Moderated Dowsing By Edge

[edge]

Edge,

YOU

DID

NOT

HAVE

A

PROTOCOL

Edited by Miss A: 

Rule 12

The dowser can successfully detect the presence of a concealed target consisting of 5 ounces of silver 4 times in 5 runs of ten attempts each, with a one-in-ten possibility of identifying the target by chance alone in each of the five runs.Material required:1 target, 5 oz. silver1 5-lb bag of flour.10 11-ounce plastic coffee containers numbered 1-10Scale and one dowsing stick with coin in the end.One tripod.Procedure:The dowser will attempt to locate the target hidden inside one of the containers. There will be five runs of ten containers each, numbered 1-10. In each run, the target will be present in one container only, and the other nine containers will be stabilized by eight ounces of flour.The containers will be prepared this way: In nine of the containers for each trial there will be eight ounces of flour. These are the dummy containers. In the remaining container there will be three ounces of flour plus the five-ounce target.All the flour dummies will be in plastic bags so transfer is easy. The target container will be determined by a random process. An individual we will call the randomizer will prepare the containers for each run; the dowser will have a representative who will verify that the container with the target actually does contain the target. This will be done by the randomizer’s, preparing five lists, consisting of numbers from 1-10. When the target container has been selected and prepared the randomizer will mark a T in the space opposite that number on the list; the dowser’s representative will initial the sheet to show that it is correct. At no time will the randomizer or the dowser’s representative be in verbal, electronic, or visual communication with the dowser; if the dowser somehow does come into contact with the randomizer or the representative, that run will be declared null and void.Before the test begins, the dowser will locate a specific spot on which all the containers will be placed, one at a time, for his dowsing test. The scale will be set up so that the dowser can attach his dowsing rod to it directly over the spot where the containers will be placed.The dowser will then move away to a waiting area and will be out of sight of the testing area at the beginning of each trial. The dowser will witness the recording of the dowser's readings by initialing each numbered list after the run of ten is complete.The randomizer will choose one of the containers in which to place the target for each run of ten. The randomizer will prepare the containers and mark the list; the dowser’s second representative will initial the list to signify that it is complete. The randomizer will signal (perhaps by blowing a whistle in a particular pattern: long-short-long, for example) the placement team when the containers are ready. The randomizer and second dowser’s representative will leave the area, and the placement team will then come to the preparation area and will one by one move the containers to the test spot for the dowsing attempt. The placement team will not know which container conceals the target. The placement team will take each container to the test site; place it on the test spot the dowser has located, and signal the dowser. Then the placement team will leave before the dowser arrives with his observer and the I.I.G. observer(s).The dowser will use his dowsing rod on each container and will say whether the container does or does not contain the silver target.When the dowser has stated this, the observer will record his opinion on a sheet numbered 1-10. If the dowser says the target is present, the number corresponding to the container will be marked T. If not, the number will be marked 0. There can be only one T in each run of ten containers. Both the observer and the dowser will initial the finished test sheet after each run of ten.The process will be repeated five times, with the target randomly placed in a container for each time and with each container placed on the same spot for each dowsing attempt. After each container is removed, the placement team will wait a minimum of three minutes before placing the next container. After each run of ten dowsing attempts, the dowser will have a rest period of ten minutes.At the end of all 5 runs (50 dowsing trials), all participants will compare the observers' list with T marked to show which containers the dowser believes hold the target and the randomizer's record of which containers actually held the target. Until that time, the randomizer and dowser's representative will not communicate with the dowser and the I.I.G. observer in any way.To succeed, the dowser will have to correctly identify the target container four out of five times. If the dowser correctly identifies the target container three out of five times or less, that will be a failure.If I pass this preliminary the final for the Money will be a test of 100 passes with 7 out 0f 10 for the win.The time line for the final will be about 8 hours.

 

[GzuzKryzt]

...
3. All your sour grapes will not prove your ability. Only a test under controlled conditions will. If you think your protocol proves your ability, apply for any other challenge and prove it. Simple, right? What is keeping you from snagging up all the other available challenge prizes?

Well, what is?

If this protocol is acceptable in your opinion, to which other organisations did you propose it to and what were the responses?

 

[Miss Anthrope]

A second split has occurred. In order to keep the thread on topic and avoid continued personal bickering, the thread has now been set to moderated.

Replying to this modbox in thread will be off topic  Posted By: Miss Anthrope

 

[Normal Dude]

Edited by Miss A: 

Rule 12

The dowser can successfully detect the presence of a concealed target consisting of 5 ounces of silver 4 times in 5 runs of ten attempts each, with a one-in-ten possibility of identifying the target by chance alone in each of the five runs.Material required:1 target, 5 oz. silver1 5-lb bag of flour.10 11-ounce plastic coffee containers numbered 1-10Scale and one dowsing stick with coin in the end.One tripod.Procedure:The dowser will attempt to locate the target hidden inside one of the containers. There will be five runs of ten containers each, numbered 1-10. In each run, the target will be present in one container only, and the other nine containers will be stabilized by eight ounces of flour.The containers will be prepared this way: In nine of the containers for each trial there will be eight ounces of flour. These are the dummy containers. In the remaining container there will be three ounces of flour plus the five-ounce target.All the flour dummies will be in plastic bags so transfer is easy. The target container will be determined by a random process. An individual we will call the randomizer will prepare the containers for each run; the dowser will have a representative who will verify that the container with the target actually does contain the target. This will be done by the randomizer’s, preparing five lists, consisting of numbers from 1-10. When the target container has been selected and prepared the randomizer will mark a T in the space opposite that number on the list; the dowser’s representative will initial the sheet to show that it is correct. At no time will the randomizer or the dowser’s representative be in verbal, electronic, or visual communication with the dowser; if the dowser somehow does come into contact with the randomizer or the representative, that run will be declared null and void.Before the test begins, the dowser will locate a specific spot on which all the containers will be placed, one at a time, for his dowsing test. The scale will be set up so that the dowser can attach his dowsing rod to it directly over the spot where the containers will be placed.The dowser will then move away to a waiting area and will be out of sight of the testing area at the beginning of each trial. The dowser will witness the recording of the dowser's readings by initialing each numbered list after the run of ten is complete.The randomizer will choose one of the containers in which to place the target for each run of ten. The randomizer will prepare the containers and mark the list; the dowser’s second representative will initial the list to signify that it is complete. The randomizer will signal (perhaps by blowing a whistle in a particular pattern: long-short-long, for example) the placement team when the containers are ready. The randomizer and second dowser’s representative will leave the area, and the placement team will then come to the preparation area and will one by one move the containers to the test spot for the dowsing attempt. The placement team will not know which container conceals the target. The placement team will take each container to the test site; place it on the test spot the dowser has located, and signal the dowser. Then the placement team will leave before the dowser arrives with his observer and the I.I.G. observer(s).The dowser will use his dowsing rod on each container and will say whether the container does or does not contain the silver target.When the dowser has stated this, the observer will record his opinion on a sheet numbered 1-10. If the dowser says the target is present, the number corresponding to the container will be marked T. If not, the number will be marked 0. There can be only one T in each run of ten containers. Both the observer and the dowser will initial the finished test sheet after each run of ten.The process will be repeated five times, with the target randomly placed in a container for each time and with each container placed on the same spot for each dowsing attempt. After each container is removed, the placement team will wait a minimum of three minutes before placing the next container. After each run of ten dowsing attempts, the dowser will have a rest period of ten minutes.At the end of all 5 runs (50 dowsing trials), all participants will compare the observers' list with T marked to show which containers the dowser believes hold the target and the randomizer's record of which containers actually held the target. Until that time, the randomizer and dowser's representative will not communicate with the dowser and the I.I.G. observer in any way.To succeed, the dowser will have to correctly identify the target container four out of five times. If the dowser correctly identifies the target container three out of five times or less, that will be a failure.If I pass this preliminary the final for the Money will be a test of 100 passes with 7 out 0f 10 for the win.The time line for the final will be about 8 hours.

Ummm can I get a paragraph or two thrown in there?

It hurts the eyeses!

 

[chillzero]

A second split has occurred. In order to keep the thread on topic and avoid continued personal bickering, the thread has now been set to moderated.

Replying to this modbox in thread will be off topic  Posted By: Miss Anthrope

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=92835

 

[edge]

[Moderated]Dowsing By Edge

I think I will now seek a science team where they are not risking vast amounts of money to keep the statuesque.

I'm done with skeptics it leads to nothing of value in the realms of new discoveries and change.

Here quit whining.

The dowser can successfully detect the presence of a concealed target consisting of 5 ounces of silver 4 times in 5 runs of ten attempts each, with a one-in-ten possibility of identifying the target by chance alone in each of the five runs.
Material required:1 target, 5 oz. silver1 5-lb bag of flour.
10 11-ounce plastic coffee containers numbered 1-10 Scale and one dowsing stick with coin in the end.
One tripod.
Procedure: The dowser will attempt to locate the target hidden inside one of the containers.

There will be five runs of ten containers each, numbered 1-10. In each run, the target will be present in one container only, and the other nine containers will be stabilized by eight ounces of flour.

The containers will be prepared this way: In nine of the containers for each trial there will be eight ounces of flour.
These are the dummy containers. In the remaining container there will be three ounces of flour plus the five-ounce target.
All the flour dummies will be in plastic bags so transfer is easy. The target container will be determined by a random process.

An individual we will call the randomizer will prepare the containers for each run; the dowser will have a representative who will verify that the container with the target actually does contain the target.

This will be done by the randomizer’s, preparing five lists, consisting of numbers from 1-10. When the target container has been selected and prepared the randomizer will mark a T in the space opposite that number on the list; the dowser’s representative will initial the sheet to show that it is correct.
At no time will the randomizer or the dowser’s representative be in verbal, electronic, or visual communication with the dowser; if the dowser somehow does come into contact with the randomizer or the representative, that run will be declared null and void.
Before the test begins, the dowser will locate a specific spot on which all the containers will be placed, one at a time, for his dowsing test.

The scale will be set up so that the dowser can attach his dowsing rod to it directly over the spot where the containers will be placed.

The dowser will then move away to a waiting area and will be out of sight of the testing area at the beginning of each trial.
The dowser will witness the recording of the dowser's readings by initialing each numbered list after the run of ten is complete.

The randomizer will choose one of the containers in which to place the target for each run of ten.
The randomizer will prepare the containers and mark the list; the dowser’s second representative will initial the list to signify that it is complete.

The randomizer will signal (perhaps by blowing a whistle in a particular pattern: long-short-long, for example) the placement team when the containers are ready.

The randomizer and second dowser’s representative will leave the area, and the placement team will then come to the preparation area and will one by one move the containers to the test spot for the dowsing attempt.

The placement team will not know which container conceals the target.
The placement team will take each container to the test site; place it on the test spot the dowser has located, and signal the dowser.

Then the placement team will leave before the dowser arrives with his observer and the I.I.G. observer(s).

The dowser will use his dowsing rod on each container and will say whether the container does or does not contain the silver target.When the dowser has stated this, the observer will record his opinion on a sheet numbered 1-10. If the dowser says the target is present, the number corresponding to the container will be marked T.
If not, the number will be marked 0.

There can be only one T in each run of ten containers.

Both the observer and the dowser will initial the finished test sheet after each run of ten.
The process will be repeated five times, with the target randomly placed in a container for each time and with each container placed on the same spot for each dowsing attempt.

After each container is removed, the placement team will wait a minimum of three minutes before placing the next container.

After each run of ten dowsing attempts, the dowser will have a rest period of ten minutes.
At the end of all 5 runs (50 dowsing trials), all participants will compare the observers' list with T marked to show which containers the dowser believes hold the target and the randomizer's record of which containers actually held the target.

Until that time, the randomizer and dowser's representative will not communicate with the dowser and the I.I.G. observer in any way.

To succeed, the dowser will have to correctly identify the target container four out of five times.
If the dowser correctly identifies the target container three out of five times or less, that will be a failure.
If I pass this preliminary the final for the Money will be a test of 100 passes with 7 out 0f 10 for the win.

The time line for the final will be about 8 hours.

The IIG is in the protocol here, because I sent them a copy after being rejected by the JREF and they aren't happy with it either.
It was written by a skeptic, imagine that!

But only one skeptic had vision enough to write me a protocol and possibly understood what my experiments where showing me.
It was a well-written version of what I had.
It came from Spektator about two or three days after the JREF rejected my application.

What I had was showing me, what was true about testing in only one fashion.
How to avoid the interferences that would happen in random placements of targets in the original test that had to be flawed.

The reason it had to be flawed is because in the field my success rate in locating is extremely high compared to the JREFs’ standard way of testing.
And that reason is because the gold that’s been in the creek bed moves once from the bed to my hand and not back to the bed…..
That took me months to figure out, hell it took me several years.

We only had two more things to agree on in the original protocol that I had presented when they stopped the negotiations.

This was the perfect test or at least 99% perfect, the JREF wouldn't include the last % of what I really wanted, if they did I think I could have had a 99% success rate.
With Specktators’ protocol the numbers would be within the % s presented.
This test would eliminate any excuses, simply because it works….
Hell I would forfeit the million and only take the 10,000 just to prove it!
Why?
Do the math.

I will now seek a more neutral minded set of scientists to do the test, not skeptical organization or actors that offer huge amounts of money to De-bunk.

They were whimpering about a couple of days when I spent a couple of years to develop a working protocol.

Always question what you are told to be true.

 

[Tricky]

Let's see if I can make some sense of this. Edits for clarity.

The dowser can successfully detect the presence of a concealed target consisting of 5 ounces of silver 4 times in 5 runs of ten attempts each, with a one-in-ten possibility of identifying the target by chance alone in each of the five runs.

You need to define your terminology. Is an attempt a single dowsing pass at one target, or a set of passes? ETA: I see later that you clarify slightly. You will have 50 passes over targets of which 5 will contain silver. I strongly suggest you get somebody to help you write this.

Material required: One target, 5 oz. silver. One 5-lb bag of flour.10 11-ounce plastic coffee containers numbered 1-10. Scale and one dowsing stick with coin in the end. One tripod

What kind of scale? What sensitivity? What is the scale made of? What is the purity of the silver? What form is it in? What kind of coin? What kind of tripod? Are you going to use a video camera?

Procedure:The dowser will attempt to locate the target hidden inside one of the containers. There will be five runs of ten containers each, numbered 1-10. In each run, the target will be present in one container only, and the other nine containers will be stabilized by eight ounces of flour.

This will probably be okay. Some mention was made of randomization of number of targets per attempt, so you wouldn't be fixed on just saying "this is it" once in each attempt. That would be more revealing, of course, but if you make enough attempts, this should be okay.

The containers will be prepared this way: In nine of the containers for each trial there will be eight ounces of flour. These are the dummy containers. In the remaining container there will be three ounces of flour plus the five-ounce target. All the flour dummies will be in plastic bags so transfer is easy.

Okay.

The target container will be determined by a random process. An individual we will call the randomizer will prepare the containers for each run;

It appears you have forgotten to identify the people in the test. That should be done back before you get to this part. You will need at least three people, two of which must be neutral (i.e. not friends of yours.) One can be, as you call it, the "randomizer" who will use a random process to determine the target can, place all targets and dummies in the cans and record which can has the target. Another will be the observer, who will watch the dowser and record his choices. You may have a second "friendly" observer if you like, or you can use a videocamera to record the tests. I strongly recommend the latter, since they obviously have no prejudices.

the dowser will have a representative who will verify that the container with the target actually does contain the target.

Just one dowser's rep checking the "randomizer?" No dowser's rep observing the actual test? I suppose that's okay. I still advise using a videocamera.

On another note: It looks like you're getting right into the actual tests here. You have forgotten a vitally important part, and that is the "open test". You must first dowse for the targets with full knowledge of where they are. The reason for this is twofold: 1) It lets you be sure your dowsing is working. 2) It prevents excuses later. As I recall, you tried to make excuses after you failed your first test, but because you had agreed that the conditions were acceptable and that your dowsing was working, these excuses were exposed as just that. At least one "open test" must be included into your protocol. You might want to add another in the middle to verify that your powers are still working.

At no time will the randomizer or the dowser’s representative be in verbal, electronic, or visual communication with the dowser; if the dowser somehow does come into contact with the randomizer or the representative, that run will be declared null and void.

Like I say, you may want an observer, human or electronic, observing the actual dowsing. The final protocol will have to include parts about how you plan to ensure that there is no contact. That should be easy though.

Before the test begins, the dowser will locate a specific spot on which all the containers will be placed, one at a time, for his dowsing test.

This is going to kill the test. The procedure you describe is an incredible waste of time, requiring target placement ten times for each trial. If you do fifty trials, you must have 500 trips of the “randomizer” into the room. You simply don’t have time for that. Also, this makes the test unfair for you. If you have already picked the "target" and you come across another can that gives a positive reading, you can't go back to compare them. That's a problem, wouldn't you say?

I recommend you find ten acceptable locations (your blind test will help you do this) and have the “randomizer” make a single trip, place all ten cans in their locations and you can move the tripod/scale around without calling in the randomizer in for each trip. No, you can’t have the observer move them because regardless of the flour stabilizer, there are differences in the way a coin in a can feels versus just flour in a can. This could lead to sensory leakage. Nobody in the room with the test may ever touch the cans.

The randomizer will prepare the containers and mark the list; the dowser’s second representative will initial the list to signify that it is complete. The randomizer will signal (perhaps by blowing a whistle in a particular pattern: long-short-long, for example) the placement team when the containers are ready.

Dowser's second representative? You didn't mention him before. That's why you need to identify the people and their "titles" at the beginning. It is one reason (besides your inability to use paragraphs) that your protocol is so difficult to read. Frankly, I don't see the need for this alert if you are having the "placement team" come out between each of the ten targets. When they're ready for the first target, they give the signal and the dowser and observers leave the area.

The randomizer and second dowser’s representative will leave the area, and the placement team will then come to the preparation area and will one by one move the containers to the test spot for the dowsing attempt.

You neglected to mention the neutral observer. They must leave the area too. Nobody on the "testing team" can have contact with the "placement team."

The placement team will not know which container conceals the target.

What? Is this a third team? Now you are starting to be confusing again. There is no reason why the people who put the targets in the cans cannot also place the targets, so long as nobody on the "testing team" is present. You are making this unnecessarily difficult and confusing.

The placement team will take each container to the test site; place it on the test spot the dowser has located, and signal the dowser. Then the placement team will leave before the dowser arrives with his observer and the I.I.G. observer(s).

As I say, this is going to be incredibly time-consuming and it is unlikely you will be able to complete a statistically significant number of trials. Is that what you want?

The dowser will use his dowsing rod on each container and will say whether the container does or does not contain the silver target.

How long will this take? Just a rough estimate will do. It might be necessary to put a time limt on your attempts if you insist on this lengthy protocol.

When the dowser has stated this, the observer will record his opinion on a sheet numbered 1-10. If the dowser says the target is present, the number corresponding to the container will be marked T. If not, the number will be marked 0. There can be only one T in each run of ten containers.

This bit of protocol is a bit unnecessary. It doesn't matter what the observer(s) write, since there will be nine of one thing and one of another.

But it does raise and interesting question about your protocol. If you have already identified the target in a trial of ten targets, then should you just skip the remaining targets? That is why I recommend a single placement of all ten cans for each trial.

Both the observer and the dowser will initial the finished test sheet after each run of ten.

Which observer? Both? You seem to keep varying the number of people involved.

The process will be repeated five times, with the target randomly placed in a container for each time and with each container placed on the same spot for each dowsing attempt. After each container is removed, the placement team will wait a minimum of three minutes before placing the next container.

Sounds like each attempt is going to take at least ten minutes. That's six an hour, times 8-hours is 48 tests, not counting set-up time and rest breaks.

At the end of all 5 runs (50 dowsing trials), all participants will compare the observers' list with T marked to show which containers the dowser believes hold the target and the randomizer's record of which containers actually held the target. Until that time, the randomizer and dowser's representative will not communicate with the dowser and the I.I.G. observer in any way.

Okay, more or less. Of course you had three "dowser's representatives" depending on what you mean, one for working with the randomizer, one for placement, and one for observing the test. You still keep varying the number of people involved.

To succeed, the dowser will have to correctly identify the target container four out of five times. If the dowser correctly identifies the target container three out of five times or less, that will be a failure.If I pass this preliminary the final for the Money will be a test of 100 passes with 7 out 0f 10 for the win.The time line for the final will be about 8 hours.

Don't worry about the "final" yet. That will have to be worked out with JREF later, assuming you pass this test. Remember the entrance requirements have changed, but if you pass the IIG test, it is likely that it will satisfy at least one requirement.

Remember that the IIG may have requirements as well, such as who has rights to the videos etc.

As I have indicated, your protocol is fraught with inconsistancies, undefined terms, ignored items (like the "open test") unnecessary items (like designating the letter the recorder must use), timing problems, and unanswered questions. It is also could be unfair to you, especially as regards the ability to recheck previously dowsed targets. In short, I.I.G. has, in my opinion, every reason to reject your protocol, if for no other reason than incoherence.

Get some help writing it.

 

[catbasket]

They were whimpering about a couple of days when I spent a couple of years to develop a working protocol.

I disagree. The problem was that after all this time you still did not have a working protocol.

Get some help writing it.

Take heed of Tricky's advice.

 

[Spektator]

I disagree. The problem was that after all this time you still did not have a working protocol.



Take heed of Tricky's advice.

Do get help writing it, but not from me, alas. I offered several times and finally did most of edge's protocol above on my own, working from his descriptions of how he planned to do the dowsing. I expected the protocol to be refined until it was acceptable to both parties--but by that time it was too late and the JREF had lost patience. I don't have the free time to work on the protocol any longer.

 

[catbasket]

Do get help writing it, but not from me, alas ...

... I don't have the free time to work on the protocol any longer.

It's been frustrating for me as a spectator to see so much time being spent by so many people - JREF staff, forum members and edge himself - for so little end result. I imagine it's doubly frustrating for those involved.

 

[GzuzKryzt]

It's been frustrating for me as a spectator to see so much time being spent by so many people - JREF staff, forum members and edge himself - for so little end result. I imagine it's doubly frustrating for those involved.

Actually, there is an end result. And a huge one, too: The people involved were the Sancho Pansa to edge's Don Quixote.

Lest we forget: Not even an incentive of One Million US Dollars could sway edge to come up with a useful protocol for his alleged ability. Does it get clearer than this?

 

[Tricky]

It's been frustrating for me as a spectator to see so much time being spent by so many people - JREF staff, forum members and edge himself - for so little end result. I imagine it's doubly frustrating for those involved.

Nah. It is pretty much like brushing your teeth after a while. It is just something you do because it needs to be done. People who claim paranormal talents need to have their claims addressed so that they don't appear that they have scared the skeptics away.

I've been in this thread since the very beginning and even before, but I don't think I'd have the stamina to read it from the beginning. My hat is off to you and those of similar fortitude. You make the time we spent on these posts worthwhile. It's like history, man.

 

[edge]

People who claim paranormal talents need to have their claims addressed so that they don't appear that they have scared the skeptics away.

First off it's not paranormal.
Which makes it testable, again if something works one way why doesn't it work in another way?
This is what I have learned through testing and experimenting, how to make it work the other way.
That didn’t happen till after I applied for the test.


The JREF, the actual staff hasn't been involved since the beginning of this thread.
They only spent two and a half months near the end of this thread.
Before I applied I spent three years up here figuring it out and about eight months or so writing in here near the end of the three years. During the summer of the third year I proved it in the creek mining with the spots that I picked and I scored very high.
The problem was to convert that test into a double blind test, which I figured out.
Now it’s been four years, and eight years since I took the challenge in Florida.
I had to apply before I was ready and not done with my testing.
They changed the rules to the challenge, so I had to put the cart before the horse, so to say.

Frustrating doesn't even cover what I feel.

Lest we forget: Not even an incentive of One Million US Dollars could sway edge to come up with a useful protocol for his alleged ability. Does it get clearer than this?

There's nothing if I don't get it right, but ridicule.

Tricky says,

What kind of scale? What sensitivity? What is the scale made of? What is the purity of the silver? What form is it in? What kind of coin? What kind of tripod? Are you going to use a video camera?

When I get it right it's like that statement, what does this matter till after the test, I'll give it to you to examine.
Just give me a cat scan or a lie detector test Shezz.
Road blocks!
SezMe and I had no problems getting it done.
Hide and seek isn't that complicated. L.M.A.O.

 

[Reno]

Edge, have you applied to any other organizations that have a a prize for a successful demonstration of dowsing? (other than IIG, I mean).

As an aside, I'm not sure you really know what 'LMAO' means. Kinda like my old mum, who was recently introduced to computers and messaging - she ends each message to me with 'LOL' (I think she thinks it means Love You Loads or something like that)

 

[Tricky]

First off it's not paranormal.

Actually, it is, at least it is the way you describe it. Remember when you said the force of the dowsing nearly pulled the dowsing rod out of your hand? And you say that you now need a scale for the test because the force pulls the rod down. But now remember when you said that you couldn't even make a pendulum with a piece of gold on the end move by dowsing at it?

I asked you about this because it would be a one-way force. A force for which there is no equal-and-opposite attraction. You said that it was indeed such a force. That defies the laws of physics. That makes it paranormal.

Which makes it testable, again if something works one way why doesn't it work in another way?

You should be asking yourself this question. You say you can easily dowse for gold. If you say an area has no gold, then somebody puts a gold target in it, then you should be able to find it easily. Yet you have spent great amounts of time saying "It doesn't work that way".

They only spent two and a half months near the end of this thread.
Before I applied I spent three years up here figuring it out and about eight months or so writing in here near the end of the three years. During the summer of the third year I proved it in the creek mining with the spots that I picked and I scored very high.

You scored "very high" when testing yourself. The many problems with your self-test were pointed out at the time.

The problem was to convert that test into a double blind test, which I figured out.

You still seem to have some problems with the concept. I pointed out numerous problems with your protocol.

Now it’s been four years, and eight years since I took the challenge in Florida.

Your dowsing test was only five years ago.

I had to apply before I was ready and not done with my testing.

Your "testing" was unnecessary. There were several very simple protocols for what you said you could do. You refused them all. Instead you regaled us with stories of how much gold you had found and how well the dowsing was working.

They changed the rules to the challenge, so I had to put the cart before the horse, so to say.

You were allowed to re-apply under the old rules, but you would never submit a reasonable and coherent protocol, so your application was, after long discussion, rejected. Only NOW must you submit under the new rules.

Frustrating doesn't even cover what I feel.

We're all frustrated too. Nothing we say, no suggestion of protocols, no logic seems to work on you.

There's nothing if I don't get it right, but ridicule.

If you can do what you say, there won't be ridicule.

When I get it right it's like that statement, what does this matter till after the test, I'll give it to you to examine.
Just give me a cat scan or a lie detector test Shezz.

Lie detectors don't work either, Edge. Besides, if a person truly believes that their delusion is real, then they're not lying. They're simply mistaken.

I'm not sure what you think a cat scan would do.

SezMe and I had no problems getting it done.
Hide and seek isn't that complicated. L.M.A.O.

There were numerous "problems" with that trial. It was done "quick-and-dirty" and there were great gaping holes in the protocol. Im

 

[Paulhoff]

Actually, it is, at least it is the way you describe it. Remember when you said the force of the dowsing nearly pulled the dowsing rod out of your hand? And you say that you now need a scale for the test because the force pulls the rod down. But now remember when you said that you couldn't even make a pendulum with a piece of gold on the end move by dowsing at it?

I asked you about this because it would be a one-way force. A force for which there is no equal-and-opposite attraction. You said that it was indeed such a force. That defies the laws of physics. That makes it paranormal.

Geee, let us think about this, the rod does not pull the gold, the rod that is not in the hands of the dower is not pulled to the gold. Geee, does a dowser think that there is a problem with this.

Paul

 

[GzuzKryzt]

Lest we forget: Not even an incentive of One Million US Dollars could sway edge to come up with a useful protocol for his alleged ability. Does it get clearer than this?

...
There's nothing if I don't get it right, but ridicule.
...

Funny that you perceive it like that, since I simply stated an undisputable fact.

If this protocol is acceptable in your opinion, to which other organisations did you propose it to and what were the responses? (Keeping in mind that a successful demonstration for another skeptic challenge will count hugely toward a possible future JREF Challenge Application.)

And: Will you apply again for the JREF Challenge, edge?

 

[edge]

I'm not sure what you think a cat scan would do.

It's a new form of lie detecting.

 

[edge]

Funny that you perceive it like that, since I simply stated an undisputable fact.

If this protocol is acceptable in your opinion, to which other organizations did you propose it to and what were the responses? (Keeping in mind that a successful demonstration for another skeptic challenge will count hugely toward a possible future JREF Challenge Application.)

And: Will you apply again for the JREF Challenge, edge?

I don't know.

James from the IIG has now contacted me again after some delay.

I try not to let the money affect my decisions on how to do this, or that I don't get a chance at it now.

The I.I.G. are the closest to where I live and cost of projects is relevant.

Just to going to them will cost me about 500 dollars or more out of pocket.
It’s only 700 miles or so from here but I will have to pay for a couple of days stay for two or three people and food, gas etcetera.

Geee, let us think about this, the rod does not pull the gold, the rod that is not in the hands of the dower is not pulled to the gold. Geee, does a dowser think that there is a problem with this.

Paul

If it pulled the gold out of the overburden then why would I need a dredge?

But you are wrong it is pulled to the gold hence downward or any direction of movement that indicates a presents of metals.

So where you get that from is unknown to me?

I have never had a problem in the field.

Does a metal detector work when on the ground sitting still Paul?
Even if it's turned on?

Something is taken from the person to make it work and the person is the battery in a sense.

Tricky says,

I asked you about this because it would be a one-way force. A force for which there is no equal-and-opposite attraction. You said that it was indeed such a force. That defies the laws of physics. That makes it paranormal.

Do we know all the laws of physics?

The reaction may not be sensed in the gravitational field of the Earth but may require a neutral area such as Micro gravity to be able to witness the reaction….
Lets say we could attract to a field around a star would the star move or would we move in a micro gravity situation?
Would it be magnetic or some other form, dealing with gravitational forces we have yet to understand.

Tricky says,
But now remember when you said that you couldn't even make a pendulum with a piece of gold on the end move by dowsing at it?

What I said was that there might have been some movement but it was not a clean room to test in.
It could have been the air from the movement of the stick that caused the slightest movement that I seen, I wasn’t sure.
I couldn’t say that it did.
Again if you are looking for a magnetic type of movement then we would never need the tools that we have to mine with and only need 20 ton electromagnets to pull the Gold out of the creek.

Tricky says,

There were numerous "problems" with that trial. It was done "quick-and-dirty" and there were great gaping holes in the protocol.

Name one besides the way we scored it.
We scored it on a yes and no being correct because that’s what I have to do, get the empties right too.
I have to get every pick right in any form of testing or scoring.
It was a totally honest test why does that bug you?

Then you say,

Your "testing" was unnecessary. There were several very simple protocols for what you said you could do. You refused them all. Instead you regaled us with stories of how much gold you had found and how well the dowsing was working.

I refused them because you where trying to get me to test in the old fashion method which is flawed.
My experiments show a losing proposition in placing all the ten containers in one area.
Get over what I said in the past and think about what I have learned now.
My experiments prove that what you call my excuses, have some relevance to facts.
If that weren’t true I wouldn't be here now, with this, some basic knowledge of the facts that I have learned.

Only relevance is the new information.

One netrual spot to do the test on, so that the calibrations of container with target and empty contanier with out target can be calibrated on the scale with only two known factors to deal with.

One spot to dowse on for the target, unless you want to spread the containers across an acre of land.

One scale to measurer the force empty, or with a target.

All metals are attracted when dowsing for metals.

It’s attracted to electrical fields and is still a one-way force in the Earths field.
My score is way higher when done with what’s known about it NOW…….

Everything there in that quote is what I base the protocol on, build it with that information and I won’t have a problem with it.

Lie detectors don't work either, Edge. Besides, if a person truly believes that their delusion is real, then they're not lying. They're simply mistaken.

I'm not sure what you think a cat scan would do.

It would tell you if I was cheating if there were holes!
There might be something here greater than the money or cheating for the money.
That’s only if I win and you want to be totally convinced, that I didn't find a hole, twisted Tricky.


James said,

Mike G., I'm sure, will be back next year. And I think I already know the results.

Key words, I think!
No one knows, not yet.
I do know this, one out of ten is no longer the number that you will see happen.
Why would I re-apply?

If you are looking to test for real science and truth then the time constraint should not be a factor in testing a dowser or else you are not interested in real science.....

 

[GzuzKryzt]

...
If you are looking to test for real science and truth then the time constrant should not be a factor in testing a dowser or else you are not intrested in real science.....

The MDC is about trying to prove so-called paranormal claims using scientific methods.

If you are interested in what you refer to as "real science", go ahead, try for the Nobel Prize. Comes with money, too. That sucker requires "real science".



(Of course you failed again to answer the simple question about the response of IIG.)




What is the purpose of your continued posting in this thread if you don't know whether you will apply again?