• 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.

Dowsing 4 gold

RoboTimbo said:
edge, what would falsify dowsing in your mind? What would have to happen, or not happen, for you to acknowledge that dowsing doesn't work?
Click to expand...

Well if everything I do to optimze the conditions only produces less than 90% correct in my picks, lets say that I can only get 60% correct.
I want 100% correct and you have to remember that means when it's there and when it's not.
 
Captain_Swoop said:
not finding a sample if it's 2 inches to the right?
Click to expand...

Here's a job I did the other day, now imagine what's under a buildings slab.
It's usually pig wire, 6" x 6" squares x 4'... by whatever length.

I think in the office I was able to get 6 cups centered, but the others I couldn't, if you move them slightly you would or have a chance to cause even more havoc.
 

Attachments

  • 547222498_1936761559_0.jpg
    547222498_1936761559_0.jpg
    80.8 KB · Views: 4
  • 547221887_1936759344_0.jpg
    547221887_1936759344_0.jpg
    71 KB · Views: 2
  • 547222212_1936760520_0.jpg
    547222212_1936760520_0.jpg
    75.9 KB · Views: 4
Elizabeth I said:
Translation: "I wasn't really doing the challenge that time, I just wanted to see how it worked. Now I've got them exactly where I want them."
Click to expand...

I told you before I don't need them to prove it and I will if I can and you will see or I will admit defeat, you'll know soon enough.

If I am successful they will find something about my protocol to cancel out the test.
I'll go ahead and prove that point too.
 
edge said:
...The test could be shorter in time, if when I pick the target, the rest of the set is a wash and the set is over, since they were complaining about the length of time.

In other words it could go like this, four empties could pass by and if I pick out the 5th as the target, which would make the other five empties, they could go to the next set of ten with a new position in the rotation for the target...
Click to expand...
This was discussed ad nauseum on the MDC thread.

If done this way the test is not double-blinded.

This has been stressed repeatedly and double-blinding has also been explained to you repeatedly.

An MDC test would only be performed double-blind, as you know.
Your repeated attempts to get around this test condition is why the last protocol failed to be resolved.

Repeatedly trying to dodge it this time around smacks of disengenuousness.
 
EHocking said:
This was discussed ad nauseum on the MDC thread.

If done this way the test is not double-blinded.

This has been stressed repeatedly and double-blinding has also been explained to you repeatedly.

An MDC test would only be performed double-blind, as you know.
Your repeated attempts to get around this test condition is why the last protocol failed to be resolved.

Repeatedly trying to dodge it this time around smacks of disengenuousness.
Click to expand...
It could still be double blinded. Edge says he has found the target in number 5 and skips testing 6-10. OK, reset.

Only problem would be that this gives more wiggle-room to come up with excuses afterwards. "I got a disturbance in the force when i dowsed number 5. I would have noticed the target in number 8, but they were rushing me. So that doesn't count."

Or something like that. All dowsers I have seen tested do this. All of them. Every time.

You explain away a few misses, and suddenly you are performing better than chance...
 
edge said:
It was clear to me when I set the cups down in their places, trying to find neutral spots for them.
Click to expand...
So, where are there so-called neutral spots out in the real world?

Paul

:) :) :)
 
EHocking said:
His problem is that he's relying on dowsing to find them...:p
Click to expand...
Yes, he sometimes comes up when Randi talks about that subject.

Like I said, all double blind tests that have been done, the dowser agrees that everything with the test is OK. After they fail, and they all do, they with find something wrong with the test, and it is never that dowsing doesn't work. They don't want to give up on their so-called powers.

Paul

:) :) :)
 
edge said:
I told you before I don't need them to prove it and I will if I can and you will see or I will admit defeat, you'll know soon enough.

If I am successful they will find something about my protocol to cancel out the test.
I'll go ahead and prove that point too.
Click to expand...
You didn't admit defeat last time, it's very unlikely you would in a new test. If you did, however, you would earn the distinction of being the very first claimant to do so. I wouldn't hold my breath, but it's at least possible.
 
EHocking said:
This was discussed ad nauseum on the MDC thread.

If done this way the test is not double-blinded.

This has been stressed repeatedly and double-blinding has also been explained to you repeatedly.

An MDC test would only be performed double-blind, as you know.
Your repeated attempts to get around this test condition is why the last protocol failed to be resolved.

Repeatedly trying to dodge it this time around smacks of disengenuousness.
Click to expand...

It doesn't matter I could do 100 tries, You wouldn't know, I could breeze throught the empties.
I'm not sure that we disscussed that option.
 
Marcus said:
You didn't admit defeat last time, it's very unlikely you would in a new test. If you did, however, you would earn the distinction of being the very first claimant to do so. I wouldn't hold my breath, but it's at least possible.
Click to expand...

If I fail my test, it's over.
70% or less is a failure.
 
edge said:
It doesn't matter I could do 100 tries, You wouldn't know, I could breeze throught the empties.
Click to expand...
If that is the case, do it. End of discussion. If you can do 100 tries in a reasonable time, just do it and forget about halting a trial after you claim to have a hit.

That way the test would be double-blind - neither you nor the test supervisor knows the results until after all the 100 tries are completed.
I'm not sure that we disscussed that option.
Click to expand...
It has been pointed out to you repeatedly since the thread you started in 2006 discussing an MDC protocol, Dowsing By Edge.
 
Last edited:
So edge, i have a quick question.

If a friend of yours claimed to be a great darts player, one of the best in the world, that he makes money all the time by playing darts , but when you decide to play with him he can't hit the broad side of the barn, and more than this he blames it on the residual grease on his hands from the potato chips he was eating.

Do you believe him? Or would you conclude that if grease harmed his playing ability that much, he would have been able to correct it before playing , at the very least refrained from eating the chips in question before playing, or maybe even said before playing " sorry can't do this , have greasy hands."

And either way, would you continue to believe this friend when he makes future statements about how good of a darts player he is?

Personally i would be of the opinion that if one is good at the skill one would know what effects it, and not attempt to preform in a situation in which they could not. As well i would not, in the future believe his claims about being a good darts player.
 
edge said:
There are so many variables to dowsing it’s hard to do a controlled test, this is why I need 5 pounds or more for a target and all metals have a different pull.
Click to expand...

I love the out. If someone did put five pounds of gold in front of you and you couldn't find it with your dowsing stick, you could always claim that you need just a few more pounds of gold to detect it.
 
Ladewig said:
I love the out. If someone did put five pounds of gold in front of you and you couldn't find it with your dowsing stick, you could always claim that you need just a few more pounds of gold to detect it.
Click to expand...

Yeah i am slowly starting to think this is nothing more than him trying to get a few pounds of gold in the same place, snatch it and take off.

Why is it only in the paranormal realm do people not know what effects their power till after they do it in front of an audience? Either the powers don't exist, or the practitioners are superhumanly lazy when it comes to finding out what does and doesn't effect them.
 
Ladewig said:
I love the out. If someone did put five pounds of gold in front of you and you couldn't find it with your dowsing stick, you could always claim that you need just a few more pounds of gold to detect it.
Click to expand...

Or the spot it was on wasn't 'neutral' enough and it should have been 2 inches to the right.
 
So edge's paranormal power is that he can detect gold provided there's at least five pounds of it, and that it's placed exactly where he tells you? Sounds reasonable.

By the way, how big would five pounds of gold be?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom