• 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.

IIG testing dowser $50K challenge

Good. Audio and Video seems to be all there for this round.

Funny, I find myself rooting for him to be right as well.
 
I'm not happy about the loss of sound, IIG have not ensured a robust enough public test IMO.
 
bluesjnr said:
I'm not happy about the loss of sound, IIG have not ensured a robust enough public test IMO.
Click to expand...

I believe that they have other cameras rolling non-stop besides the webcams. Maybe they will make those available.

Even with the audio loss it was easy to see what happened in the first round. If he'd been successful I think it could have been argued that he was signalled somehow, but since he failed anyway I don't see it as a big issue.
 
It always seems that the dowsers are genuinely surprised that they can't do it. He is no exception.
 
Sadly, I'm sure he will rationalize his failure in some way.

No chance he will say "I guess I can't dowse,"
 
The live feed is a joke and opens itself up to claims of foul play.
 
bluesjnr said:
The live feed is a joke and opens itself up to claims of foul play.
Click to expand...

While I'm certainly not happy with the quality of the broadcast first test, the webcam is a backup to the primary testing cameras.

If we had a test done pre-internet everyone would be happy with just having multiple cameras with timestamps.

I don't see how any claim of foul play could apply here. Could you pose a hypothetical way that there could have been tampering affecting the test due to the audio cutting out on a secondary camera? I personally can't think of anything but if you have any ideas I'm open to them.
 
All in all, I'm not sure it was worth an hour of my time, but it was interesting. The post-test interview is helping.
 
Ketyk said:
All in all, I'm not sure it was worth an hour of my time, but it was interesting. The post-test interview is helping.
Click to expand...

It was my first exposure to a test like this, so I did actually enjoy it. I was really curious how he was going to take the failure.

I was happy to see he was at least open to hearing about ways in which he may be fooling himself. Nice old guy.
 
ronin688 said:
While I'm certainly not happy with the quality of the broadcast first test, the webcam is a backup to the primary testing cameras.

If we had a test done pre-internet everyone would be happy with just having multiple cameras with timestamps.

I don't see how any claim of foul play could apply here. Could you pose a hypothetical way that there could have been tampering affecting the test due to the audio cutting out on a secondary camera? I personally can't think of anything but if you have any ideas I'm open to them.
Click to expand...

My hypothetical is irrelevant. Anybody who thinks they can douse for water is already deluded therefore it is not much of stretch to imagine how they might interpret the drop off of sound and video during their test.
 
bluesjnr said:
My hypothetical is irrelevant. Anybody who thinks they can douse for water is already deluded therefore it is not much of stretch to imagine how they might interpret the drop off of sound and video during their test.
Click to expand...

Again though, that's a secondary camera not related to the testing. The test is being recorded from multiple angles with non-webcam cameras. The webcam is an addition to that, it is not part of the main testing gear.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom