Dowsing by a Skeptic

[SezMe]

I was a diehard skeptic until very recently.

No you weren't.

 

[Akhenaten]

This is my last post tonight.


I will try to explain again. The rods are only a visual indicator.

Indeed. They're a visual indicator that the person holding them has got the wrong end of the stick, as it were.

It is the dowser that does the dowsing, not the rods.

So close to the truth, but still not quite there.

I have discovered that dowsing does not work when I have just woken up, or when I am tired. It also does not work when I am not relaxed. I doubt I would feel relaxed when being subjected to controlled conditions.

How convenient.

That's just the way it is. But I can show you !

Apparently not.

 

[Mojo]

Are you pulling the old, "It doesn't work in the presence of negative vibes" dodge?

I have discovered that dowsing does not work when I have just woken up, or when I am tired. It also does not work when I am not relaxed. I doubt I would feel relaxed when being subjected to controlled conditions.

I think that's a "yes".

 

[Dubious Dick]

Dear SaskMick,

Having spent a considerable amount of time campaigning against the trade in fake explosives detectors I have done a considerable amount of research into dowsing (some of the makers/sellers of the fake explosives detectors claim/claimed that they worked on the same principles as dowsing).

I have looked at innumerable claims for dowsing, and have yet to find any credible evidence whatsoever that it works for finding anything whatsoever.

Now, other responses have clearly explained to you that without a double blind protocol test, carried out under independent observation, your claims are totally worthless. Are you prepared to claim the JREF Million Dollars? Or take part in other credible testing? If not just go away and stop peddling your anecdotes here. There are plenty of other places where credulous believers will engage with you in your delusion.

 

[Mojo]

I doubt I would feel relaxed when being subjected to controlled conditions.

I'm not sure you understand what is meant by "controlled". It wouldn't be something that was done to you - it would be something that was done to whatever you were trying to find. So, for example, if you were trying to detect water, you might be faced with several opaque bottles, only one of which contained water, with no clues available as to which one it was. You would be allowed to dowse in exactly the same way you usually do.

 

[Dubious Dick]

Why on earth would you not feel relaxed under controlled conditions? Surely if you are so damned confident it would be a breeze?

I suggest you would not feel relaxed because you know you are not sure about your claimed abilities.

So, and I am sorry to have to say this, just bog off. and stop wasting your time here.

 

[Donn]

Welcome to the forum.

It is the dowser that does the dowsing, not the rods.

How do you suppose you do the dowsing?

Could it be that you are not stupid and have some experience with pipes, cell phones in couches and under newspapers, water flowing down inclines, and so on? You know, basic life experience?

If it's not you that is doing the dowsing, then what is? Can you think of any ways to reveal the thing that is doing the dowsing?

If I could fly, I'd want to find my limits. How fast can I go, how high? Can I do loops?

Can you think of any ways you could test your dowsing ability? You know, to get the best out of it? Are you not curious about your ability?

 

[freedy]

I can dowse for telephone cables.
When I know where the cables are located the rods react with close to 100% accuracy. When I don’t know where the cables are located, the rods, unfortunately, are very vague.

 

[Slowvehicle]

I think that's a "yes".

Certainly seems as if it is, no?

 

[Resume]

Water, empty plastic pipes ( never had water in them ) underground telephone lines, purposely hidden cell phones etc etc etc I have only been doing it for a little while and I am still learning.

What you are learning is that human beings are adept at fooling themselves You seem to be very good at it.

My rods can answer questions.

You're asking the wrong ones.

 

[Donn]

In my lingo, rods are underpants. This explains so much.

 

[Foolmewunz]

These threads get quite formulaic, but at least this one is moving along. We're already at the "oh, it won't work if the situation is other than one I control". It usually takes us five hundred posts and a week to get to that stage.

SaskMick, listen to the good folks here. They have considerable experience with this. The Foundation has tested dowsers as have many national skeptic groups in other countries. To a man and woman they (the dowers) have failed. I think it was Randi himself (or someone else from the Foundation - other posters can correct me) who noted that the most surprised person in the room after the tests has been the dowser. Dowser's aren't con artists, generally; they actually believe they can do what they claim. They may have heard about the idiometer effect but they think it applies to other people, not to themselves. And never having tested it or studied it, they are sure to a high degree of certainty that what they are experiencing is real dowsing.

So before you expect us to believe something we've seen disproved numerous times, be aware that you're going to have to offer more than a Youtube as "proof". Where are you located. There are skeptic societies in all sorts of cities/towns and it might be possible for one of them to conduct a double-blind test with you. They will not come do it at your abode where you can point to pipes in the walls or under the driveway, but will do it at an agreed upon (by you and them) neutral location and with a set of criteria that you get to sign off on BEFORE any test is conducted.

Be warned, though.... this is the exact test that numerous dowsers have failed. Dowsing has, thus far, a 100% fail rate under controlled testing.

 

[Nay_Sayer]

Sasmick pay no mind to those other bitter skeptical naysayers, Listen to this Nay_Sayer;

Not only do I find your story convincing I'm eager to offer you a limited time deal, I have in my possession Anti Tiger Rocks. I was skeptical at first but after seeing them in action I can say with great confidence they work!

Now they may "seem" like normal rocks but they were blessed by an Indian medicine woman and sure enough long Island has never had anyone get attacked while walking, By a wild Tiger.

I reduce the price for you to just 59.99$ american dollars.

 

[Cuddles]

Claims of a god, claims of supernatural abilities, claims made by Gypsy Rose Lee. etc etc Because I thought it was all bull, and I still think the vast majority is.

In other words, you are not and never were in any way a skeptic. Skepticism is a process, not a set of conclusions. "Because I think it's bull" is not a skeptical statement.

My rods can answer questions.
...
Clue.. It's not the rods that do it. The rods are just a visual indicator.

So is it the rods or not? While it will require actual evidence to convince anyone of your claims, actually making consistent claims at all would be a good start.

You are quite right, I know nothing about the proper protocol.

Don't you perhaps think that's something you should learn before jumping to the conclusion that you have magic powers?

Was Albert Einstein deluded too ?

For the sake of argument I'll ignore the fact that, as others have already noted, there appears to be no evidence he actually said any such thing about dowsing - yes. Yes he was. So what? Being an accomplished physicist does not, sadly, make one infallible.

It most probably would fail a scientific test.

Then it does not work.

 

[catsmate]

I know you don't believe me, but that's ok. It's what I know that matters.

So why are you here then?

Einstein on dowsing
<snip>

Irrelevant and out of context quotes?

Read the entire thread and you will see why I can demonstrate it to you in person. It most probably would fail a scientific test.

So it's not real then.

 

[aggle-rithm]

Read the entire thread and you will see why I can demonstrate it to you in person. It most probably would fail a scientific test.

A scientific test is a way to determine if something is real or not. If it fails a well-designed scientific test, then it's not real.

(catsmate1 beat me to it.)

 

[Stuart]

SaskMick
Like you I truly believed I could dowse.
It took three attempts to prove otherwise.
This was all indoors in the winter, walking around my parents house with a Y shaped twig.
By a chair, the twig moved - looking under the chair, there was a glass of water - I could dowse!
I moved the glass away and twig stayed stationary, next to the chair was a water filled central heating radiator - I didn't register that though. The heating was on so maybe I could only detect still water.
When the heating wasn't on, therefore the water in the radiator was still, I still couldn't detect it with my twig.
I believe the reaction your wife is getting when trying to dowse is the correct one.

 

[dlorde]

Looks like SaskMick hasn't seen Randi's excellent test of well-experienced dowsers in Australia. Note how in the test he ensures that all the dowsers agree on the test conditions and gives them a trial run so they can assure themselves their dowsing will definitely work under those circumstances; how can they possibly fail? (test proper begins at 12' 40''):

 

[dlorde]

Here is the thread started by the last person who claimed he could dowse.

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=226770

We helped him design a test protocol which was run in the presence of two university professors. I urge you to read the whole thread, you should find it very informative.

Especially post #338 (and #327 shows pics of the site).

 

[IXP]

I have discovered that dowsing does not work when I have just woken up, or when I am tired. It also does not work when I am not relaxed.

Just to clarify: Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't. When it does not, I can come up with an excuse.

IXP