Moderated Dowsing By Edge

[Marcus]

Here’s a list as simple as I can write it.


How simple can it be?

I must be learning how to speak edge, this protocol makes perfect sense to me. It appears to me that all he needs is for one of you guys to write this protocol up with normal syntax and grammar. He has agreed to dowse 10 targets at a time, so time shouldn't be a factor.

 

[Marcus]

Sorry, I misunderstood that. "Targets pass on one spot" must mean that he is still on the one at a time thing.

 

[EHocking]

edge, EHocking did his damnest to help you write a protocol. I am willing to write one. Do you think if the three of us got together via e-mail and tried to work one out that something would come of it?

If we could come up with something, we could offer it to JREF on a take-it-or-leave-it basis. No further negotiations.

BTW, I have NOT run this by EHocking so he may be so fed up he doesn't want anything to do with you.

I was going to suggest exactly this. I stayed out of the thread so as not to distract edge further from working out a protocol with JREF.

I'm still willing to help.

But only if edge drops the idea of a one at a time test protocol.
It can't be done in the 8 hours he's been given.

e.g.,
edge stipulation that test site is free of any target for 3mins between dowsing passes - 300mins.
edge stipulation that he has a 10min rest between each trial - 100mins

That leaves 80mins to dowse - 48secs per pass.

It won't work.

edge - would you be willing to be tested with 10 targets in place at once?

 

[Cuddles]

I have more to work out like place and the time.

Edge, this is the whole problem. You have spent the last year complaining about not being able to find a place, and have spent far more time and effort on that than on working out a protocol, even with all the help you have had. Why should the JREF bother to continue working on the protocol when you are incapable of agreeing on a place to do it anyway?

As for outs not being our concern, as Paul2 said, if either you or the JREF has an out then there is absolutely no point in carrying out the test, since it will not prove anything.

 

[RemieV]

Everyone can continue working on a protocol with Mr. Guska if they wish, but really we're frozen in time until Jeff makes a decision on whether or not to move forward.

There is zero clarity in the protocol, and I think it extends further than that. Results of a test with this many stipulations are no longer self-evident, and really, that's the whole point.

 

[Old man]

SezMe, EHocking,

Have you given any thought to having Edge find two (or three) ‘neutral’ sites, fairly close to each other, and testing alternately between them (i.e. target 1 at site 1, then target 2 at site 2, then target 3 at site 1, etc.)?

This might save time, as each site could be clear of targets while the other was being used. It would also save set-up time, as one site could be set up while testing was being done at the other, instead of having each team twiddling their respective thumbs while the other was ‘working’.

 

[EHocking]

SezMe, EHocking,

Have you given any thought to having Edge find two (or three) ‘neutral’ sites, fairly close to each other, and testing alternately between them (i.e. target 1 at site 1, then target 2 at site 2, then target 3 at site 1, etc.)?

This might save time, as each site could be clear of targets while the other was being used. It would also save set-up time, as one site could be set up while testing was being done at the other, instead of having each team twiddling their respective thumbs while the other was ‘working’.

Unfortunately, not down to us - it's all edge's call.

edge has to find a site where all 10 targets can be laid down at once for a single trial.

The one-at-a-time way he wants to do it can not physically be performed in the time JREF has (rightly) given him.

A dowsing test that takes 11 hours is fraught with all sorts of problems - the dowsers fatigue notwithstanding, the longer the testing takes, the more likely mistakes will be made by the testers.

 

[Spektator]

edge, in the interest of saving time, would you be willing to make fewer tries and have a higher level of success?

Would you consider testing 50 times instead of 100?

The target would be present 5 times.

To pass the preliminary test, you would have to identify the target all five times--no misses.

Would this do?

 

[Old man]

Unfortunately, not down to us - it's all edge's call.

Yes, I understand that. I should have said “asked edge…” rather than “have edge…”.

edge has to find a site where all 10 targets can be laid down at once for a single trial.

It was my understanding that edge claims that he couldn’t keep track of the ‘background interference’ on 10 sites. That’s why I suggested 2.

Assuming that edge agrees to 2 sites, do you think that it would help with the time issue?

 

[edge]

Quote:

Targets pass on one spot.

Only the metal is picked out.

A break after a set of ten is done.

The dummies contain lime, 9 of them.

One person on their side to confirmed the truth about my picks.

My choice of where the test will take place.

 

[EHocking]

Yes, I understand that. I should have said “asked edge…” rather than “have edge…”.

It was my understanding that edge claims that he couldn’t keep track of the ‘background interference’ on 10 sites. That’s why I suggested 2.

I posted a suggestion whereby he could keep track by the expedient of writing his benchmark on a wooden marker at each site. No response.

Assuming that edge agrees to 2 sites, do you think that it would help with the time issue?

At a pinch. From his suggested times:

2-3mins / pass = 6min x 5 groups of 2 passes x 10 trials = 300mins
3mins site "rest" per pass = 3min x 4 x 10 = 120mins
10mins rest for him between trials = 10mins x 9 = 90mins

Total 510 mins = 8-1/2 hours.

That's if NO BREAKS are taken at all. No lunch break, no time out, back to back passes and trials.

This leaves absolutely no time for edge to do an "open" test, nor to do his benchmark/background dowsing.

Whereas, if he had 10 sites:

3mins / pass = 3 x 10 x 10 = 300mins
10mins rest for him between trials = 10mins x 9 = 90mins
(this way each test site is "rested" for the required minimum 3mins as well)

Total = 390 mins = 6-1/2 hours

Which leaves 1-1/2 hours for him to prepare the sites and do background readings as well as an open test before the Preliminary MDC double-blind test.

 

[petre]

If I may post a quick suggestion, proposing a success rate of 70% in chosing the correct target out of 7 containers instead of 10 would have a chance less than 1/1000 by random luck, and 70 scans would require less time than 100.

 

[IXP]

e.g.,
edge stipulation that test site is free of any target for 3mins between dowsing passes - 300mins.
edge stipulation that he has a 10min rest between each trial - 100mins

That leaves 80mins to dowse - 48secs per pass.

It won't work.

edge - would you be willing to be tested with 10 targets in place at once?

Where has Edge asked for 3 minutes after each dowsing? I think he said he needs 3 minutes after the target has appeared to get correct results. This can be accomplished by giving him 3 minutes between each set of 10. He has already stated that he wanted to stop after he identifies the target. If you required him to dowse the rest of the cans after that, it still works since we can simply ignore any reading he gets on those cans, since he "knows" they are empty.


IXP

 

[edge]

SezMe, EHocking,

Have you given any thought to having Edge find two (or three) ‘neutral’ sites, fairly close to each other, and testing alternately between them (i.e. target 1 at site 1, then target 2 at site 2, then target 3 at site 1, etc.)?

This might save time, as each site could be clear of targets while the other was being used. It would also save set-up time, as one site could be set up while testing was being done at the other, instead of having each team twiddling their respective thumbs while the other was ‘working’.

This might be possible.
I can find 2 maybe 3 but there is no telling till I try an area.

The only thing we have is a problem with the time issue.

I will ask again SezMe how long did it take to do that test that we did?
After the set up?
Was it about 40 minutes?
If it was then there should be no problem.
SezMe says,

See, edge, right there is the problem. I ask you basically a yes-or-no question and I get the above soliloquy. I'll reserve judgement on your dowsing skills but I'm prepared to call your clarity of thinking and writing to be wanting. Do you want to some help or not?

Yes or No

I know what I'm doing so my clarity is not an issue.
Like I said why change what works?
I have to experiment with a target of sufficient size to know weather to change it or not.
No not yet.

Remie said in the e-mail,

You will dowse the single cannister and leave the room
while a second is placed. The process will continue
for ten cannisters. One of those will definitely
contain the target metal. The other nine in each set
will definitely not.

You will then be allowed a short break (about ten
minutes) and return to dowse the next set of ten in
the same fashion.

You will be asked to dowse ten sets of ten cannisters
in this fashion.

According to this where's the problem?
We'll make it 5 minutes.

Spectator says,

edge, in the interest of saving time, would you be willing to make fewer tries and have a higher level of success?

Would you consider testing 50 times instead of 100?

The target would be present 5 times.

To pass the preliminary test, you would have to identify the target all five times--no misses.

Would this do?

This is possible to do.
Ya we could do that, so there.
All right SezMe write it like that, with what I need.
I still get 8 hours.
When the metal appears I need the field cleared and then when I say to continue, we do,
add that for 100% correct hits.
So we are looking at about 300 minutes.
5 to 6 hours.

Quote:

Targets pass on one spot.

Only the metal is picked out.

When the metal is on the spot, when I think it is, we pause, after the spot is cleared of that container. When I say continue we then check the rest of the containers in that set off ten, then I make my choice.

A break after a set of ten is done.

The dummies contain lime, 9 of them.

One person on their side to confirmed the truth about my picks.

I have to get five out of 50 correct hits done in sets of 10X5.
My choice of where the test will take place.

 

[Spektator]

Okay, I'll give it a try. SezMe, EHocking, check me on this.

PROTOCOL FOR DOWSING TEST

Material required:
1 target, 5 oz. silver
1 5-lb bag of lime
10 11-ounce plastic coffee containers
Scale

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.

The containers will be prepared this way: In nine of the containers for each trial there will be eight ounces of lime. These are the dummy containers. In the remaining container there will be three ounces of lime plus the five-ounce target.

The dowser will be out of sight of the testing area at the beginning of each trial.

A randomizer will choose one of the containers in which to place the target for each run of ten. The randomizer will signal the placement team when the target has been placed in a container.

The placement team will take the container to the test site, place it, and signal the dowser. Then the placement team will leave before the dowser arrives.

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 observation team 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.

The process will be repeated five times, with the target randomly placed in a container for each time.

To succeed, the dowser will have to correctly identify the target container five times.

The dowser will fail if he identifies the target container four or fewer times.

 

[edge]

Okay, I'll give it a try. SezMe, EHocking, check me on this.

PROTOCOL FOR DOWSING TEST

Material required:
1 target, 5 oz. silver
1 5-lb bag of lime
10 11-ounce plastic coffee containers
Scale

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.

The containers will be prepared this way: In nine of the containers for each trial there will be eight ounces of lime. These are the dummy containers. In the remaining container there will be three ounces of lime plus the five-ounce target.

The dowser will be out of sight of the testing area at the beginning of each trial.

A randomizer will choose one of the containers in which to place the target for each run of ten. The randomizer will signal the placement team when the target has been placed in a container.

The placement team will take the container to the test site, place it, and signal the dowser. Then the placement team will leave before the dowser arrives.

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 observation team 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.

The process will be repeated five times, with the target randomly placed in a container for each time.

To succeed, the dowser will have to correctly identify the target container five times.

The dowser will fail if he identifies the target container four or fewer times.

That's good.


Now make them understand this,
Quote:

Targets pass on one spot.

A break after a set of ten is done.

One person on their side to confirmed the truth about my picks just an observer.

My choice of where the test will take place.

Any more than this and it will confuse them.

the preliminary is I have to get five correct out of 50 scans done in sets of 10X5.
And what do I have to score for the final?

 

[edge]

A clown says,
My protocol as outlined a few posts ago will take approx 30 mins.

Wrong that is the same as the first test which lasted four hours or more.

 

[edge]

Spektator, SezMe, EHocking, scanning the empties can take as little time as about a half a minute.

They will have to keep their timing the same for each set of the containers on the spot.
But of course that’s up to them.

Dan used 25 seconds before calling me back.

My walk time was about 25 to 30 seconds till I reached the spot, another 30 seconds or so for the scan if it was empty.

If the target was there, up to two minutes.

If the target can repeat what we witnessed in nature on the creek SezMe, well then it should be easy to identify the target and save time.

 

[Reno]

The definative 'edge' protocal'

I have to score for over the ground in the final for a higher %ge than the prelim. Usually it is 110% but as I can score that it could be the thought that 70% is for the preliminary only. That would suit me just fine.

If the passes on the scans are to be observed (but not picks for a whole observation level) then it would only be necessary if one or two of the observers. This will be at the discretion of course and may be discussed on the day.

If limestone is used in the containers, then the subject shall not be the object unless the passes last past the first 6. The 7th will then be the 'break time' where the field will be reset by appointees of the JREF who may or may not take residence in the motel paid by or not by me. These rest periods will not be included in the time for the challenge because it will be during the 'reset phase'.

There must not be any fields of bodies presnt in the area but I will have scanned previosly and will require a month or two to take into account the scientific gravitational field energie of disruption. This can happen because I know of a canyon where spanners and other implemnents can float and defy the gravitational pull. But this is natural and caused by something that is not invloved in my tests.

Secondly: It will be only a 'hit' if the JREF appointees or Sezme decide that I have discovered it beyond the double-blind. (you could even triple-blind of it was the decision that there may be something strange occcuring.) This is true for magmite also.

Finally and without exception to be certified by Sezme as he saw a proof positive of the effect in the scales: It will be the determination of the percentage.

This is a final and unambiguous rendering of the protocol. why are you chicken bullspit JREF Rennie?

 

[RemieV]

The definative 'edge' protocal'

I have to score for over the ground in the final for a higher %ge than the prelim. Usually it is 110% but as I can score that it could be the thought that 70% is for the preliminary only. That would suit me just fine.

If the passes on the scans are to be observed (but not picks for a whole observation level) then it would only be necessary if one or two of the observers. This will be at the discretion of course and may be discussed on the day.

If limestone is used in the containers, then the subject shall not be the object unless the passes last past the first 6. The 7th will then be the 'break time' where the field will be reset by appointees of the JREF who may or may not take residence in the motel paid by or not by me. These rest periods will not be included in the time for the challenge because it will be during the 'reset phase'.

There must not be any fields of bodies presnt in the area but I will have scanned previosly and will require a month or two to take into account the scientific gravitational field energie of disruption. This can happen because I know of a canyon where spanners and other implemnents can float and defy the gravitational pull. But this is natural and caused by something that is not invloved in my tests.

Secondly: It will be only a 'hit' if the JREF appointees or Sezme decide that I have discovered it beyond the double-blind. (you could even triple-blind of it was the decision that there may be something strange occcuring.) This is true for magmite also.

Finally and without exception to be certified by Sezme as he saw a proof positive of the effect in the scales: It will be the determination of the percentage.

This is a final and unambiguous rendering of the protocol. why are you chicken bullspit JREF Rennie?

I got about a sentence in and then my brain exploded.