Is dowsing a reliable technique for finding well sites?

[(Q)]

In regards to the opening post made by Ivan and his claim,” Dowsing confirmed as real” certainly must be his personal opinion, as he seems to be convinced divination is real. But then, Ivan believes in lots of things.

First of all, Betz is a physicist, and his knowledge in hydrogeology is unknown. He thinks that there may be "subtle electromagnetic gradients" resulting from fissures and water flows that create changes in the electrical properties of rock and soil. Dowsers, he thinks, somehow sense these gradients in a hypersensitive state. His speculation is not based on any scientific data and he ignores the fact that geological instruments fail to detect these gradients. He also assumes that not only ‘chance’ would not produce better results but also claims scientific hydrogeological procedures would not produce better results than dowsers.

Most of Betz claims surround one particular individual in which the observations and conditions worked under are unknown.

 

[(Q)]

I guess the bottom line is does it hold up against double-blind testing.

Funny you should mention that – the Scheunen experiment conducted in Germany from 1987-1988 had over 500 self-proclaimed dowsers participate in more than 10,000 double-blind tests.

The results and conclusions from this experiment overwhelmingly supported ‘chance.’

 

[BoulderHead]

Are you confident you could find that string I spoke about on the previous page?

It's not a matter of confidence, it's a matter of chance. That would be like asking if I was confident I'd roll double sixes with dice.

Ok, after some rereading I acknowledge the meaning of your point was not something my question directly pertained to.

The reason I asked that question is because out of four individuals attempting to browse for the string, one quite apparently could not do it.

So, are you saying that individual did not have the capacity to hold a stick in his hand, wave it around in the air and pretend the stick was pointing at something?

In that same spirit I believe your question does not touch on my point either.


I have only acknowledged in my posts having been a participant to a curiosity. I have not attempted to claim the curiosity had any real merit (although I did say that if nothing else it would make for a good party trick). The only thing which I could not explain was my success at having the rods move inwards as they passed over the string while my eyes were closed.

 

[(Q)]

The only thing which I could not explain was my success at having the rods move inwards as they passed over the string while my eyes were closed.

Fair enough - but did it happen once or was the movement repeated each time you passed over the string? Did you pass over the string from different angles? Were there any other variables that may have caused you to inadvertenly move the rods yourself?

Your eyes were closed, right? Can anyone else somehow have moved the rods without you knowing?

 

[Ivan Seeking]

Ivan, did you get my PM?

Yes I did Arctic Fox. thanks. Work is crazy right now but I will follow up ASAP.

It should be noted there that if I can arrange it, Arctic Fox has agreed to be tested by someone at a local university.

 

[(Q)]

It should be noted there that if I can arrange it, Arctic Fox has agreed to be tested by someone at a local university.

And I suppose that you and he will be posting the results?

 

[Ivan Seeking]

In regards to the opening post made by Ivan and his claim,” Dowsing confirmed as real” certainly must be his personal opinion, as he seems to be convinced divination is real. But then, Ivan believes in lots of things..

The quote was "Dowsing confirmed as real?" Note the question mark. As a skeptic, one would think that you might at least try to give an accurate representation of the facts.

Keep in mind that you already have been warned twice. Some of your posts have been great however flame wars will not be allowed.

 

[(Q)]

The quote was "Dowsing confirmed as real?" Note the question mark. As a skeptic, one would think that you might at least try to give an accurate representation of the facts.

I did. Nowhere in the article does it make such a claim with or without a question mark therefore it is your personal opinion. Is that not a clear representation of the facts?

Keep in mind that you already have been warned twice.

I contacted Greg in regards to your warnings and he said you were equally at fault. Of course, if you are allowed to break the rules here without warning and can dole out warnings on a whim, what does that say about your ability to properly moderate this forum?

Some of your posts have been great however flame wars will not be allowed.

That is entirely incorrect and I take offence to the reference - ALL of my posts are great!

 

[BoulderHead]

The only thing which I could not explain was my success at having the rods move inwards as they passed over the string while my eyes were closed.

Fair enough - but did it happen once or was the movement repeated each time you passed over the string? Did you pass over the string from different angles? Were there any other variables that may have caused you to inadvertenly move the rods yourself?

Your eyes were closed, right? Can anyone else somehow have moved the rods without you knowing?

My eyes were closed, the person telling me when to stop wouldn't/couldn't have moved the rods. I only walked at 90-degree angles to the string. As I now remember it, the experiment was done several times and at least once met with failure of the rods to move at all. I recall the rate of success being higher than the rate of failure and I’m fairly sure this isn’t a false memory (although like many, I have those types too). The only variables I can think of which may have altered the outcome was listening to the footsteps while the string was being placed (I found it hard to ignore, but tried not to listen). I found it difficult to refrain from guessing where the string might be located, even following holding my ears, and feared my subconscious might cause the rods to move in reaction to a hunch even though consciously I attempted to not force a movement of my arms or wrist. Because I felt I couldn’t rule such a thing out I reserved judgment. It did not appear to me that random chance would have caused the results but neither did I feel it possible to rule out subconscious ‘trickery’. I do not hold out my attempts as being scientific as it was purely for fun. I have never tried it again since that time and certainly do not claim to hold mastery. I admit the rods having moved at all was my greatest thrill because with eyes open or shut, seeing the string or not, I did nothing consciously to move my body. I concluded that dowsing would be at minimum fun for people to experiment with. I am unfamiliar with attempts to earn the ‘Randi million’, but from personal attempts at dowsing I found the experiment worth my investment of time.

 

[zoobyshoe]

Seems like (Q) is the victor in this debate. I'm still waiting for some legitimate peer reviewed scientific evidence to back the claims of 'dowsers', as far as I know James Randi is the only man willing to do what it takes to find the truth about such subjects. And as (Q) mentioned, all participants agree to the conditions of the million dollar test and still no one has won the money.

What maintains my interest in the possibility there is something to dowsing are all the reports that people keep using it with better than chance success. In the stories reported here a lot of these people are just utility workers, not paranormal believers, who are taught the efficacy of dowsing as part of their occupation's lore. My thinking is that if there were nothing to it, it would end up actually working so rarely that the practise would be dropped and forgotten. The fact that these sorts of people, whose motivation is purely practical, are reported to still use it, is what makes me want to explore the possibility there is something to it.

Why everyone failed Randi's test is an excellent question. It is quite a damning circumstance, and since no one seemed to be able to pass the test you'd think that dowsing, really, should just about never work, and since it would just about never work, why would anyone practise it? I can't resolve this.

I'm curious to know what some of you think about psychics that speak to the dead, and that is not a jab because some of you have offered some very interesting theories on possible scientific explanations for dowsing. I guess the bottom line is does it hold up against double-blind testing.

Personally, I think all psychics who "speak to the dead" are bogus. Most are "mentalists" like James van Prague and the Crossing Over character (forget his name, just now). They fish for clues and give vague responses phrased such that they sound specific. Mostly they distract people with messages that the lost loved one forgives them and loves them, which is so much what most people want to hear they lose all objectivity about the vagueness of the actual details that come out.

 

[(Q)]

What maintains my interest in the possibility there is something to dowsing are all the reports that people keep using it with better than chance success.

One would think dowsers spend more time than others searching for water. Clearly, they must have gained some sort of experience and knowledge from their undertakings.

So, with that in mind, one would assume dowsers would never look for water at the top of a hill, for example, and instead might look for a gentle valley with a large potential drainage area behind it.

And with stick in hand, they would march on over to said valley and commence waving.

“Eureka! I found water!”

 

[zoobyshoe]

One would think dowsers spend more time than others searching for water. Clearly, they must have gained some sort of experience and knowledge from their undertakings.

So, with that in mind, one would assume dowsers would never look for water at the top of a hill, for example, and instead might look for a gentle valley with a large potential drainage area behind it.

The kind of dowsing that impressed me was when they find burried pipes when other means of locating them have failed (according to the stories).

In this situation, your mention of experience and knowledge still factors heavily in, except that the dowser would be using the trappings of dowsing rods to let go of preconceptions and let their unconscious tell them something they don't consciously want to suggest, because it would be counterintuitive. In other words, the dowser would be unconsciously weighing the situation and saying to himself "Since they didn't put it there (where they should have) or there, then they must have been going by such and such train of thinking and put it HERE! (rods cross!).

The dowser, himself, wouldn't be aware of following this train of logic. He would also, based on how experienced he was, always have a better than chance success rate, since he is actually working with the facts of what he can see in front of him, what he knows about where people decide to put pipes, and where the pipe wasn't.

 

[(Q)]

The dowser, himself, wouldn't be aware of following this train of logic.

So far we’re in somewhat agreement but I have a problem with that statement as it borders on divination. Most likely he knows well what he does with full on-board faculty.

He would also, based on how experienced he was, always have a better than chance success rate, since he is actually working with the facts of what he can see in front of him, what he knows about where people decide to put pipes, and where the pipe wasn't.

Precisely. And that is where we can discard the concept of divination as we unravel the mystic of the “dowser” by simply revealing its true nature - a “buried pipe expert.”

 

[zoobyshoe]

The dowser, himself, wouldn't be aware of following this train of logic.

So far we’re in somewhat agreement but I have a problem with that statement as it borders on divination.

Not at all. In this line of speculation there is no aquisition of information by extra-sensory means. There is no "divination". The unusual part is that the dowser puts what he knows together and comes up with the right answer without consciously deliberating about it.

Think of it this way: I am suggesting that he is tapping into the same prodigious ability that autistic math wizards use when they perform astonishing calculations in their head, and can't explain how they did it.

By resorting to the dowsing rods the utility worker would be letting go of the cumbersome process of consciously sorting out the mass of details he's noticed. He just let's his unconscious put it all together for him, and he is free to believe he just "sensed it with the rods", rather than have to engage in what might be a book-length examination of all the things he took into consideration if he had to do it consciously.

I think this is pretty common. If you take anyone who is good at anything, say basketball, there is always only a very limited range of things that the players are consciously deliberating about. The rest is quite automatic, and spontaneous: very fast judgements made for reasons they probably could not consciously explain with any accuracy.

Glen Gould said this about his piano playing: if you stop a centipede and ask it how it moves its 99th leg, it starts to think about that leg it and pretty soon it can't walk anymore. Likewise when he was playing, he couldn't think about how he was playing or more specifically, why he was humming along. All he could tell you is that if he didn't hum along, he couldn't play.

Most likely he knows well what he does with full on-board faculty.

Someone once explained the learning process to me like this: We all start out unconsciously imcompetent. We think, consciously, we are competent, but in fact we aren't

In the next stage we become consciously aware that we are incompetent.

In the third stage we start to acquire conscious competence. We begin to acquire expertize, and are consciously aware of it.

The fourth stage is unconscious competence. Because of all the practise and experience the person becomes able to do things skillfully without having to think about it.

By this logic, I think it is fair to claim that the experienced dowser/utility worker is not consciously aware of how he is finding pipes or whatever. He would just pick up the rods and "sense" the pipes.

Precisely. And that is where we can discard the concept of divination as we unravel the mystic of the “dowser” by simply revealing its true nature - a “buried pipe expert.”

Well, we can't discard anything since all I'm doing is speculating. This doesn't even constitute a theory: I haven't proposed any tests or predictions. Although what I suggest succeeds in explaining the alleged better-than-chance results, I'm not asserting I've indisputably hit the nail on the head. I'm just following a realistic train of logic to demonstrate that there are realistic trains of logic that could account for dowsing having a better-than-chance success rate. These are always to be preferred to explanations requiring the existence of unproven phenomena.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

I will open this thread again a little later

 

[Ivan Seeking]

I apologize for the interruption.

The thread is open again.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

It should be noted there that if I can arrange it, Arctic Fox has agreed to be tested by someone at a local university.

And I suppose that you and he will be posting the results?

Of course I would Q. That is really the whole point isn't it.

In the future, if you feel that I am acting dishonestly or unfairly please file a complaint with Greg or Chroot. You will refrain from using here a presumed lack of integrity as the explanation for anyone’s interest in fringe topics.

If you play nice we will not have a problem.

Edit: I also refer you to the PF guidelines:

Langauge Guidelines:
Any foul or hostile language used in Physics Forums will not be tolerated. This includes any derogatory statements and profanity. Direct or indirect personal attacks are strictly not permitted. Insults and negative attitudes are not allowed. It is better to walk away from a possible confontation and come back with constructive arguments.

All members have the right to their own ideas, beliefs and faiths . Members have the right to express these on physics forums with equal respect and consideration.

https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=5374

 

[(Q)]

Of course I would Q. That is really the whole point isn't it.

Yes, but the likeliness of biased results and lack of scientific method is very high all things considered.

In the future, if you feel that I am acting dishonestly or unfairly please file a complaint with Greg or Chroot. You will refrain from using here a presumed lack of integrity as the explanation for anyone’s interest in fringe topics.

What are you talking about? Please show me where I stated you were acting dishonestly or unfairly. And, please show where I stated as an explanation a lack of integrity to anyone.

If you play nice we will not have a problem.

Does that mean if I agree with everything you say, we won't have a problem?

Edit: I also refer you to the PF guidelines:

Yes, I've read the guidelines. And those guidelines you refer have nothing to do with me as I don't use derogatory statements or profanity, neither have I personally attacked anyone. If you have some evidence to the contrary, please show it to me.

 

[(Q)]

The unusual part is that the dowser puts what he knows together and comes up with the right answer without consciously deliberating about it. I am suggesting that he is tapping into the same prodigious ability that autistic math wizards use when they perform astonishing calculations in their head, and can't explain how they did it.

I seriously doubt that unless all dowsers are autistic. One simply can’t tap into a mental disorder.

He just let's his unconscious put it all together for him, and he is free to believe he just "sensed it with the rods", rather than have to engage in what might be a book-length examination of all the things he took into consideration if he had to do it consciously.

Again, this is merely chance that the dowser will find anything.

If you take anyone who is good at anything, say basketball, there is always only a very limited range of things that the players are consciously deliberating about. The rest is quite automatic, and spontaneous

Ok, not you’re comparing apples and oranges. The professional athlete hones his skills and techniques for many years in order to achieve a level of play in which their moves are almost instinctive. I’ve played team sports my entire life and although my abilities have increased year after year, I still have to concentrate very hard in order to make the play I want to make – the same goes for every athlete. The only difference is that they have practiced their techniques for so long, it makes it appear the move is effortless.

There is a clear difference between the way a professional athlete trains and a dowser. Athletes practice techniques that are finite and tangible and will produce a result each time. You can’t say that about dowsers because it’s not possible for a pipe to be buried in a standard location each and every time. How then does a dowser practice his skills? Quite simply, he cannot.

Glen Gould said this about his piano playing

Again, playing the piano and dowsing are clearly not in the same category. The keys to a piano are finite and tangible and will never change their positions on the keyboard. Can a pipe be buried in standard locations and never be changed from the norm? I would venture to say they do change for each and every case. Big difference.

Although what I suggest succeeds in explaining the alleged better-than-chance results

I don’t think so – a dowser cannot practice his skills in the same way another person practices their skills as its not logical to assume a pipe will be buried in the exact locations predetermined by practice so again it all comes down to chance.

 

[Arctic Fox]

Okay, (Q). So you don’t believe dowsing is a real... “thing”.
Fine. You’ve basically said the same statement over and over.
We get it. Shall we move on now?


I’ve a dash of Autism, being Asperger’s Disorder. Anyone think that may play a roll in the ability to dowse?

 

[zoobyshoe]

I seriously doubt that unless all dowsers are autistic. One simply can’t tap into a mental disorder.

I never said anyone could tap into a mental disorder. I said they could tap into an otherwise unused ability. The ability I was referring to is one that is obvious to see in the case of autistic-savants: unconscious but accurate assessments.

Again, this is merely chance that the dowser will find anything.

Earlier you agreed the dowsers better-than-chance success in finding pipes was due to him being a "burried pipe expert".
Now you are backpedaling and denying there is ever any better-than-chance success.

There is a clear difference between the way a professional athlete trains and a dowser. Athletes practice techniques that are finite and tangible and will produce a result each time. You can’t say that about dowsers because it’s not possible for a pipe to be buried in a standard location each and every time. How then does a dowser practice his skills? Quite simply, he cannot.

Both practise by trial and error. Both keep techniques that work and discard those that don't.

Again, playing the piano and dowsing are clearly not in the same category. The keys to a piano are finite and tangible and will never change their positions on the keyboard.

You completely missed my point about conscious deliberation. Your previous point was that the dowser must be fully conscious of what he was up to. The Glen Gould story was an example of someone who played less well in proportion to how consciously he was deliberating about it.

Can a pipe be buried in standard locations and never be changed from the norm? I would venture to say they do change for each and every case. Big difference.

There is no standard location for pipes in many situations. This is, apparently, why utility workers resort to dowsing.

I don’t think so – a dowser cannot practice his skills in the same way another person practices their skills as its not logical to assume a pipe will be buried in the exact locations predetermined by practice so again it all comes down to chance.

My understanding is that utility workers dig first where they expect the pipe logically to be. If it isn't there, or at a second test dig, then they "resort" to dowsing. Thus, through trial and error, they learn all kinds of things, conscious and unconscious, about where people make decisions to put pipes. Utility workers who replace or repair pipes do it everyday. They get plenty of practise.

 

[zoobyshoe]

I’ve a dash of Autism, being Asperger’s Disorder. Anyone think that may play a roll in the ability to dowse?

Seriously? Are you an "Aspie"?

If so, it begs the question, "Do Asperger's people make better dowsers?"

 

[Ivan Seeking]

The quote was "Dowsing confirmed as real?" Note the question mark. As a skeptic, one would think that you might at least try to give an accurate representation of the facts.

I did. Nowhere in the article does it make such a claim with or without a question mark therefore it is your personal opinion. Is that not a clear representation of the facts?

This is the authors responsibility. I posted this paper for your consideration. This does not imply that I consider this proof of anything. That's why we have discussions - to see if this is worth considering or not. Beat it up all that you want. That's why we have this forum

Keep in mind that you already have been warned twice.

I contacted Greg in regards to your warnings and he said you were equally at fault. Of course, if you are allowed to break the rules here without warning and can dole out warnings on a whim, what does that say about your ability to properly moderate this forum?

Okay. I contacted Greg and he confirms that you did contact him six months ago or so. He never mentioned it to me. I warned you when in two sentences you accused me of lying three times. I did no such thing. If you want to re-hash all of this then file a complaint or send me a PM. Otherwise I consider this a dead issue and I will delete any further references to this.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

Of course I would Q. That is really the whole point isn't it.

Yes, but the likeliness of biased results and lack of scientific method is very high all things considered.

What things considered. I have hardly said anything. Please tell us what about testing arctic fox, as discussed so far, constitutes bad science? Please be specific.

If you play nice we will not have a problem.

Does that mean if I agree with everything you say, we won't have a problem?

Is that not supposed to be an insult? No Q, we value differing opinions. Again, that is really the whole point of this forum.

 

[(Q)]

Shall we move on now?

Shall we move on to what?

Anyone think that may play a roll in the ability to dowse?

You would first have to establish that there are actual “abilities” to dowsing. And since none have been established and the fact that dowsing is pure chance, I would say no, Aspergers disorder will not play a roll.

 

[(Q)]

Earlier you agreed the dowsers better-than-chance success in finding pipes was due to him being a "burried pipe expert".
Now you are backpedaling and denying there is ever any better-than-chance success.

No, I agreed a buried pipe expert might have better than chance success, not a dowser. A buried pipe expert would use tangible methodical ways to find buried pipes. He would use his knowledge that pipes MUST be buried in certain places according to logic. If he looks and finds those pipes in those places and claims he found them dowsing, I suspect he would be lying.

Both practise by trial and error. Both keep techniques that work and discard those that don't.

Sorry, but I disagree and I suspect you don’t play sports. Techniques for practicing sports are tangible and have already been established – a player learns those techniques and does not discard them because those techniques work each and every time if done correctly. You can’t say the same thing about dowsing.

You completely missed my point about conscious deliberation.

No, I got your point and I followed it up with a statement about how Glen’s playing is linked to the fact that the keys never change position on the keyboard – that is the only reason why he is able to play without conscious deliberation. Are pipes buried in exact locations known to the dowser therefore he can simply walk up to that location and find the pipe? No, it is complete chance.

There is no standard location for pipes in many situations. This is, apparently, why utility workers resort to dowsing

Ok, so we need to go back and review which utility workers use dowsing to find pipes and see the results and compare them to other methods or determine if the results reveal chance.

My understanding is that utility workers dig first where they expect the pipe logically to be. If it isn't there, or at a second test dig, then they "resort" to dowsing.

So, they are forced to eventually resort to chance when logic fails. Of course, I would think those workers would be remiss not to use a metal detector before breaking ground.

Utility workers who replace or repair pipes do it everyday. They get plenty of practise.

Practice dowsing or practice the logic of pipe placement?

 

[(Q)]

Beat it up all that you want. That's why we have this forum

Gee thanks – that’s what I thought I was doing yet some here are taking it personally as if their whole life’s beliefs were hanging in the balance.

I contacted Greg and he confirms that you did contact him six months ago or so. He never mentioned it to me.

Of course, I always back up my statements with valid evidence. Perhaps he didn’t mention it to you because there was nothing to merit the warnings in the first place.

I warned you when in two sentences you accused me of lying three times. I did no such thing.

I see. Please show me in the Terms of Service where accusations of lying are prohibited.

If you want to re-hash all of this then file a complaint or send me a PM. Otherwise I consider this a dead issue and I will delete any further references to this.

Uh… I didn’t bring it up – YOU did. And I don’t go whining to moderators about anyone – I simply deal with them or ignore them.

Why delete the references, is there something you don’t want others to see?

 

[zoobyshoe]

Earlier you agreed the dowsers better-than-chance success in finding pipes was due to him being a "burried pipe expert".
Now you are backpedaling and denying there is ever any better-than-chance success.
No, I agreed a buried pipe expert might have better than chance success, not a dowser.

No you said "dowser":

Precisely. And that is where we can discard the concept of divination as we unravel the mystic of the "dowser" by simply revealing its true nature - a "buried pipe expert."

Here you have clearly said that the "dowser" was, in fact, a buried pipe expert.

Both practise by trial and error. Both keep techniques that work and discard those that don't.
Sorry, but I disagree and I suspect you don’t play sports. Techniques for practicing sports are tangible and have already been established – a player learns those techniques and does not discard them because those techniques work each and every time if done correctly. You can’t say the same thing about dowsing.

I see what you're saying here. The dowser doesn't spend time just practicing the way people practise for sports.

You completely missed my point about conscious deliberation.
No, I got your point and I followed it up with a statement about how Glen’s playing is linked to the fact that the keys never change position on the keyboard – that is the only reason why he is able to play without conscious deliberation. Are pipes buried in exact locations known to the dowser therefore he can simply walk up to that location and find the pipe? No, it is complete chance.

OK. I see what you're hung up on here.

There is no standard location for pipes in many situations. This is, apparently, why utility workers resort to dowsing

Ok, so we need to go back and review which utility workers use dowsing to find pipes and see the results and compare them to other methods or determine if the results reveal chance.

That would be fine by me.

My understanding is that utility workers dig first where they expect the pipe logically to be. If it isn't there, or at a second test dig, then they "resort" to dowsing.

So, they are forced to eventually resort to chance when logic fails. Of course, I would think those workers would be remiss not to use a metal detector before breaking ground.

According to the stories dowsers can find clay pipes. This is my whole reson for thinking there might be something to it: why go through the silly rigamarole of dowsing rods if they aren't getting better than chance results from them?
If they aren't getting better than chance results from them, they would be digging ALOT of fruitless holes. Personally, I wouldn't bother after the third empty hole found with dowsing rods. Better to make wild guesses and continuously fail than to continuously fail because of dowsing rods. I could see some crackpot willing to fail over and over, but not practical people on the time clock with a job to do.

Utility workers who replace or repair pipes do it everyday. They get plenty of practise.
Practice dowsing or practice the logic of pipe placement?

The logic of pipe placement, obviously, but not necessarily on a conscious level.

 

[(Q)]

Zobbyshoe

You must be beginning to concede the argument as you now turn your attention away to nitpicking mine.

If you insist that everything be spelled out for you then so be it.

No you said "dowser":

A dowser is a self-professed individual who claims to find things via divination.

Here you have clearly said that the "dowser" was, in fact, a buried pipe expert.

But I was following your line of logic, which stated that the ‘dowser’ was actually working with the facts of what he can see in front of him, what he knows about where people decide to put pipes, and where the pipe wasn't.

Clearly there is a big difference between a person using divination and one using facts of where pipes are buried. If this particular individual used the facts and then claimed to be a dowser, then he is a fraud and he is in fact a buried pipe expert, and I would call him such. But we are talking about self-proclaimed dowsers so my statement is correct.

The dowser doesn't spend time just practicing the way people practise for sports.

No, I am stating that there are no verifiable techniques that a dowser can use to practice whereas an athlete has verifiable techniques to practice. How does one practice something where the results are pure chance?

why go through the silly rigamarole of dowsing rods if they aren't getting better than chance results from them?

Because dowsers claim to have ‘special abilities’ and if we’ve learned anything about the human condition we know people like to get attention especially if they think they have abilities through divination. This entire forum is built partly on that concept.

I could see some crackpot willing to fail over and over, but not practical people on the time clock with a job to do.

Do you really think practical people would turn to dowsing?

And of course, crackpots fail over and over all the time yet refuse to understand or acknowledge it. This forum, along with many others is ripe with crackpots who have failed miserably, yet can’t see it for themselves.

The logic of pipe placement, obviously, but not necessarily on a conscious level.

I have a hard time understanding why anyone would want to bury pipes on anything but a conscious level – perhaps you can elaborate why such a thing would occur?

 

[zoobyshoe]

Zobbyshoe

You must be beginning to concede the argument as you now turn your attention away to nitpicking mine.

No, I have been nitpicking your argument from the start. The devil's in the nits, to paraphrase the famous saying.

No you said "dowser":
A dowser is a self-professed individual who claims to find things via divination.

Some are, I suppose. Others do it just because they were taught that it works with no explanation of the mechanism. Ivan's father, apparently, was quite surprised to hear that it wasn't supposed to be scientifically possible. He'd been doing it for years with the vague notion there was some kind of electromagnetic thing at work. Other utility workers are much the same, I suppose.

Here you have clearly said that the "dowser" was, in fact, a buried pipe expert.

But I was following your line of logic, which stated that the ‘dowser’ was actually working with the facts of what he can see in front of him, what he knows about where people decide to put pipes, and where the pipe wasn't.

In other words, you clearly said the dowser was a buried pipe expert.

Clearly there is a big difference between a person using divination and one using facts of where pipes are buried. If this particular individual used the facts and then claimed to be a dowser, then he is a fraud and he is in fact a buried pipe expert, and I would call him such. But we are talking about self-proclaimed dowsers so my statement is correct.

My speculation was that the person is not consciously aware of calculating with the unconscious store of information at his disposal. There's no question here of fraud. I believe that this is the real point of disagreement between us: you don't believe a person can slip into a state of mind like this at will. I believe they could, if they were taught that the divining rods work, and don't particularly care how they work.

No, I am stating that there are no verifiable techniques that a dowser can use to practice whereas an athlete has verifiable techniques to practice. How does one practice something where the results are pure chance?

Your quetion assumes the rsults are pure chance.

I could see some crackpot willing to fail over and over, but not practical people on the time clock with a job to do.

Do you really think practical people would turn to dowsing?

The reports are that they do.

The logic of pipe placement, obviously, but not necessarily on a conscious level.
I have a hard time understanding why anyone would want to bury pipes on anything but a conscious level – perhaps you can elaborate why such a thing would occur?

As someone recently said to me, "if you want everything spelled out for you..." I did not say people learn to bury pipes unconsciously, I said they might unconsciously learn many things about how other people bury pipes.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

Beat it up all that you want. That's why we have this forum

Gee thanks – that’s what I thought I was doing yet some here are taking it personally as if their whole life’s beliefs were hanging in the balance.

Alright the heck with it. If you want to play more games I'll play along. I sure wouldn't want anyone to think that I'm hiding anything.

This last statement of yours is a hint at your technique. You ignore or misrepresent what came before.

I contacted Greg and he confirms that you did contact him six months ago or so. He never mentioned it to me.

Of course, I always back up my statements with valid evidence. Perhaps he didn’t mention it to you because there was nothing to merit the warnings in the first place.

Since I have learned to anticipate your misrepresentations of the facts, I assumed that this was just more misdirection.

I warned you when in two sentences you accused me of lying three times. I did no such thing.

I see. Please show me in the Terms of Service where accusations of lying are prohibited.

It is when the accusation is false. It was and you know it.

If you want to re-hash all of this then file a complaint or send me a PM. Otherwise I consider this a dead issue and I will delete any further references to this.

Uh… I didn’t bring it up – YOU did. And I don’t go whining to moderators about anyone – I simply deal with them or ignore them.

I reminded you that you had been warned twice. I did so since I want to be fair. I also had not been told about your pm to Greg by a reliable source yet.

Why delete the references, is there something you don’t want others to see?

No Q, you're right. We wouldn't want to give that appearance would we.

 

[(Q)]

No, I have been nitpicking your argument from the start.

Fine, whatever.

I suppose. Others do it just because they were taught that it works with no explanation of the mechanism

That would presume such a mechanism existed and whether or not it worked. So far, no such mechanism has been shown to exist.

He'd been doing it for years with the vague notion there was some kind of electromagnetic thing at work.

Or, he is under the delusion he’s been doing it for years.

Other utility workers are much the same, I suppose.

Or not.

In other words, you clearly said the dowser was a buried pipe expert

Oh I get it now – you’re trying to annoy me. Ha ha, good one.

you don't believe a person can slip into a state of mind like this at will. I believe they could, if they were taught that the divining rods work, and don't particularly care how they work.

No, I never said I don’t believe a person can slip into a state of mind. And of course, another assumption that divining rods actually work – they are just pieces of wood , you know.

Your quetion assumes the rsults are pure chance.

Every experiment ever conducted on dowsers revealed the same results. Doesn’t a theory have to be falsifiable and can be falsified with just one experiment?

I did not say people learn to bury pipes unconsciously, I said they might unconsciously learn many things about how other people bury pipes.

I’m not sure how that can take place. Would that require a self-professed dowser to spend time with buried pipe experts?

 

[Arctic Fox]

MY OFFICIAL RESIGNATION, I’m finished! It’s over!


I am hereby officially submitting my resignation as an adult. I have decided to leave behind the complexities of the adult world and only accept the responsibilities of a young child.

I want to return to a time when life was simple. When all I knew was the alphabet, colors and numbers.

I want to go to a fast food place and think it is a Five Star Restaurant.

I want to play hide and seek and make mud pies with friends.

I want to think candy is better than money because you can eat it.

I want to live in a time where nothing can bother me because I don't know what the adults know and I don't care.

I want to think the world is peaceful and everyone is kind and honest.

I want to believe anything is possible.

I don't want my life to consist of more work than one person can handle, depressing news and how to survive more days in a month than there is money in the bank.

I want to believe in the Easter Bunny, Santa Claus and the true meaning of Thanksgiving.

I want to believe in the power of love, friendship, and having snowball fights in the winter.

So, I am sending you my check book, my car keys, and my bills.

I am officially resigning as an adult.

If you want to discuss this further...

You will have to catch me first because...







TAG! You're IT!



Dowsing isn’t just looking for water or pipes. Try finding a stolen vehicle in a city of 1.2Million. Or a lost cat in a National Forest. Or a bracelet lost months earlier...

Can’t we all just... get along? :D

 

[zoobyshoe]

I suppose. Others do it just because they were taught that it works with no explanation of the mechanism
That would presume such a mechanism existed and whether or not it worked. So far, no such mechanism has been shown to exist.

Yes, it presumes such a mechanism exists. That was stated in my introduction to my line of speculation. I stipulated for myself the authenticity of dowsing, and speculated forth from that stipulation.

I am not trying to prove dowsing, I am assuming for the sake of argument there is something to it, and trying to speculate logically what the mechanism may be in realistic, non-magical terms. The stipulation can't be attacked, since its a stipulation. It's a stepping off point for a mental excercize.

In other words, you clearly said the dowser was a buried pipe expert

Oh I get it now – you’re trying to annoy me. Ha ha, good one.

No, it may annoy you to be quoted verbatim to have said something you later denied having said, but my primary intention wasn't to annoy you.

Your quetion assumes the rsults are pure chance.

Every experiment ever conducted on dowsers revealed the same results. Doesn’t a theory have to be falsifiable and can be falsified with just one experiment?

I haven't read anyone's Theory of Special Dowsing or the follow up Theory of General Dowsing. C'mon! Dowsing has never been presented on the level of a theory. It remains a claim.

As I said in my introduction to my speculation, the fact it has failed all these tests is pretty damning.

The fact is, according to stories that have been posted in threads about dowsing here, people using it for purely practical purposes, that is: to locate pipes and other buried utilities, claim that it works more often than not, and is reliable. That being the case, that they claim this, I am not prone to completely close my mind to it. And, stipulating they they aren't lying or deluded, I am trying to reason out a realistic explanation. Ya see? (I know there is one other thread about dowsing that has been contributed to in the past six months or so, and there may actually be two. These are where these stories are. I don't know if you've read them.)

I did not say people learn to bury pipes unconsciously, I said they might unconsciously learn many things about how other people bury pipes.

I’m not sure how that can take place.

Unconsciously, like I said.

Would that require a self-professed dowser to spend time with buried pipe experts?

No. It would just require that the person find a lot of pipes. Whenever we do anything a lot we pick up a lot of things unconsciously about what we're doing. Consciously, too, of course, but the notion I'm playing around with here is that the divining rods act as a distraction for the person's conscious mind so that he can unconsciously put together the mass of facts at his disposal very quickly, and figure out where the pipe is, fully believing the rods sensed it.

 

[(Q)]

Yes, it presumes such a mechanism exists.

Kinda like presuming aliens are visiting Earth with UFO's?

No, it may annoy you to be quoted verbatim to have said something you later denied having said, but my primary intention wasn't to annoy you.

Then you either misunderstood or I failed miserably trying to explain it to you. That's even more annoying. ;)

Dowsing has never been presented on the level of a theory.

Actually, it has and those theories border on pseudoscience and protoscience.

Ya see?

Uh-huh.

Unconsciously, like I said.

No, you misunderstood - I meant how can it physically take place? Do dowsers follow around buried pipe experts, have meetings, that sort of thing?

the divining rods act as a distraction for the person's conscious mind

Ok, I see what you're getting at. But there are those who use "L" shaped brass rods due to the notion the rod is attune to the Earths magnetic fields. Do you think the dowser would therefore not involuntarily move the rods but instead the rods would move themselves due to the magnetic fields?