• 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 by edge - Part III

GzuzKryzt said:
Well, you're not going to win the money anyway. And you're right in one part: You don't understand...the bonds, the savings and the implications.
If you want, take pride in the fact that you helped speed up the discontinuation of the JREF Challenge by making it rather clear from what kind of pool the applicants arise.



Concerning your correspondence with IIG you need to comprehend that you are probably not very high on their to-do list.
Click to expand...

What's your problem, I'm not the one making bets then backing out?
You sound like a spoiled little brat.
 
edge said:
What's your problem, I'm not the one making bets then backing out?
Click to expand...

The JREF Challenge is neither a bet nor did the JREF "back out".

The JREF challenged you to prove your dowsing claim. You were blatantly unable to devise your protocol - even with dozens of hours of help - hence the JREF terminated your application.

edge said:
You sound like a spoiled little brat.
Click to expand...

Your personal attacks lack pizzazz. Step it up, hoser. Better yet: Prove your claim, equus. Buttburglar. Douchebag.
 
GzuzKryzt said:
The JREF Challenge is neither a bet nor did the JREF "back out".

The JREF challenged you to prove your dowsing claim. You were blatantly unable to devise your protocol - even with dozens of hours of help - hence the JREF terminated your application.



Your personal attacks lack pizzazz. Step it up, hoser. Better yet: Prove your claim, equus. Buttburglar. Douchebag.
Click to expand...

It's not a personal attack just a personal observation.
Just like with any child, ignoring name-calling, { your adhominem approach } is the logical thing to do.
Go home now before I have a talk with your mother.
 
edge said:
It's not a personal attack just a personal observation.
Just like with any child, ignoring name-calling, { your adhominem approach } is the logical thing to do.
Go home now before I have a talk with your mother.
Click to expand...

It's not name-calling. Just a personal observation.

Waffle-Willy. Dowsing-Douche. Mutter-Mike.
 
edge said:
Not a peep from the I.I.G., I wonder why?
Well, I know why.
Click to expand...
I'm guessing it's because there's a tremendous amount of evidence to suggest that trying to work with you is a waste of time. You cannot write a protocol and you will not accept one written by others. You are barely coherent and unable to make sensible replies to simple questions.

In essence, it is probably the same reason the JREF terminated your application.
 
Tell me what's so hard to understand in this it is plane English?
Here’s the questions,,
Hi Jim,
Regarding my suggested protocol for testing dowsing:
Do you agree with this procedure?

1. All containers will be placed on the same spot, a
spot of my own choosing, one after the other, and I
will dowse them one at a time.

2. A tripod over the spot will support a scale. I
will attach the scale to my dowsing rod. Neither the
scale nor the rod will actually touch the containers.

Please let me know if these two conditions are
acceptable.
Click to expand...
Sounds like the excuses come from the skeptics’ side to me so understanding is not the issue.
 
Ravenwood said:
Edge, in a previous thread, you claimed that when you were dowsing, you were at a spot where the pull was so strong that the rod bent 180 degrees. You realize that being able to demonstrate that under controlled conditions would be a winning claim, right?
Click to expand...

You keep failing to address this Edge. Why is that?
 
edge said:
Tell me what's so hard to understand in this it is plane English?

Sounds like the excuses come from the skeptics’ side to me so understanding is not the issue.
Click to expand...

Sorry, but I've been out of this for a while. Newborn and all. Your protocol, as presented, is incomplete. There should be more, specifically explaining stuff like:

- how many trials in each run? For example, are you planning to dowse 10 times per run?
- are you proposing to dowse all x containers (see the above question), or are you proposing to stop when you think you've found the container that has the target material in it?
- what kinds of containers? Are you proposing to go with the plastic coffee containers you proposed with the JREF test?
- how many containers? Just one, that has to be prepared each time? Or x containers, where x is the number you specify in answer to my first question?
- how will you ensure that the container(s) that does/do NOT contain the target material will be indistinguishable from the one(s) that does/do? I.e., how will you weigh down the container that doesn't have the target material in it?

Please forgive me if there's an obvious post in here somewhere that outlines all that (and let me know where it is). I took the Chiefs' Exam this week and my brain is dribbling out through my ears.
 
Do we humans, too, have a sense of magnetism? To test this possibility, Robin Baker, of the University of Manchester, drove groups of blindfolded student volunteers along twisting roads up to 30 miles away from their campus. Then he asked them to indicate the way back to their starting point. Interestingly, the students tended to give good estimates of the direction home while still blindfolded, but became disoriented when the blindfolds were removed, as if the overpowering sensation of sight masked a more subtle one of magnetism.


Of course, this remains a highly contentious subject. Some researchers who've investigated it have failed to find anything definite at all. But the spectacular practical success of dowsers demands a serious scientific response – and not just because the phenomenon might be intrinsically fascinating. When an estimated 80 percent of all diseases in the Third World are caused by polluted water, and at least two billion people have inadequate water supplies, the benefits that could come from a more effective way of locating deep aquifers are obvious.
Click to expand...

Interesting article.

http://www.daviddarling.info/encyclopedia/D/dowsing_and_magnetic_sense.html
 
edge said:
Interesting article.

http://www.daviddarling.info/encyclopedia/D/dowsing_and_magnetic_sense.html
Click to expand...
Interesting as a conversation piece, perhaps, but as science, not at all. No methods given for eilther experiment with the students, and none that I can find online.

The write-up suggests that the experiments were not blinded and that leeway to interpret the results in favor of the desired conclusion was intentionally built in.

But this bit from your quoted part really sinks it:
linked article said:
But the spectacular practical success of dowsers demands a serious scientific response – and not just because the phenomenon might be intrinsically fascinating. When an estimated 80 percent of all diseases in the Third World are caused by polluted water, and at least two billion people have inadequate water supplies, the benefits that could come from a more effective way of locating deep aquifers are obvious.
Click to expand...
There is no spectacular practical success of dowsers. None, edge. Zero.

You can't even dowse enough gold to buy a $90 pair of cold water gloves or pay for a minimum wage assistant.

Bunkum again. Lots and lots of bunkum.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom