I have applied for the challenge

Peter Morris said:
I'm demostrating the errors of James Randi, not advocating dowsing. Randi claims it's easy to find water. It's actually pretty hard. You require an expert geologist - not a dowser - to find water.

Randi's anti-dowsing arguments are rubbish.
Click to expand...

Well, in Florida it is pretty easy to find underground water. You just dig a hole. And just because someone says something that is not true, that doesn't make everything they say not true.
 
Last edited:
robinson again:

"don't take my word for it"

OK, I won't.


AFAIK, researchers have never found rivers flowing underground.
That is why Randi says he would be willing to offer the Million for someone to come along and prove it to be the case.

The Challenge exists for people to prove their claims -- not for Randi to prove them wrong!

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/1999/11/991123164337.htm
  • Jon Martin, a University of Florida (Gainesville) assistant professor of geology, reveals that his research shows water that feeds the springs in the region flows through tiny pores in the rocks, not large underwater conduits.

In other words, it is in the rock. It doesn't flow openly, as on the surface. As common sense dictates.
 
webfusion said:
AFAIK, researchers have never found rivers flowing underground.
That is why Randi says he would be willing to offer the Million for someone to come along and prove it to be the case.
Click to expand...

You have to be kidding me. Not only are there underground streams, there are legal cases over them. Don't get all woo about this.
 
webfusion said:
In other words, it is in the rock. It doesn't flow openly, as on the surface. As common sense dictates.
Click to expand...

Mmm... now I know how Randi must feel when dealing with somebody making an outrageous, and stupid claim. You just want to say something insulting and have them never bother you again.
 
You must be one of those that can't follow a link. I already posted it for you.

Houston & T. C. Ry. v. East (1904)
Texas Supreme Court

Don't confuse moving streams or wide plains of water with an underground river. A true underground river is usually a limestone or lava conduit. Florida has a lot of them. Many parts are large enough to dive in, which a friend of mine loves to do. They often are really rivers, with large outflows into above ground areas, or under the ocean. There is a well known one that was discovered when it drained an entire lake into the Gulf of Mexico, after a plug collapsed.

I don't think you are trolling, so I am trying to help you out. Even if we drift off topic, perhaps under the influence of some unseen current....:D

heh
 
Last edited:
robinson said:
You must be one of those that can't follow a link. I already posted it for you.

Hello? Is there anybody in there?

Houston & T. C. Ry. v. East (1904)
Texas Supreme Court
Click to expand...

Hello -- I read the entire brief. All 2400 words of it.

The passage related to TC Ry v East makes reference to percolating groundwater.
Texas courts presume that all groundwater is percolating unless proved otherwise. The law about the ownership of percolating groundwater in Texas is well settled. The strict common-law or "English" rule was established by the Texas Supreme Court in Houston & T. C. Ry. v. East (1904). Under this rule the owner of the overlying land can pump and use the water with few restrictions, whatever the impact on adjacent landowners or more distant water users. Since the East case the rule has been elaborated somewhat by Texas courts but has not been modified significantly. A law passed in 1949 provides for the voluntary establishment of local conservation districts for underground water. Also, groundwater districts may be formed by special legislation and given powers significantly different from those of general-law districts. Such local districts exercise about the only control over landowner rights to groundwater.

Says not one word proving or giving any evidence of rivers underground.
Certainly in 1904, no modern technologies existed for discovering underground rivers -- any recent cases you can cite that do provide such evidence?

Is there any body of evidence today you can point to which proves there are indeed open-conduits of underground rivers?

The claim of this Applicant says there are --- Randi has a Million dollars to you, mr robinson, or anyone else (especially Peter Morris, who has been called delusional and now takes exception to that characterization) who can bring foward the evidence.
 
You got be kidding me. Look, I enjoy a good joke as much as anyone. But that is too absurd to even think about.

But you are making me laugh, so thanks. No really, this is funny. Like someone asking me to prove there is a sinkhole, and I get a million dollars if I can do it.

Hahahahaha!

But why would anyone take you seriously? See? Its too much. One has to believe you are kidding, or delusional. There is no other option.

Underground Stream: Water that passes through or under the earth's surface in a definite channel is generally known as an "underground stream."

See? Thats a definition, used by lawyers and engineers, in a real document. There are thousands and thousands of those documents. See? They are used by engineers and lawyers and real people over real issues, (almost always involving somebody screwing with somebody else who is downstream of a particular underground stream). See?

Its not hidden knowledge. Its not mysterious at all. That you keep asking for proof is funny.
 
Last edited:
Hilarious.

From the OP:
This is the most pervasive of the delusions that dowsers have and promote endlessly, that there exist vast rivers of fresh water that run deep in the ground and can be easily tapped. There are large reservoirs of water there to be accessed, it’s true, but they are certainly not “flowing”; they’re pretty well stationary.

No - massive - underground - rivers.
(maybe some minor streams, sure, but no major 'river' of underground water, such as the size of the Mississippi).

If you think there are ----- show us one.
 
And before you get nitpicky about definitions and terms, remember you are dealing with the collective mass of scientist, engineers and logical people who accept underground streams and rivers as a fact.

So if you say it doesn't exist, you have to prove it, not them.

heh
 
Let's see.

Water flowing through a limestone conduit wouldn't be a underground stream but a cave. That's already ruled out.

Water seeping through pores in limestone wouldn't be considered and underground stream because the water is impeded by the rock, even though there may be more flowing through that layer of rock.

So what's generally called an "underground stream" isn't what Mr. Randi is denying.
He's saying that there's no such thing as an unimpeded stream of underground water apart from where the water is passing through a cave.
So Mr. Morris must produce a stream of water flowing under the surface of the ground but not flowing through a conduit or seeping through porous rock.

That would indeed be paranormal!
 
robinson, your first two google 'hits' (of the nearly five million) specifically link to the research of the University of Florida assistant geology professor I quoted in my post #22.

What is wrong with you?

No - vast - underground - rivers- exist.

Peter Morris is delusional to claim they do.
You have been asked several times to offer evidence, and still are not showing the "underground rivers" that you seem to think are there. Why are you unable to offer that simple bit of proof? Show me, and everyone, on a map, a massive underground river.


robinson again:
So if you say it doesn't exist, you have to prove it, not them.
Click to expand...

This is woo.
 
Last edited:
Florida? Limestone, karst scenery, and therefore geology extremely amenable to the formation of underground cavities, through which water can run. In a stream or river like fashion. I've spent a lot of time in such places. Great fun.

I wish the whole world was full of underground rivers that I and my friends could splash around in. But dammit, limestone caves are just not that common. And I've never found or heard of underground rivers in sands, sediments, granites, and so on... would it were true...
 
Too much fun

webfusion said:
From the OP:
This is the most pervasive of the delusions that dowsers have and promote endlessly, that there exist vast rivers of fresh water that run deep in the ground and can be easily tapped. There are large reservoirs of water there to be accessed, it’s true, but they are certainly not “flowing”; they’re pretty well stationary.
Click to expand...

You know, until you posted that I forgot about it. A quick search and it appears that the only place on the entire internet such a claim appears, is on Randi's page.
http://www.randi.org/jr/2006-08/080406move.html

Nowhere else. In fact, even bringing it down to the phrase "of fresh water that run deep in the ground and can be easily tapped" or "fresh water that run deep in the ground", still no hits anywhere else. So, who s making the claim?

webfusion said:
No - massive - underground - rivers.
(maybe some minor streams, sure, but no major 'river' of underground water, such as the size of the Mississippi).

If you think there are ----- show us one.
Click to expand...

Nice twist. But you are defending, or arguing, about something that Randi said, not me. See? If somebody makes a claim, and it goes against common knowledge, then they have to back it up.

Even so, only you have mentioned the phrase "major 'river' of underground water, such as the size of the Mississippi". See? And then you want me to show you something that you made up.

Hahaha!

Really, its been fun, but I have to go. ;)
 
May I ask another question?

Is Mr. Morris' claim that there are massive underground rivers, say the size of the St John's River (a nice Floridian river)?
Is that what his steak is? Of course that would be a mistake.

Or channels of water underground that aren't either passing through caves or seeping through porous rock or more permeable material? Strange.

Oh, here it is
My claim is a simple one. I say that water does in fact move underground (e pur si muove) and a few related things.
Click to expand...

So he must prove that water can move underground.

I must say, this is the most amazing challenge thread I've ever read.
 
Last edited:
Hyparxis -- yes. Morris believes that there are vast underground flowing bodies of water similar to the Mississippi or Columbia or Ohio or Nile, or Hudson.

That's his 'stake' in this new claim for the million.

It cannot be otherwise. Common sense dictates.
 
webfusion said:
Hyparxis -- yes. Morris believes that there are vast underground flowing bodies of water similar to the Mississippi or Columbia or Ohio or Nile, or Hudson.

That's his 'stake' in this new claim for the million.

It cannot be otherwise. Common sense dictates.
Click to expand...

That would indeed be a mistake.
Does he mean vast quantity as opposed to big size?
Has he actually submitted his claim in writing yet, so it's clear just what he's driving at?

Oh again: Here it is from his website:

3. Applicant makes four statements

i) Some underground water exists in channels that run many metres under the surface. There are several different types of channel, some of which can be correctly classified as "underground rivers."

ii) Water flows underground through various different structures.

iii) Underground water is hard to find. Locating a suitable spot for a well requires someone with an expert understanding of geology after making a detailed study of the area. Random drilling by someone without proper expertise is highly likely to hit a dry spot.

iv) Water supply is extremely variable over a short distance. It is perfectly possible to locate a well that produces several hundred gallons per minute (GPM) while another well just a few metres away can produce very little or nothing at all.
Click to expand...

Nostrildumass predicts this challenge won't be accepted. Peter Morris will clarify that he isn't claiming an underground Amazon, James Randi will make some qualifying statements, and no geologists will be consulted.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom