MythBusters Need to Test Dowsing Rods Already!

I think the testing ground is somevere in germany.

Dowsing for landmines sound like a great idea, let sniffex go first.
 
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.


From jref encyclopedia
 
AbleSugar said:
I think you nailed it. My inlaws love Mythbusters but if they started bashing ghosts and other woo-woo stuff they would stop watching the show.
Click to expand...

The other thing is that a ghost is not something that is as clearly defined by a specific myth. As they look for pretty specificly described situation to look at, ghosts would not seem to fit.

But there are so many gray areas. They did propetual motion after all.
 
They aren't "Woo Busters", and I feel like the general spirit of the show kind of keeps them away from the woo. The way the show is set up, there has to be something that can actually happen within the laws of physics. They usually build some gadgets to test the myths, and try to come as close as possible to the claimed conditions. If the actual myth fails, they can always try to replicate the claimed outcome. Usually, that involved blowing something up real good.

Dowsing just doesn't seem to fit the show, based on the fact that they want to really make something happen. Dowsing just doesn't work, and how exciting would it be for them to walk around with sticks instead of making things go boom or taunting vicious animals?
 
Thanks Toke. Before I have even had a chance to do my research you gave me the answers. Thank you.

JoeEllison, I like your explanation on why MythBusters don’t test dowsing. It is true on all aspects. The MythBusters have my respect again. Based on what you said Penn & Teller’s Bull**** would be a more proper place for the testing of dowsing (If they haven’t done it already, I am not sure). I just wish MythBusters would do it because so many people would see it. But what can I do, make my own show on cable TV committed to just busting woo? Yea right. I’d have better luck getting a show on cable TV shoveling woo down the throat of all the sucker out there.

-Kyle
 
Clairvoyant_Kyle said:
I got a question. I remember sometime back seeing a system that was built to test dowsing and was wondering if anyone had anymore info on that? No not five buckets filled with water. It was like an underground system with a random switch to send water down one of so many paths. It was then up to the dowser to pick what path the water went down. I would like to share that test with a friend who claims dowsing is real.

-Kyle
Click to expand...

It's on Google video. Search for "James Randi in Australia"
 
Clairvoyant_Kyle said:
Based on what you said Penn & Teller’s Bull**** would be a more proper place for the testing of dowsing (If they haven’t done it already, I am not sure).
Click to expand...

If anything, I think Penn and Teller would be even less appropriate than Mythbusters. They'd just spend the whole time shouting insults at people for believing stupid things. Fun to watch, but hardly a scientific rebutal.
 
Although the Mythbusters have stated they'll avoid "oogie boogie" stuff, they do have a section on the forum. "Adam's Oogie Boogie Board". This is where questions about dowsing, the Bermuda triangle, crop circles, and the like may be discussed.
I and a few other skeptics try manfully....
 
Plus there's far less potential for those annoying kids to fall down, trip
over, or hit their head. Sometimes the only entertaining part of that show
is when "Tory" gets twatted on the head or falls off his bike.
 
I don't blame them from staying away from subjects such as dowsing. If you start destroying thing people hold dear you are bound to lose viewers and therefore money. So how about a spin-off show? Ghost Hunters has one. Why not Mythbusters? Mythbusters Paranormal or something like that, and while I'm fairly sure that it won't have near the same viewership as the original (spin-offs seldom do, well maybe Fraiser), it will have an audience. If Jamie and Adam wanted to further insulate themselves from the fallout a show like this would produce then they wouldn't have to host it themselves.
 
Oops.... They've reconfigured the forum again, and the "oogie boogie" section has been removed.
I guess those questions will end up in the "everything else" thread.
 
freeradical said:
Mythbusters Paranormal or something like that
Click to expand...

I agree with your point that they are trying not to alienate fans in exchange of making money. And to be honest I’d be willing to do the same if I was in their shoes. Anyways I would call a spin off is “WooBusters.” Then of course stick to subjects like Randi and others have worked on. Everywhere from “Dowsing Rods” to “Counterfeit Money Detecting Pens” to “Penis Enlargement Pills.” Maybe move threw subjects a lot quicker then MythBusters do, but on every episode have one thing you go into great dept about. To me that sounds like a great show.

So anyone of you people out there into television production? I have some experience in video editing, project brain storming, and would even be willing to participate in any way I can to help make a pilot for a show like that.

-Kyle
 
I was disappointed at first when Les Stroud used dowsing on his show "Off the Grid".
However, when the dowser completely failed to find water, Les did state that
the dowsing was a complete failure.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom