Dowsing by a Skeptic

[steenkh]

How do the experts at the British Society of Dowsers explain the fact that dowsing never works under controlled conditions?

Is it their advice that keeps Mick from performing a blinded test?

 

[Donn]

This has been a rare insight into the process of confirmation bias.

It's actually quite scary to see how quickly belief can cleave a person away from reality.

I often wonder about the people in power over me, politicians, judges, doctors, and so on. How many of them are running on batteries of bias, isolated from reality, soaked in certainty, taking me and mine down into darkness?

 

[Jim_MDP]

I sincerely hope he does too. He seemed to have a sense of humor.

I don't know about "humorous", but going by Mick's own anecdote describing his behavior with others, the description I would use is "creeper".

 

[pakeha]

[ . . . ]In particular, one thread is very funny since Mick is inquiring about the notion of ideomotor effect, which he seems to have learned about here at JREF. It is dated June 10.

How does the ideomotor effect debunk dowsing ?

Their moderator/admin has a very succinct answer to the question:

Saskmick seems to have found a new home.

Concerning the ideomotor effect and Pegler's response, Mick is finally being fed the information that sets him all a twitter:
Hopefully he'll be coming back to rub our noses in his newly found knowledge.

ETA: credit to uvar for finding the site with Mick's posts.

Yes, it's funny, but for all the wrong reasons.

[ . . . ] The only reasonable route left for JREF is to offer him help in creating a protocol to try for the MDC.

It isn't often that we can actually witness someone in the process of falling into the woo.

Yes, I agree.
How about it, Mick?
Is there any chance you'd help devise a useful protocol for giving dowsing a fair test?

I don't know about "humorous", but going by Mick's own anecdote describing his behavior with others, the description I would use is "creeper".

Indeed.

...PS, I have become aware some people are frightened when I have demonstrated dowsing to them. Just the other day I met one of these people while out shopping, he was telling me about a bloke who had ripped him off. I asked if he would like me to put a curse on him. You should have seen the look on his face.

I have noticed that those who are uneasy are generally religious types, and those who are not the sharpest knives in the drawer.

Mick,did you read this post through?
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=10071869&postcount=241

 

[Olowkow]

How do the experts at the British Society of Dowsers explain the fact that dowsing never works under controlled conditions?

Is it their advice that keeps Mick from performing a blinded test?

I think their world is very different from that of the skeptic. I didn't understand why, at first, the moderator at BSD was quoting a cherry picked out of context passage from one of Shermer's interviews. Now I do.

Hyman: Good scientific research is very costly and time consuming. Given limited resources, I think we get more bang for our buck if we focus on the media and education—the opinion makers—instead of serious research. I think we need to be a credible source of reliable information.

Re: How does the ideomotor effect debunk dowsing ?

by Ian Pegler » Thu Jun 12, 2014 5:26 am
famous Ray Hyman quote:Ray Hyman wrote:I think we get more bang for our buck if we focus on the media and education—the opinion makers—instead of serious research

from here

Says it all.
Ian

This type of tactic reminds me of so many groups' technique of twisting of facts to prove the truth of their claims...AGW deniers, evangelicals, politicians, etc.

It appears that Ian Pegler (from BSD) believes that this quote means that serious research is not being done because of some conspiratorial need to debunk dowsing while avoiding any cost, if I understand his point of view. This is the line apparently that Saskmick is going to enjoy rubbing our noses in. He seems to think Ray Hyman, a famous skeptic, is avoiding doing research on dowsing because he is afraid it will prove to be accepted. What an incredible bit of fallacious reasoning.

Hyman's point is obviously that all the prizes and offerings of tests don't work because some minds are made up. It is only through education that these things can be shown to be bogus.

by Hyman:
Frankly I think it is useless to offer cash prizes and debunk psychics on television. You can do that until doomsday. The public doesn’t gain anything from this. I think we need to educate the public on the reason why these things appear real, on why we believe, on how we are deceived. These are epistemological questions. Most of us most of the time make decisions not on logic or science or rationality, but on emotion. Debunking without lessons is a waste of time.

Concerning the use of the ideomotor effect to attempt to explain the folly of dowsing, I'm getting the impression that at least one of the dowsers accepts this as the mechanism for moving the rods, but it is the brain's knowledge of the water location that gives the rods their direction. Some seem to think that it is the human's detection of water, etc. that is the essence and mystery of dowsing, and that the rods are merely the tools of indication. They self righteously then proceed to ignore the ideomotor effect entirely.

by Ian Pegler (BSD): Dowsers have known for a very long time (centuries!) that this kind of involuntary subconscious movement is untimately responsible for the movement of the rods. But really so what? It doesn't always respond in accordance with expectations, not if you're doing it right. The term "ideomotor effect" says nothing about the nature of consciousness or how the mind knows more than it should.

It's turtles all the way down!

 

[uvar]

How about it, Mick?
Is there any chance you'd help devise a useful protocol for giving dowsing a fair test?

There are plenty of examples to get him started...

At Kassel, north of Frankfurt, Germany, the scientific group Gesellschaft zur wissenschaftlichen Untersuchung von Parawissenschaften (GWUP) in 1992 set up a very efficient and effective site for testing dowsing in cooperation with a local television station. A plastic pipe of suitable size was buried fifty centimeters beneath a level section of field, through which a very large flow of water could be directed from a switching valve. The test area was protected by a large tent, and the position of the buried pipe was prominently marked by a broad red and white stripe. The challenge for the dowsers was not to find the pipe, but only to say whether water was flowing in it or not...
Each dowser [of the thirty participating] was asked to make, in advance, a statement expressing any objections he might have to the procedure and stating his or her expected success rate. Each and every problem was satisfied and each dowser expected 100 percent success, as attested by the signatures...
At the end of three days of testing, GWUP announced the results of almost a thousand bits of data to the assembled dowsers. A summary of their results produced just what would be expected according to chance.

http://www.randi.org/encyclopedia/dowsing.html
(Much longer experiment discussion in the Swift Volume 1s, http://www.randi.org/swift/current/index.html)

 

[SaskMick]

Evening all !

Sorry to have been absent for so long, but I have been busy.


The test so far.

I have got hold of five identical plastic buckets and spray painted the inside of one at the base. I gave them to my wife to place upside down and 30 feet apart. The score is four out of four correct so far. I will give it another three attempts before calling it quits.

 

[SaskMick]

The most interesting bit of this post is at the very end, where you can watch SaskMick's video of him dowsing. I can't watch it on the device I'm posting from, but I'm sure it's interesting somehow.



That seems potentially consistent, really. It helps Mick is happy to give the 'other' forum plenty of details.

• Many years ago: SaskMick first learns about dowsing, tries to dowse with no success (link)
• Last Autumn (northern hemisphere): Mick buys the acreage with existing structure; shortly after, it burns down (link)
• Mid-May: 'Day Zero'. Mick gets a plumber to visit for 'an estimate'. Mick takes the plumber to the well, the plumber looks at/in the well, and then uses his dowsing rods. The plumber claims the well is a good source with plenty of water. Mick asks to try and gets an instant result matching the plumber's. Mick discovers he can ask questions out loud to get answers from the rods. Mick asks the plumber about his rods, who lies and claims they are a special material (in fact, coat hanger wire) apparently out of annoyance at Mick's success. (previous link)
• Mid-May: Mick investigates with his own coat hanger wire rods, successfully dowsing previously-marked gas and phone lines on the property. Mick repeats several times with some failures. Mick does experiments with his wife, who is unable to dowse. One experiment involves Mick holding the rods while his wife walks near three sources of water that Mick knows about; the rods respond when his wife reaches them. Mick does other tests that would be interesting if he had done them with more rigor and achieved the same results. Mick continues to experiment with 'surrogate dowsing' (dowsing based on someone else's position), at first with them holding a pendulum, but later deciding the pendulum is unnecessary. (previous link)
• May 28: Mick joins the British Society of Dowsers forum.
• May 29: Mick discovers one rod works as well as two rods.
• May 31: "I'm now fairly sure it's the dowser that subconsciously makes the rods move". (link)
• Very early June: Mick meets another dowser, and discovers dowsing has medical applications (Possibly the friend of the doctor) (link)
• Very early June: Mick dowses another property for a well, and discovers the woman living there can dowse. Her husband later forbids Mick from contacting her about dowsing, and maybe contacting them at all. (see last link)
• June 5: Another forum poster links to a youtube video of Randi on dowsing, to which Mick replies "I have seen that Randi video before. I would like to stick my dowsing rods right up his arse." (link)
• June 8: Mick gets a (phone?) call from the president of the Holistic Intuition Society about using his youtube video* on their website, and a possible job dowsing underground for other clients (link)
• June 10: Mick asks the BSD forum about the ideomotor effect, and is happy with their explanation of why dowsing still works regardless. Later in the thread (June 15), in an example of bad faith, Mick states "PS, I just needed it to rub someones nose in it a the JREF forum. You should check out that forum, it's great fun." (link)
• No later than June 11: Mick joins the JREF forum, and then makes this thread.
• June 14: Mick discovers another person (male this time) who can dowse as well as him. (link)
• Before June 20: Mick discovers he can dowse better when moving than when stationary.

*Despite having enough posts to do so, Mick has not posted his video here (as far as I'm aware). However, he planned to earlier - "( I need 15 posts before I can post a video link )" - so I'm sure he won't mind if I do:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kocsJpsgl-A

That's a very fair piece of reporting.

I have come to the conclusion that there are "dowsers" who are full of it. It's a pity, but there are shysters everywhere.

My friend who does the "medical dowsing" checks people homes for negative energy. He gets recommended by the doctor and the people contact him directly.

June 20th ish Mick discovers he can dowse for negative energy

 

[Daylightstar]

...
June 20th ish Mick discovers he can dowse for negative energy

You have not demonstrated that you can dowse for anything at all.

 

[SaskMick]

"It is the challenge of the unknown that draws the greatest minds; others are well comforted and appeased by certainty"

Not sure who wrote that, but I like it anyway.

 

[SaskMick]

You have not demonstrated that you can dowse for anything at all.

Then why bother yourself with this thread ?

 

[AdMan]

Evening all !

Sorry to have been absent for so long, but I have been busy.


The test so far.

I have got hold of five identical plastic buckets and spray painted the inside of one at the base. I gave them to my wife to place upside down and 30 feet apart. The score is four out of four correct so far. I will give it another three attempts before calling it quits.

So how did you double-blind this test, exactly?

You should read this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clever_hans

 

[Daylightstar]

Then why bother yourself with this thread ?

To remind you that you have not demonstrated that you can dowse for anything at all, in spite of your apparent conviction that you can.

You are not expected to be able to ever demonstrate that you can dowse for anything at all, but you will show what your mind is made of.

 

[Daylightstar]

"It is the challenge of the unknown that draws the greatest minds; others are well comforted and appeased by certainty"

Not sure who wrote that, but I like it anyway.

^{Hilite by Daylightstar}
Irrational belief or faulty understanding of things in the real world is not an unknown.
Your own 'experience', which you indirectly try to refer to, is not an unknown but rather an unknowing or unknowable, indemonstrable .....

 

[Giordano]

Evening all !

Sorry to have been absent for so long, but I have been busy.


The test so far.

I have got hold of five identical plastic buckets and spray painted the inside of one at the base. I gave them to my wife to place upside down and 30 feet apart. The score is four out of four correct so far. I will give it another three attempts before calling it quits.

That's great in general concept, but both it is more complicated than suggested and still possible of leaving visible clues for the sprayed painted bucket (the way that light reflects or passes through it, for example). But it sounds as if you now have everything you need for a strong test. Assuming the 4 unpainted buckets are identical, and opaque, have your wife in your absence place a Canadian penny under 3 and and an American penny under the fourth at random (use a dice throw for example). Have her leave the room- this is important. Then you enter and dowse. Repeat several time if you want to improve the statistics. Tell us how it went. If this really works you have an easy way of winning a million! I know you don't need it, but think how much a benefit it will be for thiose you give the money to! Thanks!.

 

[Giordano]

That's a very fair piece of reporting.

I have come to the conclusion that there are "dowsers" who are full of it. It's a pity, but there are shysters everywhere.

My friend who does the "medical dowsing" checks people homes for negative energy. He gets recommended by the doctor and the people contact him directly.

June 20th ish Mick discovers he can dowse for negative energy

Negative energy! Would you be willing to explain what this is and how you have done it?

 

[Giordano]

My friend who does the "medical dowsing" checks people homes for negative energy. He gets recommended by the doctor and the people contact him directly.

And the doctor douses too to confirms your friend's diagnosis if I remember your posts correctly? Is this an MD type of doctor?

 

[Loss Leader]

Evening all !

Sorry to have been absent for so long, but I have been busy.


The test so far.

I have got hold of five identical plastic buckets and spray painted the inside of one at the base. I gave them to my wife to place upside down and 30 feet apart. The score is four out of four correct so far. I will give it another three attempts before calling it quits.

<Sigh> This sounds like it could be a good test, but I'd like to know a whole lot more about what these buckets look like, how "identical" they really are and what the painted one looks like in the light. I'd like to know how your wife chooses where to put each bucket and how she makes sure it's random. It would further help to know where your wife is and what you can see and hear of her during your tests.

At least in your absence, you've learned to sound more like you're doing appropriate testing.

 

[Kid Eager]

"It is the challenge of the unknown that draws the greatest minds; others are well comforted and appeased by certainty"

Not sure who wrote that, but I like it anyway.

"Nothing quite like bogus quotes to give one a warm fuzzy feeling"
- Aristotle

 

[Daylightstar]

... winning a million! I know you don't need it, but think how much a benefit it will be for thiose you give the money to! Thanks!.

That will probably not motivate him:

Sure I could use it, it would give me great pleasure to spread it around, but I don't need it

According to SaskMick, they won't get it because he says he himself doesn't need it