Jim_MDP
Philosopher
My niece's ferret can do calculus. Hell... I can't do calculus.
Pixel42
Schrödinger's cat
If that was true then at least one of the dozens, if not hundreds, of dowsers who have taken a blind test would have done at least slightly better than chance. Yet none ever have, even though they were 100% successful in the unblinded test taken just seconds earlier.
The only rational explanation is that the perceived ability to dowse is an artifact of the ideomotor effect, confirmation bias, and the universal human tendency to underestimate the frequency at which coincidences occur.
Last edited:
AdMan
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Feb 10, 2010
- Messages
- 10,293
ComfySlippers
Banned
Ahem,
Hilariously funny but..,,
Why debate magic sticks?
Hilariously funny but..,,
Why debate magic sticks?
Nope, the tests have not failed miserably. The tests have been extremely successful in that they failed to demonstrate any dowsing ability.
It is the dowsing which has failed miserably.
That is exactly the point I was making. The reason the dowsers all failed is that nobody was dowsing
.Donn
Philosopher
And the tests give them ample time to frame their minds as they wish.
Doing tests that immediately exclude the dowser by being insensitive to their stated requirements is dumb. No tests are done that way.
Dubious Dick
Muse
- Joined
- Sep 3, 2008
- Messages
- 515
Dear SaskMick,
How very convenient that you claim double blind testing does not work for dowsing. That was the same excuse trotted out by James McCormick who sold the fake explosives detector, the ADE651.
Even if you did submit to testing, I would bet that when you failed you would make up some excuse after about why the testing was invalid. This is the common pattern.
Combined with your statement that you do not care what we think, that pretty much ends the point of you discussing the issue here. While you continue to rely on anecdote, and the nonsense fed you by the BSD, no one here is going to take your claims seriously.
Did you read the quote above from Ladewig? If not I strongly recommend that you do, and think about what he says very carefully.
Now, stop wasting your time and ours waffling. I am sure the folks at BSD will be more than happy to continue to indulge you in your fantasies.
How very convenient that you claim double blind testing does not work for dowsing. That was the same excuse trotted out by James McCormick who sold the fake explosives detector, the ADE651.
Even if you did submit to testing, I would bet that when you failed you would make up some excuse after about why the testing was invalid. This is the common pattern.
Combined with your statement that you do not care what we think, that pretty much ends the point of you discussing the issue here. While you continue to rely on anecdote, and the nonsense fed you by the BSD, no one here is going to take your claims seriously.
Did you read the quote above from Ladewig? If not I strongly recommend that you do, and think about what he says very carefully.
Now, stop wasting your time and ours waffling. I am sure the folks at BSD will be more than happy to continue to indulge you in your fantasies.
It's impossible to frame your mind to be neutral and carefree when you REALLY want to prove something.
I don't understand what you are saying, please rephrase.
Last edited:
Donn
Philosopher
So? Be carefree during the test.
Arrange the test in such a way to maximize your carefree neutral mind such that your attempts to dowse succeed greater than chance.
If you cannot devise such a test, then your dowsing simply does not work. Ever.
I was just waiting for someone to say How convenient
Was James McCormick's claim true. Yes
Does his ADE651 work. Yes
Does it work for everyone . No
Did he explain that to his customers . No
Is he a con man. Sort of
Did he deserve prison time Yes
Can you explain everything Dubious Dick ?
Donn
Philosopher
Dowse my reply.
I just dowsed your reply. It says it does not mean anything.
Donn
Philosopher
Where you carefree and neutral at the time? Because that can damp your powers.
If you had any real interest in the subject, you would be here with ideas and a keen interest in getting to the truth.
Meh.
If you had any real interest in the subject, you would be here with ideas and a keen interest in getting to the truth.
Meh.
Aha ! the rational explanation.
In that case I should stop calling myself a dowser, how about Ideomotorist ? What ever it's called it works fantastic
I do have a real interest in the subject.
My primary interest at the moment is the reaction of people dowsing for the first time. If they can do it,( and some can do it much better than others) I get them to dowse me. I say stay where you are, and come for a walk in my shoes. I then walk over something that they have just dowsed while they are standing still. The usual response it WTF !!! They often asked how I did it, I tell them I did nothing, YOU DID IT
Kid Eager
Philosopher
- Joined
- Nov 5, 2010
- Messages
- 7,296
Aha ! the rational explanation.
In that case I should stop calling myself a dowser, how about Ideomotorist ? What ever it's called it works fantastic
The movement of the dowsing rods are just a measure of your confirmation bias at a particular point in time.
Is there a name for that?
Donn
Philosopher
Ideotroller.