cube of water without you hearing it
lets see how you do


oh.. yes

Welcome
:D
For every person who reads this valuable book there are hundreds of naïve souls who would prefer to have their spines tingled by a sensational but worthless potboiler by some hack journalist of the paranormal. You who now read these sentences join a small but wiser minority. Martin Gaardner (Psychology of the Psychic)
User avatar
ciscop
 
Posts: 1423
Joined: 22 Jul 2009, 12:04

Re: Real Scientific Analysis of Dowsing

Postby NinjaPuppy » 04 Jun 2010, 18:52

Welcome Taffy!
User avatar
NinjaPuppy
 
Posts: 4002
Joined: 28 Jul 2009, 20:44

Re: Real Scientific Analysis of Dowsing

Postby Craig Browning » 04 Jun 2010, 23:28

:o Deja Vu :?

While I'm exceptionally well versed in Ideomotor technique (it's been the basis to many of the things I've done on stage, etc.) I also come from a familial situation in which Dowsing is very much a part. I've seen and experienced the difference first hand and sadly, there is no way to "prove it" to the cynically dependent, that such is so... sorry Taffy, but if James Randi could prove the sun was a hoax there are "educated" fools out there that would kiss his wrinkled butt and praise him for such a revelation.

The chief problem with proving Dowsing or any related skill centers on one's ability to not just silence the mind but set aside any (ANY) expectation. This is something the cynics not only can't do, they would refuse to do so even if they could. But we can say the same about the believer to some extent, which is why when they place themselves into a "prove it" scenario, they fail. They are so fixed on the idea and overly confident that they "aren't listening" but rather, trying to second guess things via the logical mind so as to expedite the demonstration and have gloating rights.

The other issue centers on "external" energy or what some call "Telepathic Influence" which also comes as a double-edged factor; the skeptics seeking to test the claim project their doubt and desire to see the dowser fail and so they will IF the dowser is ultra-sensitive to such an emotional focus. Conversely (and this is very true during the "training" process for dowsing), the believer can misguide the novice by wanting them to succeed and unwittingly influence the tests (even when out of sight... for those that will want to suggest body language tattle-tales).

I have seen and actually had the Y stick pulled from my hands when coming onto certain "flows" (it's most common with fast moving, heavy bodies of underground water). I've likewise had Pendulums, Okimeters and other such "static" devices suddenly go nuts in how they move when over a specific target. So again, I KNOW there's much more to it than mere ideomotor influence BUT... and this is very important to note... the majority of what people do, especially when they are just starting into dowsing, IS ideomotor based discovery. That's not to cosign the claim that it's all one in the same, only that understanding the difference requires time and experience (along with DAILY practice).

"Scientific" qualification for this and most other paranormal or psi type skills will probably never come to be accepted by the status quo simply because those who can't replicate the skill will insist that it's fake and trickery is involved, ignoring the fact that they are missing a particular "ingredient" in the testing -- someone that is a successful dowser vs. a johnny-come-lately ego wanting to prove himself.
User avatar
Craig Browning
 
Posts: 1526
Joined: 13 Feb 2010, 05:20
Location: Northampton, MA

Re: Real Scientific Analysis of Dowsing

Postby ciscop » 04 Jun 2010, 23:50

yep if dowsing was real why you cant locate water in a double blinded test?
why is that i wonder?
common craig, go and take randi´s money and make a fool out of him
but nah.. you rather call him an old fart and do nothing
you only seem to find water when you can actually see it
hahahaha

and by the way
lets never forget
that this idiotic concept killed people in irak
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/04/world/middleeast/04sensors.html?_r=1

i believe that the scammer that sold this is facing charges
For every person who reads this valuable book there are hundreds of naïve souls who would prefer to have their spines tingled by a sensational but worthless potboiler by some hack journalist of the paranormal. You who now read these sentences join a small but wiser minority. Martin Gaardner (Psychology of the Psychic)
User avatar
ciscop
 
Posts: 1423
Joined: 22 Jul 2009, 12:04

Re: Real Scientific Analysis of Dowsing

Postby Craig Browning » 07 Jun 2010, 22:00

ciscop wrote:yep if dowsing was real why you cant locate water in a double blinded test?
why is that i wonder?
common craig, go and take randi´s money and make a fool out of him
but nah.. you rather call him an old fart and do nothing
you only seem to find water when you can actually see it
hahahaha

and by the way
lets never forget
that this idiotic concept killed people in irak
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/04/world/middleeast/04sensors.html?_r=1

i believe that the scammer that sold this is facing charges


I do believe my post addressed such stupidity and secondly, I have no ego-need to play Randi's games. They are deliberately designed to bring about failure, end of story! There's absolutely nothing fair about the challenge though it has the appearance of being fair and above board... like all con games.

I don't know about the thing in Iraq (the proper spelling btw... but I'm just a High School grad, what would I know about proper language use? I guess when you qualify for MENSA you're allowed to not use proper spelling and sentence structure :roll: -- :shock: wait a minute! I was invited to join MENSA by in the early 80's... maybe I need to start acting smart and not spelling right and showing my ass off by being a bully?)

I do know (as I've said before) that dowsing has been used throughout much of the past 150ish years for mine detection, revealing a far higher level of success than not (otherwise, why would it still be part of standard study and use by armies world wide?) I know that there are metal detectors that use crossing lines (similar to the L wires used by some but in a meter format, for lack of a better description) and similar detection systems have been used successfully when it comes to well location. So maybe there is a bit more to it than meets the eye given the number of governments, military officials and major corporations that still rely on some mode of dowsing, be it the more primitive mode of doing things or a new electronic "sensing" system.

:roll: I can't wait till you're out of puberty, you're being such a temperamental spoil sport these days. :roll:
User avatar
Craig Browning
 
Posts: 1526
Joined: 13 Feb 2010, 05:20
Location: Northampton, MA

Re: Real Scientific Analysis of Dowsing

Postby ciscop » 08 Jun 2010, 00:02

you got invited to join mensa you said?
well... here is quote i found on the internet
let it be clear im just quoting which i believe is valid in this forum

Mensa is kinda like Who's Who Among America's High School Students... basically a scam to get money from those pathetic, introverted individuals who need to convince others that they're really special, because they can't do it through the greatness of their actions or accomplishments.

http://ask.metafilter.com/22917/Getting-into-Mensa

thats a funny line isnt? :lol:

also i wanna make sure people of google remember to type craig browning + shadow vision + david martin
they will get a laugh out of that one.
For every person who reads this valuable book there are hundreds of naïve souls who would prefer to have their spines tingled by a sensational but worthless potboiler by some hack journalist of the paranormal. You who now read these sentences join a small but wiser minority. Martin Gaardner (Psychology of the Psychic)
User avatar
ciscop
 
Posts: 1423
Joined: 22 Jul 2009, 12:04

Re: Real Scientific Analysis of Dowsing

Postby ProfWag » 08 Jun 2010, 23:27

Craig Browning wrote:
I don't know about the thing in Iraq (the proper spelling btw... but I'm just a High School grad, what would I know about proper language use? I guess when you qualify for MENSA you're allowed to not use proper spelling and sentence structure :roll: -- :shock: wait a minute! I was invited to join MENSA by in the early 80's... maybe I need to start acting smart and not spelling right and showing my ass off by being a bully?)

I must stick up for ciscop on this. First, English is his third language. In his native language, Irak may actually be the correct spelling. I have 7 years of higher education, but that doesn't mean I am a great speller. I make spelling and grammatical errors all the time. The occasional error shouldn't have anything to do with anything. However, I feel I must point this out. I've hinted before that it appears you are or have done so many things that after a while, one begins to question the validity of many of these statements. So surely if one can qualify for MENSA, then one should know the correct spelling of the word "lose." (Sorry, one of the few words I know the difference between so I had to throw that out there...)
Craig Browning wrote: I'd loose them all if I couldn't keep things clear to them there :o
User avatar
ProfWag
 
Posts: 3843
Joined: 05 Aug 2009, 03:54

Re: Real Scientific Analysis of Dowsing

Postby ciscop » 09 Jun 2010, 05:11

yes is Irak in spanish
but we do use Iraq when we use it by the full name of Republica de Iraq
For every person who reads this valuable book there are hundreds of naïve souls who would prefer to have their spines tingled by a sensational but worthless potboiler by some hack journalist of the paranormal. You who now read these sentences join a small but wiser minority. Martin Gaardner (Psychology of the Psychic)
User avatar
ciscop
 
Posts: 1423
Joined: 22 Jul 2009, 12:04

Re: Real Scientific Analysis of Dowsing

Postby Craig Browning » 10 Jun 2010, 00:49

Ok... I had no clue as to the multi-lingual talents of our great harasser... but there is such a thing as Spell Check which is what keeps my posts looking a bit better than they otherwise could look :o

I do find it ironic, the fact that many of the most educated and prolific writers, researchers, etc. couldn't spell. Some had horrid inabilities just functioning in common society, many being institutionalized as "mad" or a social burden until their genius started shining through.

When I was introduced to MENSA in the early 80s it was seen as a very legit scholastic "fellowship" from which many JPL employees, Cal Tech and MIT students were being "discovered". Though I had several friends involved with the group I refused to see myself as being that big a geek :lol:


AS TO THE RANDI SILLINESS... firstly, it's just that, pure silliness and a major waste of time and money. I typically get paid to jump through hoops by clients not pay for the privileged of "entertaining" a handful of biased "researchers". Besides, Randi only accepts those that are going to get him another spot on Larry King or 60 Minutes along side another college circuit tour, etc. The whole sham exists to support him and further the evangelizing of Atheism; proof can be seen in how it is exploited (including, how it's become the preferred batton whenever anyone claims an ability or experience. It's much akin to how fundamentalist Christians seek to shove the bible up everyone's ass... as undeniable fact/truth, et al).
User avatar
Craig Browning
 
Posts: 1526
Joined: 13 Feb 2010, 05:20
Location: Northampton, MA


Return to Introduce Yourself

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest