• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Moderated Dowsing By Edge

SezMe said:
I'm concerned about the use of lime. Isn't that a white powder? After working with the targets and cannister for a while, won't there be white power everywhere.

edge, I want to remind you that you said you'd do some testing to find a target mass sufficient to give the unequivacable downward position of your dowsing rod. Doing so removes the time issue.

Oh, BTW, thanks for using the quote function.
Click to expand...

When I do then we can maybe change it but for now it stands as it is because it works.

Lime is limestone base, hydrogenised, or crushed to a fine and heavy consistency, so a small amount will be heavy.
Put it in -plastic bags.
It very efficient and with the right bags flexible and should be leak proof.
Problem solved again.

I have other major problems to solve.
I will be working for a big corporation up here Hard rock mining outfit, so the target will be no problem I should be able to buy gold ingots and then we’ll know because I can test at that time.

I’m open for anything that will speed up the process because of the fatigue issue.
Till I test it, the way I have it now works.
I’m sure that the JREF will and want me to test the other way but for now What we have is what we really have, and that is what works for me not them.
Give me a month or two.
 
Dowsing underground in a tunnel is going to be very interesting, more knowledge.
I will film that so you can see what happens, I already know.
 
edge said:
I took a risk here testing and I know what to do.
Click to expand...
Please be specific in the protocol. A vague protocol, where you handwave 'I'll take a risk here' is unlikely to be acceptable.
edge said:
LOL I have been living off of what makes a good target.
Click to expand...
No, you've been locating gold in river beds, (IIUC). You've not isolated the dowsing part of your gold extraction from the geographical and other methods of locating gold in such locations (AFAICT).

edge said:
The tray probably contains 1 ounce.
It worked, so 4 or 5 will do better.
Click to expand...
(a) if 1 ounce oz silver is sufficient, why ask for 4 times more?
(b) how do you know that 4 or 5 will be better? -- you've not tried it. Perhaps more than 4 ounces 'overloads' your sensors or something (An example from real life is drug sniffer dogs. They sometimes fail to detect huge quantities, because the smell is 'everywhere', the pointing response to which they are trained, doesn't cover that situation, and they become confused.)

edge said:
I like how you come in here all of a sudden and demand answers. You ( ! ) head.
Click to expand...
I'm glad you like my questions. I'm guessing the (!) is some comment about the insight you're gaining from these questions -- I'm not sure why you didn't write it in words though. However, you're incorrect of the 'all of a sudden' part, IYR, I've been participating in this thread for some time.
 
edge said:
Dowsing underground in a tunnel is going to be very interesting, more knowledge.
I will film that so you can see what happens, I already know.
Click to expand...
You're losing focus. Focus on the challenge -- you want the 1M$ don't you?
 
nathan said:
(a) if 1 ounce oz silver is sufficient, why ask for 4 times more?
Click to expand...
There is a very good reason.

Dowsing for the 1 ounce of silver involved a lot of time and caused edge to become fatigued. But edge has demonstated (see my Coffee Creek write-up) that larger amounts of the target material will cause his dowsing rod to react nearly instantaneously (~2-3 seconds) and dramatically (dipping to near vertical). edge has also that maybe 4-5 ounces of silver will induce the same reaction. If so, then using a more massive target solves the fatigue and "judgement" problems in one swell foop.

nathan said:
(b) how do you know that 4 or 5 will be better? -- you've not tried it.
Click to expand...
edge has acknowledged this and has stated that he will be doing more tests to determine the amount of target material that is required to produce an unequivicable response. You must have missed this in his upthread comments.
 
I can understand the time limit for people doing voluntary work, but if the testers were paid for their efforts, I am sure that edge could arrange to get the time he needs to complete the test.
 
...and as we all slowly spin through the void on our inexorable journey on our little planet Earth, time continues to whittle away our finite and irreplacable lives while Edge talks nonsense and the test of his "powers" slips ever further into the realms of the impossible.

There should be a deadline where we stop talking to delusional people and let them go back to waving sticks. It should certainly not drag on for years.
 
Kenny 10 Bellys said:
...and as we all slowly spin through the void on our inexorable journey on our little planet Earth, time continues to whittle away our finite and irreplacable lives while Edge talks nonsense and the test of his "powers" slips ever further into the realms of the impossible.

There should be a deadline where we stop talking to delusional people and let them go back to waving sticks. It should certainly not drag on for years.
Click to expand...

It will most likely not drag on for years. If I recall correctly, edge's application got accepted in February 2007, perhaps March at latest. That means a maximum of twelve months for protocol negotiations. If a suitable protocol has not materialised by March 2008: No test, no success and hence no million. clams. Tough titty, to quote edge.

And since I very much doubt that this will be the JREF's fault: No chance of another application from edge being accepted.



The good part: Barring a server snafu, this whole enchilada of a thread is saved and ready for future generations to digest, to evaluate and to conclude. Another tessera, another data-set, another link. ;)

THE UNIVERSE RULES! WHOOOOOO!!!

U-NI-VERSE!
U-NI-VERSE!
U-NI-VERSE!




I will now take my medication and continue to stare at the wall.
 
March 2008? You do realise at current posting rate this thread will be 200 pages long, filled with the ramblings of Edge followed by the rest of us tearing our hair out trying to figure out what the hell he means?
 
steenkh said:
I can understand the time limit for people doing voluntary work, but if the testers were paid for their efforts, I am sure that edge could arrange to get the time he needs to complete the test.
Click to expand...

Yes, in nuggets possably.
We'll see.
 
Kenny 10 Bellys said:
March 2008? You do realise at current posting rate this thread will be 200 pages long, filled with the ramblings of Edge followed by the rest of us tearing our hair out trying to figure out what the hell he means?
Click to expand...

I shave my head, so I got at least that covered. :D



I have little doubt that this thread will gain substantially in volume. Especially, given the two most likely scenarios:

1. No test will happen. (110% probability.)
2. Edge fails the test. (110% probability.)

Part of me is already looking forward to the excuses edge will parade before us. But make no mistake, I consider it technically possible edge will perform successfully. But the odds are in the 5000-supermodels-showing-up-in-your-bedroom-and-do-what-you-want realm, Paris Hilton winning multiple Nobel Prizes or Scotland winning the Soccer World Cup 2010. :D :D :D
 
Mike Guska,

Thanks for your continued patience while we work through your information.

At this point, it is my recommendation that the JREF discontinue negotiations with you regarding your protocol. I have turned the issue over to Jeff Wagg for further review.

It is incredibly difficult to understand your protocol and the sentences you're using to describe it. Words like "show up" don't clarify anything. At this point, there are a great number of stipulations and rules for how you want the test to run.

At this point, I believe that the actual claim has become lost somewhere with all the stipulations.

Either you can perform the claim you describe, or you can't. And the way the test would work out, it seems to me that either you would not or would have about ten thousand different outs based upon your phrasing and inability to answer direct questions about your own powers.

Jeff will not necessarily side with me on this, and it is possible the JREF will want to continue testing negotiations. Since I have made my recommendation, I am stepping out of the process until he completes the review and decides whether or not we will continue negotiations. If so, I will contact you with more information. If not, then we will part ways.

Thank you again for your patience.
 
Edge, if you know someone who can help you writing up a proper protocol proposal, now would be the time to call him.

I fully understand RemieV's concerns. Appreciative nod for the JREF's patience so far.

Hopefully, their resources permit them to - somehow - move this claim to the testing stage.
 
edge, EHocking did his damnest to help you write a protocol. I am willing to write one. Do you think if the three of us got together via e-mail and tried to work one out that something would come of it?

If we could come up with something, we could offer it to JREF on a take-it-or-leave-it basis. No further negotiations.

BTW, I have NOT run this by EHocking so he may be so fed up he doesn't want anything to do with you.
 
edge said:
My outs are not your concern so what are you worried about that for?
Click to expand...
But of course your outs are the concerns of the JREF! The whole point of the MDC is to develop a protocol in which there are no outs, which means that the results of the challenge are crystal clear to everyone and can't be interpreted differently by different people (that is, by claiming an out), so that it is clear, in the final determination, that someone either failed at or succeeded in their claim. An out prevents that final determination.
 
edge, EHocking did his damnest to help you write a protocol. I am willing to write one. Do you think if the three of us got together via e-mail and tried to work one out that something would come of it?

If we could come up with something, we could offer it to JREF on a take-it-or-leave-it basis. No further negotiations.

BTW, I have NOT run this by EHocking so he may be so fed up he doesn't want anything to do with you.
Yesterday 10:42 PM
Click to expand...


SezMe you know and I know that this is easier to set up than it sounds.
The only difference in the test you did on me is, that I would in that set of scans is, picking out the metal once. Your dummy target was fine wasn’t it?
That’s so simple.
Because it would only show up one time out of ten then we would run it nine more times.

There is a real chance of them losing now.

Here’s a list as simple as I can write it.
Targets pass on one spot.

Only the metal is picked out.

A break after a set of ten is done.

The dummies contain lime, 9 of them.

One person on their side to confirmed the truth about my picks.

My choice of where the test will take place.
Click to expand...

How simple can it be?
 
Everything else has been worked out, % of hits needed, They know how to double blind the test.

Paul2, i don't need an out if I lose I will never post again.
Losing is not an option.
This isn't a protocol about ways out, I haven't taken the test yet.

This is about taking the test with what I have learned about not having ways out.
It's what I need to win now, the things I ask for in the test.
You guys have me losing before I try and also making new excuses before hand.
 
edge said:
SezMe you know and I know that this is easier to set up than it sounds.
The only difference in the test you did on me is, that I would in that set of scans is, picking out the metal once. Your dummy target was fine wasn’t it?
That’s so simple.
Because it would only show up one time out of ten then we would run it nine more times.

There is a real chance of them losing now.

Here’s a list as simple as I can write it.


How simple can it be?
Click to expand...

See, edge, right there is the problem. I ask you basically a yes-or-no question and I get the above soliloquy. I'll reserve judgement on your dowsing skills but I'm prepared to call your clarity of thinking and writing to be wanting. Do you want to some help or not?

Yes or No
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom