EHocking
Penultimate Amazing
Yes, but in this case, 90% correct is STILL within random chance, and then, only at odds of 1:100.
See my previous reply to edge for a fuller account.
EHocking
Penultimate Amazing
Sorry - looks like GeoCities can't cope with the traffic. I've asked for the original to reduce the size of the PDF and see if that helps.
Anyone got an alternate site?
Could we attach it to this thread?
There are no guesses and no cheating.
So I had to rewrite this again. She doesen't understand so I have to elaborate some.
Alison,
Instead of ten spots on the ground that I pick and say
are good for a container to be placed on, ten of them.
I pick one spot and you will set one of the containers
on that spot one at a time, they are on the ground.
There are no ten spots anywhere that will work at
once.
I will only find one.
The way I do this is scan an area and find the weakest
spot or attraction or reaction.
No metals under me to confuse with a response as a
target.
As close to neutral as possible a dead zone, blank
spot, a place were IF I WHERE MINING , I wouldn’t
mine.
So that there is a difference, that’s readable by a
scale, that’s hanging off a tripod, over the spot that
I choose.
I the idea is that I will get very little pull on the
stick and when attached to the scale what I’m looking
for is a reading that’s less than a quarter of an
once.
When the target is there I need it to show more.
I may find one neutral spot, where the targets empty or
not can sit on, one at a time and pick the one with the
metal, silver, gold what ever the target maybe.
Each pass of ten containers is one of ten passes
that's a total of 100 scans.
Each pass of 10 will have one target show up in any of
the random numbered container from one to ten.
There are ten cards you blindly chose one that will
represent the container that you will place the target
in.
While you are doing this I will be out of sight and
hearing range, here we used the house.
Each time you place a container in the spot I will
leave and you all will call me back when you have
switched the containers, 1 through 10.
Unless I pick lets say number 5 at that point that set
of ten is done and we will start with the next set of
10 after which you will choose a new card for the next
placement of metals or target.
The metal target should fit in a thirty five
millimeter film can, that will be placed into a 11
once coffee can all are plastic.
You can then use a placebo target that represents the
metal in volume or size to me its irrelevant. We can
have 9 more film cans with placebos that are void of
the metal and all can contain the same plastic or
rubber placebos. But it must be plastic or rubber.
Or to make it easy you can use bubble gum.
You can record anything you want, any way you want.
From this point I must hit 7 of 10 correct now what do
I have to do after this test to win?
How many more tests to prove?
Mike
So the test in this way is only hits on the target.
So I had to rewrite this again. She doesen't understand so I have to elaborate some.
Alison,
Instead of ten spots on the ground that I pick and say
are good for a container to be placed on, ten of them.
I pick one spot and you will set one of the containers
on that spot one at a time, they are on the ground.
There are no ten spots anywhere that will work at
once.
I will only find one.
The way I do this is scan an area and find the weakest
spot or attraction or reaction.
No metals under me to confuse with a response as a
target.
As close to neutral as possible a dead zone, blank
spot, a place were IF I WHERE MINING , I wouldn’t
mine.
So that there is a difference, that’s readable by a
scale, that’s hanging off a tripod, over the spot that
I choose.
I the idea is that I will get very little pull on the
stick and when attached to the scale what I’m looking
for is a reading that’s less than a quarter of an
once.
When the target is there I need it to show more.
I may find one neutral spot, where the targets empty or
not can sit on, one at a time and pick the one with the
metal, silver, gold what ever the target maybe.
Each pass of ten containers is one of ten passes
that's a total of 100 scans.
Each pass of 10 will have one target show up in any of
the random numbered container from one to ten.
There are ten cards you blindly chose one that will
represent the container that you will place the target
in.
While you are doing this I will be out of sight and
hearing range, here we used the house.
Each time you place a container in the spot I will
leave and you all will call me back when you have
switched the containers, 1 through 10.
Unless I pick lets say number 5 at that point that set
of ten is done and we will start with the next set of
10 after which you will choose a new card for the next
placement of metals or target.
The metal target should fit in a thirty five
millimeter film can, that will be placed into a 11
once coffee can all are plastic.
You can then use a placebo target that represents the
metal in volume or size to me its irrelevant. We can
have 9 more film cans with placebos that are void of
the metal and all can contain the same plastic or
rubber placebos. But it must be plastic or rubber.
Or to make it easy you can use bubble gum.
You can record anything you want, any way you want.
From this point I must hit 7 of 10 correct now what do
I have to do after this test to win?
How many more tests to prove?
Mike
So the test in this way is only hits on the target.
Edge, that's not how your demonstration for SezMe worked -
It seems like you were deciding whether or not the target was there not by the apparent force shown on the scale but by some other method. Any comments?
Marcus
Illuminator
- Joined
- Feb 17, 2007
- Messages
- 3,857
In this demonstration, there is a 50/50 chance of a correct pick, assuming everything is on the level and edge has no idea how many times the gold will be there. According to the tables, 70 correct guesses out of 100 would meet the requirement of 1 in 10,000, 10 readings is not going to show anything. Success with 50 readings would certainly get my attentions, but not 10.
Dumb All Over
A Little Ugly on the Side
I did take statistics in college but that was over a lifetime ago. Also, I'm not the best mathematician in the world. Can someone help to boil these statistics down so that a dummy like me can understand them.
The test described is very akin to flipping a coin, so I guess each trial would have a 50/50 chance of being correct. Is it statistically significant that edge was able to correctly guess nine of ten times? I admit it was premature of me to declare 90% accuracy. Sensationalism sells.
The test described is very akin to flipping a coin, so I guess each trial would have a 50/50 chance of being correct. Is it statistically significant that edge was able to correctly guess nine of ten times? I admit it was premature of me to declare 90% accuracy. Sensationalism sells.
A Dowsing Demonstration by Edge
1 Introduction
My mate and I planned a mid-May vacation in northern California in the vicinity of where Edge
(hereinafter Mike) lives. Before leaving, he and I exchanged phone numbers and we were finally
able to contact each other. So on Thursday, May 18th late in the afternoon, Mike and his brother,
Danny, drove to where I was staying and we spent a couple of hours dowsing. My sincere thanks
to Mike and Danny for going a considerable distance out of their way on very short notice in order
to meet with us and conduct this demonstration.
Mike had a specific goal in mind for this demonstration, namely, to ascertain whether his dowsing
had to be calibrated for different dowsing locations (more on what “calibration” means below).
My main goal was to get a definitive understanding of kind of test Mike is proposing because I
could not get a clear picture of it from his postings on the JREF forum. Secondarily, I wanted to
do an informal test to see how it would go. And, finally, I wanted to meet “edge” because he
seemed to be an interesting guy.
2 Preliminaries
After introductions and a brief discussion of Mike’s background, we began with Mike just
dowsing in the general area of our cabin. I asked what he thought was “forcing” his dowsing rod
and, after some discussion, it turns out he thinks that somehow gravity is affecting what he is
dowsing for and that his dowsing rod picks up this change in gravity. As an aside, I would note
that Mike (edge) in person is very much reflected in his postings. He could not, in my opinion,
articulate a clear explanation of his “theory” of dowsing.
At one point, Mike offered to have me dowse. I declined. But I did put my finger along the
dowsing rod as he did some dowsing. He does grip the dowsing rod quite firmly.
3 Demonstration
As I mentioned, this was not a well planned, formal test. We did not know until the earlier in the
day when we met that we would even be able to get together at all. So everything we did was
done in an ad hoc manner.
First, I’ll describe the equipment that Mike and Danny brought with them then I’ll describe the
testing protocol we established and subsequently conducted.
3.1 Equipment
“Equipment” is a too highfaluting word for what we had to work with - but please don’t
misinterpret my comment. We had what Mike could muster up at a minutes notice and I had
little but pen and paper to add to the mix. As mentioned above, this was ad hocracy at its
finest.
Mike brought with him:
• His dowsing rod
• A silver tray
• A large cardboard box
• A small scale typically used to weigh envelopes in order to ascertain the correct
postage to use.
The best picture I have
of his dowsing rod is
shown in Figure 1. I
had my friend with the
camera take a close-up
picture of the rod itself
but that picture, sadly,
seems to have been
lost.
The dowsing rod is a
“carefully selected”
(quoting Mike) branch
from a willow tree.
The “head” of the rod
is about 9 inches long
w h i le the two
branching limbs are
about 24 inches long.
The tip of the head of the rod is wrapped in black electricians tape. When queried about this,
Mike indicated that the tape holds a USA dime to the dowsing rod. As I understand it, this
dime, in combination with the dowsing rod itself, is what allows Mike to detect gravity
changes. In response to a
question by my friend with
the camera, Mike stated
that if he removed the
dime, this same dowsing
rod would then become a
more traditional water
dowsing rod.
The silver tray (shown
on the right in Figure
2) would become the
t a r g et o f o u r
demonstration. Mike
brought this tray
Figure 1
Figure 2
because he had found it in a hidden location at his sister’s house using this dowsing rod so he
knew that it would affect his dowsing.
The cardboard box was used to conveniently carry Mike’s equipment but it also served as a
component of our demonstration (see the next section). By the way, the “arms” of the
dowsing rod are visible above the plastic drain pan.
The scale is shown in
Figure 3. It measures
the downward force
exerted by whatever is
attached to it. It is a
simple, mechanical
device; its most
import ant characteristic
relevant to
this test is that the
reading marks are not
linear. The indicator
runs from 0 to 90
d e g r e e s wh i c h
indicates a force of
from 0 to 4 ounces.
But 1 ounce is at 45
degrees, 2 ounces is at
67.5 degrees and 3
ounces is at 79.25
degrees and 4 ounces
(its limit) is at 90
degrees.
3.2 Demonstration Protocol
In broad terms, the protocol consisted of these steps:
• Selecting a demonstration site
• Setting up the equipment
• Defining the demonstration process
• Pre-trial calibration
Figure 3
• Trials
• Post-trial calibration
3.2.1 Selecting a demonstration site
First, Mike needed to verify that the porch of our cabin was not contaminated by
anything that would affect his work. He walked along the porch area while dowsing and
stated that there was nothing under the porch that would interfere with his efforts.
3.2.2 Setting up the equipment
This step was critical for me to achieve my goal because I was finally able to see and
understand what Mike is actually proposing for the MDC.
First, Mike hung a (bent out of shape) ordinary coat hanger from a beam in the roof of
the porch. The hook of the coat hanger hung at the lowest point which you can see at
the very top of Figure 3. As shown in that figure, the scale was directly attached to the
coat hanger.
A thin, light string, (barely) visible at the bottom of Figure 3, hung down from the scale.
A loop at the bottom of this string was used to attach the head of the dowsing rod to the
scale.
The targets of the dowsing are shown in Figure 2. The “target” is the silver tray. The
“dummy” was a RubberMaid drain pad taken from the cabin kitchen. The cardboard
box was used to disguise which item was in the target area by placing the target inside
the box.
3.2.3 Defining the demonstration process
After brief discussions, we agreed upon a protocol that would have either the target or
dummy put in the box outside of Mike’s view. Mike would then dowse for the target
using the scale as an indicator of its presence or absence. Each trial would have Mike
state without equivocation whether the target was there or not. There would be ten
trials.
Before the trials began, there would be two calibration trials in which Mike would know
whether the target was there or not.
3.2.4 Pre-trial calibration
In Mike’s presence, I put the dummy target in the box and Mike dowsed. Danny would
stand to Mike’s right on the ground just off the porch as seen in Figure 4 (although he
was not standing there when this picure was taken.) And read off the scale reading.
When the scale stabilized, it read ¼ ounce. This took about 15 seconds (based on my
memory alone - I did not have a stopwatch with me). Figure 4 shows Mike while
actually dowsing.
I then put the tray in the box in Mike’s presence and he dowsed again. This time the
stabilized scale reading was 1 ounce.
Note that this process was central to meeting Mike’s goal. He reports that similar trials
in other locations have resulted in a dummy reading of 3 ounces. Thus, Mike concludes
that the calibration of his dowsing process is site specific.
3.2.5 Trials
Out of sight of everyone, I flipped a quarter 10 times. I decided before starting that
heads would equate to dummy and tails would equate to target.
For each trial, Mike and Danny would go back behind the cabin as we put either the
dummy or the target in the box. I stood where I could see both Mike and Danny at the
rear of the cabin while my mate made the placement to make sure there was no way they
could see what she was doing. In fact, in one trial, she purposely dropped the trey on
the porch while putting the dummy in the box to see if Mike was using a sound clue.
Since I observed each trial, this was only a single-blind experiment. That is me in the
foreground in Figure 4.
Each trial proceeded with Mike doing the dowsing and Danny reading off the scale
value as sort of a running commentary, like a race track announcer. In fact, to me it
seemed as if Danny was encouraging Mike to get a high value.
Figure 4
After the scale reading stabilized, the trial would end and Mike stated clearly “dummy”
or “target”. Interestingly, the time to stabilization increased as we went through the
trials; note, again, that this is a subjective judgement because I did not have a stop watch
with which to time each trial. At first, it seemed that stabilization would occur within
15-30 seconds. By the end, it was taking about a minute. A couple of times Mike
would have to stop, shake off his tension and resume the dowsing.
After the fifth trial, Mike was getting fatigued so we took a couple minute break. This
fatigue consists of his having to stand perfectly still during each trial and having to grip
the dowsing rod firmly in each hand. I have no doubt that this effort is, in fact,
fatiguing.
Here are the results:
Trial In Box Mike Result
1 Dummy Dummy True
2 Dummy Dummy True
3 Dummy Dummy True
4 Target Target True
5 Dummy Dummy True
6 Dummy Dummy True
7 Dummy Dummy True
8 Target Target True
9 Target Dummy False
10 Dummy Dummy True
By this series of tests, Mike scored 90% correct.
3.2.6 Post-trial calibration
After this series of trials, we did one more calibration test with Mike knowing the tray
was in the box. He correctly stated it was there.
4 Post-Demonstration Activities
After this set of trials, we did some “fun” dowsing just for the hell of it. These activities have no
probative value but I report them here for completeness.
Since Mike asserts that he is detecting metals (not just gold) I asked him to dowse my car. He did
for a couple of seconds by holding the dowsing rod over the trunk of the car. The rod did not dip.
We then walked down by Coffee Creek (a vigorously flowing stream at this time of year due to
snow melt) which is just out of sight over the spare tire of Mike’s vehicle in Figure 1. Mike’s
dowsing revealed that there were several locations where gold existed. Interestingly, when doing
this dowsing, the rod responded instantaneously and dramatically by dropping to near vertical.
I should note that this area was extensively hydraulically mined for gold in the 1800s. In fact, not
100 yards upstream there is a huge (30 feet high by 100 feet long) rock pile left over from
previous mining operations.
5 Notes
I offer these in no particular order of importance to give my full sense of this demonstration.
5.1 Demonstration
I have used the word “demonstration” here instead of “test” deliberately. I do not consider
this exercise to have been a test in the sense that Randi would use the term. My goal, as
stated, was simply to get a better understanding of what Mike asserts that he can do by
actually observing the dowsing process that will, presumably, be the basis of his current
MDC.
Expanding on that thought, I had not been able to get a clear sense of what Mike is actually
proposing he can do with his dowsing based on his posts on the JREF forum. Now that I have
seen Mike in action, I have a much better appreciation of what he claims to be able to do. I
hope I have conveyed a clearer idea of how he proposes to be tested in this document so that
we can focus on the MDC test protocol.
5.2 Mike
My impression of Mike in person very much reflects what you see on-line. He is a voluble
guy who has trouble putting his thoughts in clear order. We’ll have to deal with that fact.
5.3 Demonstration Protocol
There are so many holes in the protocol that we used that RoadToad could drive a truck
through it. Did the cardboard box have a hole in it? Was Danny somehow giving clues to
Mike? Did the trey (which I did not inspect at all) have a magnet in it?
5.4 Decision Criteria
The calibration phase established a background “force” of ¼ ounce and a target force of 1
ounce. Yet, in nearly all the trials, these benchmarks were ignored. Many times (no, I did not
write down the final stabilization reading) the scale read 2 ounces or above yet Mike would
declare (correctly) that the target was not there.
During one trial (#7, I think) Mike declared that the rod was “just not grabbing” him like it
had done before so, in spite of the scale reading he (correctly) declared that the target was
absent.
In retrospect, I was really stupid to not get Mike to state - and adhere to - his decision criteria
before we actually began the trials..
5.5 What’s going on?
I will offer two distinct impressions of Mike (and Danny).
I conclude Mike really believes that he can dowse. Danny is most certainly a believer so that
ANY test that involves him must be rejected out of hand. Mike can, in a wink of an eye,
explain away any inconsistency and just plow ahead as if he is actually dowsing.
My mate, however, was absolutely furious with me regarding this whole episode. She was
convinced that Mike and Danny ran a scam on me and that I was a total fool to even let the
whole experiment proceed. She’s convinced that Mike (and Danny) are scammers of the first
order and knowingly made an absolute jerk out of me.
Who knows?
6 Photos
I did adjust the photos contained in this report in order to show as much detail as possible.
This manipulation merely consisted of using the standard image adjustment tools in Corel’s
Paint Shop program. I have the originals and would be happy to make them available should
anyone want them.
1 Introduction
My mate and I planned a mid-May vacation in northern California in the vicinity of where Edge
(hereinafter Mike) lives. Before leaving, he and I exchanged phone numbers and we were finally
able to contact each other. So on Thursday, May 18th late in the afternoon, Mike and his brother,
Danny, drove to where I was staying and we spent a couple of hours dowsing. My sincere thanks
to Mike and Danny for going a considerable distance out of their way on very short notice in order
to meet with us and conduct this demonstration.
Mike had a specific goal in mind for this demonstration, namely, to ascertain whether his dowsing
had to be calibrated for different dowsing locations (more on what “calibration” means below).
My main goal was to get a definitive understanding of kind of test Mike is proposing because I
could not get a clear picture of it from his postings on the JREF forum. Secondarily, I wanted to
do an informal test to see how it would go. And, finally, I wanted to meet “edge” because he
seemed to be an interesting guy.
2 Preliminaries
After introductions and a brief discussion of Mike’s background, we began with Mike just
dowsing in the general area of our cabin. I asked what he thought was “forcing” his dowsing rod
and, after some discussion, it turns out he thinks that somehow gravity is affecting what he is
dowsing for and that his dowsing rod picks up this change in gravity. As an aside, I would note
that Mike (edge) in person is very much reflected in his postings. He could not, in my opinion,
articulate a clear explanation of his “theory” of dowsing.
At one point, Mike offered to have me dowse. I declined. But I did put my finger along the
dowsing rod as he did some dowsing. He does grip the dowsing rod quite firmly.
3 Demonstration
As I mentioned, this was not a well planned, formal test. We did not know until the earlier in the
day when we met that we would even be able to get together at all. So everything we did was
done in an ad hoc manner.
First, I’ll describe the equipment that Mike and Danny brought with them then I’ll describe the
testing protocol we established and subsequently conducted.
3.1 Equipment
“Equipment” is a too highfaluting word for what we had to work with - but please don’t
misinterpret my comment. We had what Mike could muster up at a minutes notice and I had
little but pen and paper to add to the mix. As mentioned above, this was ad hocracy at its
finest.
Mike brought with him:
• His dowsing rod
• A silver tray
• A large cardboard box
• A small scale typically used to weigh envelopes in order to ascertain the correct
postage to use.
The best picture I have
of his dowsing rod is
shown in Figure 1. I
had my friend with the
camera take a close-up
picture of the rod itself
but that picture, sadly,
seems to have been
lost.
The dowsing rod is a
“carefully selected”
(quoting Mike) branch
from a willow tree.
The “head” of the rod
is about 9 inches long
w h i le the two
branching limbs are
about 24 inches long.
The tip of the head of the rod is wrapped in black electricians tape. When queried about this,
Mike indicated that the tape holds a USA dime to the dowsing rod. As I understand it, this
dime, in combination with the dowsing rod itself, is what allows Mike to detect gravity
changes. In response to a
question by my friend with
the camera, Mike stated
that if he removed the
dime, this same dowsing
rod would then become a
more traditional water
dowsing rod.
The silver tray (shown
on the right in Figure
2) would become the
t a r g et o f o u r
demonstration. Mike
brought this tray
Figure 1
Figure 2
because he had found it in a hidden location at his sister’s house using this dowsing rod so he
knew that it would affect his dowsing.
The cardboard box was used to conveniently carry Mike’s equipment but it also served as a
component of our demonstration (see the next section). By the way, the “arms” of the
dowsing rod are visible above the plastic drain pan.
The scale is shown in
Figure 3. It measures
the downward force
exerted by whatever is
attached to it. It is a
simple, mechanical
device; its most
import ant characteristic
relevant to
this test is that the
reading marks are not
linear. The indicator
runs from 0 to 90
d e g r e e s wh i c h
indicates a force of
from 0 to 4 ounces.
But 1 ounce is at 45
degrees, 2 ounces is at
67.5 degrees and 3
ounces is at 79.25
degrees and 4 ounces
(its limit) is at 90
degrees.
3.2 Demonstration Protocol
In broad terms, the protocol consisted of these steps:
• Selecting a demonstration site
• Setting up the equipment
• Defining the demonstration process
• Pre-trial calibration
Figure 3
• Trials
• Post-trial calibration
3.2.1 Selecting a demonstration site
First, Mike needed to verify that the porch of our cabin was not contaminated by
anything that would affect his work. He walked along the porch area while dowsing and
stated that there was nothing under the porch that would interfere with his efforts.
3.2.2 Setting up the equipment
This step was critical for me to achieve my goal because I was finally able to see and
understand what Mike is actually proposing for the MDC.
First, Mike hung a (bent out of shape) ordinary coat hanger from a beam in the roof of
the porch. The hook of the coat hanger hung at the lowest point which you can see at
the very top of Figure 3. As shown in that figure, the scale was directly attached to the
coat hanger.
A thin, light string, (barely) visible at the bottom of Figure 3, hung down from the scale.
A loop at the bottom of this string was used to attach the head of the dowsing rod to the
scale.
The targets of the dowsing are shown in Figure 2. The “target” is the silver tray. The
“dummy” was a RubberMaid drain pad taken from the cabin kitchen. The cardboard
box was used to disguise which item was in the target area by placing the target inside
the box.
3.2.3 Defining the demonstration process
After brief discussions, we agreed upon a protocol that would have either the target or
dummy put in the box outside of Mike’s view. Mike would then dowse for the target
using the scale as an indicator of its presence or absence. Each trial would have Mike
state without equivocation whether the target was there or not. There would be ten
trials.
Before the trials began, there would be two calibration trials in which Mike would know
whether the target was there or not.
3.2.4 Pre-trial calibration
In Mike’s presence, I put the dummy target in the box and Mike dowsed. Danny would
stand to Mike’s right on the ground just off the porch as seen in Figure 4 (although he
was not standing there when this picure was taken.) And read off the scale reading.
When the scale stabilized, it read ¼ ounce. This took about 15 seconds (based on my
memory alone - I did not have a stopwatch with me). Figure 4 shows Mike while
actually dowsing.
I then put the tray in the box in Mike’s presence and he dowsed again. This time the
stabilized scale reading was 1 ounce.
Note that this process was central to meeting Mike’s goal. He reports that similar trials
in other locations have resulted in a dummy reading of 3 ounces. Thus, Mike concludes
that the calibration of his dowsing process is site specific.
3.2.5 Trials
Out of sight of everyone, I flipped a quarter 10 times. I decided before starting that
heads would equate to dummy and tails would equate to target.
For each trial, Mike and Danny would go back behind the cabin as we put either the
dummy or the target in the box. I stood where I could see both Mike and Danny at the
rear of the cabin while my mate made the placement to make sure there was no way they
could see what she was doing. In fact, in one trial, she purposely dropped the trey on
the porch while putting the dummy in the box to see if Mike was using a sound clue.
Since I observed each trial, this was only a single-blind experiment. That is me in the
foreground in Figure 4.
Each trial proceeded with Mike doing the dowsing and Danny reading off the scale
value as sort of a running commentary, like a race track announcer. In fact, to me it
seemed as if Danny was encouraging Mike to get a high value.
Figure 4
After the scale reading stabilized, the trial would end and Mike stated clearly “dummy”
or “target”. Interestingly, the time to stabilization increased as we went through the
trials; note, again, that this is a subjective judgement because I did not have a stop watch
with which to time each trial. At first, it seemed that stabilization would occur within
15-30 seconds. By the end, it was taking about a minute. A couple of times Mike
would have to stop, shake off his tension and resume the dowsing.
After the fifth trial, Mike was getting fatigued so we took a couple minute break. This
fatigue consists of his having to stand perfectly still during each trial and having to grip
the dowsing rod firmly in each hand. I have no doubt that this effort is, in fact,
fatiguing.
Here are the results:
Trial In Box Mike Result
1 Dummy Dummy True
2 Dummy Dummy True
3 Dummy Dummy True
4 Target Target True
5 Dummy Dummy True
6 Dummy Dummy True
7 Dummy Dummy True
8 Target Target True
9 Target Dummy False
10 Dummy Dummy True
By this series of tests, Mike scored 90% correct.
3.2.6 Post-trial calibration
After this series of trials, we did one more calibration test with Mike knowing the tray
was in the box. He correctly stated it was there.
4 Post-Demonstration Activities
After this set of trials, we did some “fun” dowsing just for the hell of it. These activities have no
probative value but I report them here for completeness.
Since Mike asserts that he is detecting metals (not just gold) I asked him to dowse my car. He did
for a couple of seconds by holding the dowsing rod over the trunk of the car. The rod did not dip.
We then walked down by Coffee Creek (a vigorously flowing stream at this time of year due to
snow melt) which is just out of sight over the spare tire of Mike’s vehicle in Figure 1. Mike’s
dowsing revealed that there were several locations where gold existed. Interestingly, when doing
this dowsing, the rod responded instantaneously and dramatically by dropping to near vertical.
I should note that this area was extensively hydraulically mined for gold in the 1800s. In fact, not
100 yards upstream there is a huge (30 feet high by 100 feet long) rock pile left over from
previous mining operations.
5 Notes
I offer these in no particular order of importance to give my full sense of this demonstration.
5.1 Demonstration
I have used the word “demonstration” here instead of “test” deliberately. I do not consider
this exercise to have been a test in the sense that Randi would use the term. My goal, as
stated, was simply to get a better understanding of what Mike asserts that he can do by
actually observing the dowsing process that will, presumably, be the basis of his current
MDC.
Expanding on that thought, I had not been able to get a clear sense of what Mike is actually
proposing he can do with his dowsing based on his posts on the JREF forum. Now that I have
seen Mike in action, I have a much better appreciation of what he claims to be able to do. I
hope I have conveyed a clearer idea of how he proposes to be tested in this document so that
we can focus on the MDC test protocol.
5.2 Mike
My impression of Mike in person very much reflects what you see on-line. He is a voluble
guy who has trouble putting his thoughts in clear order. We’ll have to deal with that fact.
5.3 Demonstration Protocol
There are so many holes in the protocol that we used that RoadToad could drive a truck
through it. Did the cardboard box have a hole in it? Was Danny somehow giving clues to
Mike? Did the trey (which I did not inspect at all) have a magnet in it?
5.4 Decision Criteria
The calibration phase established a background “force” of ¼ ounce and a target force of 1
ounce. Yet, in nearly all the trials, these benchmarks were ignored. Many times (no, I did not
write down the final stabilization reading) the scale read 2 ounces or above yet Mike would
declare (correctly) that the target was not there.
During one trial (#7, I think) Mike declared that the rod was “just not grabbing” him like it
had done before so, in spite of the scale reading he (correctly) declared that the target was
absent.
In retrospect, I was really stupid to not get Mike to state - and adhere to - his decision criteria
before we actually began the trials..
5.5 What’s going on?
I will offer two distinct impressions of Mike (and Danny).
I conclude Mike really believes that he can dowse. Danny is most certainly a believer so that
ANY test that involves him must be rejected out of hand. Mike can, in a wink of an eye,
explain away any inconsistency and just plow ahead as if he is actually dowsing.
My mate, however, was absolutely furious with me regarding this whole episode. She was
convinced that Mike and Danny ran a scam on me and that I was a total fool to even let the
whole experiment proceed. She’s convinced that Mike (and Danny) are scammers of the first
order and knowingly made an absolute jerk out of me.
Who knows?
6 Photos
I did adjust the photos contained in this report in order to show as much detail as possible.
This manipulation merely consisted of using the standard image adjustment tools in Corel’s
Paint Shop program. I have the originals and would be happy to make them available should
anyone want them.
I'll have to let this sink in some more, but at a first glance it does not look all bad.
The major problem I see at this point is the total test time: 100 scans + rest and recovery time + putting the targets in place + ensuring proper double-blinding (which in this case means lots of walking) = Way too much for one day.
How long do you need on average for a scan in this context, edge?
And to get back to my former point:
1. Have you set a location where you can perform - and succeed - by hitting at least seven times in ten tries with your above protocol?
2. How many trial runs have you performed at said specific location, and how many successful hits did you register?
And the most important point: 3a. Were those trial runs double-blinded? 3b. How did you do that?
Forgive me if I ask you to repeat what you might have already stated. Sometimes I have a hard time understanding what you are saying, because your grammar is a bit unconventional - which I do not hold against you.
I'm trying to help by providing an answer sheet for my above inquiries. I noted some hints in brackets:
1. (Please answer "Yes" or "No".) ___
2. I did ___ trial runs. I achieved ___ hits. (We'll calculate the percentage for you if you provide the data.)
3a. (Please answer "Yes" or "No".) ___
3b. (Please describe shortly how you ensured proper double-blinding.)
EHocking
Penultimate Amazing
edge, your elaboration really on makes things more complicated. Regardless, I'm prepared to attempt to write up a protocol based on your past posts, if you could answer a couple of questions.
1. Can you select 2 sites that you would be willing to be tested at? One as a back up - you have to give JREF an option. Site only needs to be large enough to place a single box on as per your preferred protocol.
If you can't - why not? You demonstrated for SezMe on the porch of a cabin with no problems.
2. Do you *have*, positively *have* to use the scales? If yes, the readings will play no part in the protocol, it will merely be an additional accessory for your use only.
Why the scales? You don't use them in the field or in the middle of a creek when dowsing for gold. Why for the Challenge?
3. Will you allow JREF (or whomever tests you) to inspect the dowsing rod and ALSO allow them to remove anything you attach to the tip? One stipulation would be that anything attached to the tip will be inspected BEFORE a test is performed and attached while being witnessed by the testers.
4. How much time do you have before this JREF Challenge application runs out?
I think that's it for the moment.
I'll write up a protocol as per your post I'm replying to and let's get it out in the public domain here to get hammered out.
SezMe, thank you for the write-up. Your mate seems allright.
Thumbs up to EHocking and Reno.
And a tip of my hat to you, edge. You have again stepped up to the plate. In a small league, but nonetheless.
Now let's hammer out a protocol and secure you a run at the Million.
Thumbs up to EHocking and Reno.
And a tip of my hat to you, edge. You have again stepped up to the plate. In a small league, but nonetheless.
Now let's hammer out a protocol and secure you a run at the Million.
Tim Harrod
Scholar
- Joined
- Dec 18, 2005
- Messages
- 90
Dumb All Over
A Little Ugly on the Side
Mike, I want you to know how much I appreciate this post. You have a good sense of humor.
With 10 trials, the odds of getting them all correct by chance is 0.097%, and the odds of getting 9 correct is 0.97%, for a total just over 1% by chance alone (as has been noted) of getting 90% or more correct. Significant enough to investigate further, but not quite worth a million bucks. He'd have missed the required target by 1, since a perfect score would have been needed to reduce it to a 1/1000 chance.
By my math, 100 trials would allow for a success of at least 66 to fall under the 1/1000 target. A 70% success rate will suffice there.
What I also like is that the results of the flips had a large number of dummy trials. A person guessing randomly would usually balance their guesses more than that.
Dumb All Over
A Little Ugly on the Side
Thank you, petre.
EHocking's explanations did not go unnoticed, either. Both of you are clear and make perfect sense.
EHocking's explanations did not go unnoticed, either. Both of you are clear and make perfect sense.
SezMe
post-pre-born
Good questions.
The "other" target was put inside our cabin, out of view of Mike, Danny or me. I would estimate that the other target was ~20 feet away from the dowsing area. To be more complete, we were staying at a cabin that had a front porch that you see in the pictures. Out of view of any of the pictures, there is a single, front door into the interior of the cabin. After the selected target was put in the box, the other target was taken inside the cabin, out of view of all participants, and covered with a small blanket.
Regarding where Danny stood: Look at Figure 4. Mike is standing on the porch in front of the box. The open end of the box is toward the camera. Danny would stand on the gound (~2 feet below the porch level) just to Mike's right. See that huge cup on the bench? Danny would be just to Mike's right of that.
It's too bad that you can't see the string, the scale and Danny during the test. The guy who was taking the pictures (the proprietor of the resort) was pressed to get something else done and didn't have much time to devote to picture taking nor did he seem to be interested in taking photos from many different angles. To paraphrase Rummy, you go into an ad hoc dowsing test with the resources you have, not the resources you want.
Could Danny somehow have seen into the box and given Mike a clue as to what was there. Yes. But I do not think that was happening, mostly because Danny (IMO) sincerely does not believe that Mike needs clues. Could there have been a hole in the box that would allow Mike to see into it. Yes. Again, we worked with what we had.
I would reemphasize that I considered this to be a "demonstration", not a test. I was just trying to figure out what Mike was doing with the scale he talks about and what he means by calibration. If we all now have a better concept of what these terms mean, then my write-up contributes to the thread.
SezMe
post-pre-born
No, I did not see the dime; it was completely covered by the tape. I did not ask Mike to untape the dime to prove to me that it was there.
Sitting here responding to you as a particpant in the demonstraton, my response is "who cares?" The presence or absence of the dime is immaterial to the outcome of the experiment. Dimes don't affect gravity.
Sitting here responding to you as a skeptic with the opportunity for hindsight, my response is "D'oh, SezMe, you're an idiot." Mike could have put a magnet at the head of his dowsing rod and I should have eliminated that possibility. I did not - my bad.
That said, here is why I don't think this is an issue. I did look at the tip of the dowsing rod and whatever was wrapped inside the tape was, well, about the size of a dime. Unless it was a very powerful magnet, it would not have had much of an affect due to a small tray ~ 4 feet away. I think Mike's ideomotor effect and the need for him to keep his hands perfectly still vertically would be much more influencial than the effect of a magnet he might have hidden in the head of his dowsing rod.
SezMe
post-pre-born
Please read my pdf. Reno's post, while capturing the text accurately, does not include my pics which I think are essential to understanding the whole write-up.
SezMe
post-pre-born
With the benefit of hindsight and time, here is the most important question I have regarding this demo.
The pre-trial calibration phase showed a "background" force on the scale of ½ ounce and a "target" force of 1 ounce. Yet some of the trials showed a scale reading greater than 1 ounce yet you stated that the target was not there. On what basis did you, Mike, make your determination of the presence/absence of the target other than the reading on the scale.
Another matter that I can't understand is why my car did not affect your dowsing rod. You were much closer to it and it has a couple of orders of magnitude more metal mass than your tray.
The pre-trial calibration phase showed a "background" force on the scale of ½ ounce and a "target" force of 1 ounce. Yet some of the trials showed a scale reading greater than 1 ounce yet you stated that the target was not there. On what basis did you, Mike, make your determination of the presence/absence of the target other than the reading on the scale.
Another matter that I can't understand is why my car did not affect your dowsing rod. You were much closer to it and it has a couple of orders of magnitude more metal mass than your tray.
Agreed. The reason I posted the text was to give the people who couldn't get to the pdf because of the limited bandwidth a little something to tide them over til they managed to get to the pdf.